Ok, @HellcowKeith. I’m sure I can speak for lots of folks: We need your thoughts about what was recently released on UA. If you feel like answering, or even reading the comment, thanks a lot. Enjoy your weekend. It’s something that needs to be playtested and refined, which is the point of UA.
— Keith Baker (@HellcowKeith) March 1, 2019
I like the various ways that the class gets to feel creative—preparing new spells every day, being able to swap cantrips, changing damage types with Arcane Weapon. This sort of versatility is something that was missing from the previous UA artificer. I’ve seen complaints that it uses spells as opposed to an entirely separate system, but the 3.5 artificer was also a spellcaster. The description could be refined, but I like the basic principle. There should be more subclasses, and I expect there will be.
— Keith Baker (@HellcowKeith) March 1, 2019
I wanted to love it, but…meh. It feels underpowered and limiting of creativity. Simply put, very clunky.
One of my players is using an artificer right now while his main is out of action, and it has been a fun addition. Other characters are a little afraid of him because he never declares the spell name, he just describes how he casts it (and I know what it is on his sheet) so it often makes the effects seem unpredictable.
I like the class overall. I am a lite Concerned with viability of the pets at upper levels of play in that magnitude of their damage/healing never goes up and they dont really learn new tricks. I would also love to see some more infusion options, or else some balanced guidelines for letting players define their own.
You doesn’t need a new class, we need a better craft system. A better table of magic items, one which includes an improved classification and cost. The actual system is not balanced. Improve the craft system and then artificer could work, and better, we could start playing with gadgeteer rogues, fighters, wizards, etc…