Let's just take a moment to appreciate that Chris always sticks to (and sometimes exceeds) his youtube schedule. So many content creators are irregular, and it's nice to have something to look forward to every Monday and Friday morning.
Agreed. It's huge. Not that I think it would hurt him if he were to fall off the schedule every once in awhile, but his consistency is appreciated and admirable.
Sorry to be offtopic but does any of you know a way to log back into an instagram account? I was dumb forgot my login password. I would love any assistance you can give me.
If one were to infuse a shield, by the wording of the tools required paragraph it could be used as a spellcasting focus. This leaves your other hand free to gesticulate and complete somatic components.
Thank for the video Chris. One thing I've noticed about the Artificer: I can already see arguments between players and DM's in campaigns where characters are created at any level above 1. "Well I have four possible infusions, so I have this, this, this and this magic item on my level 5 Artificer" "No, you can't start with any already-created magic items!" etc etc. I think there will be the occasional DM that doesn't get how weak Artificer is without making full use of their infusions as soon as possible.
session 0 is everything in that case. Magical items are not an addon on an artificer, it's a core feature, don't play a class if the DM is nerfing a core feature I guess? Might also want to change DMs?
I'd just kind of chuckle and be like "Okay, I've learned how to turn normal items into magic ones without ever having done it, so at the start of the first session I'll start doing it for the first time." 😂
I think the Homunculus is intended to be another pet, so I think it just gets your proficiency bonus period, which is the simplest solution. Alchemist is clearly intended to be a Support/Healer given his substandard damage, but wide array of Utility spells and respectable single target Healing. Whether it succeeds is up for debate.
I agree and don't understand why it or the steel defender wouldn't have the exact same PB as you have. Since there's no way that you can game the system to make your PB skyrocket like that then neither can theirs.
It has been three years now, and I’m guessing it’s been updated because everything I look at for the homunculus and steel defender just references your proficiency bonus. There’s nothing about adding 1 or anything like that. I’m guessing that maybe it was added originally to explain that it goes up with your PB 🤷♂️
On the last one, about the artillerist, I would think that you kind of have to go with yes. Since the cannon is something that the artillerist creates, any challenge to whether it fits on the shoulder or is secure would simply be answered by, "Yes, I designed it to do that." A more complicated situation would be if the cannon were going to ride on another character...
@@theonlymatthew.l in principal, I'd think it's the same. But when it's the same character building and wearing it, the question of whether it fits is pointless. Just like you can tie your shoes to the right tightness without much thought. Using that same metaphor though, it's entirely easy to tie someone else's shoes wrong. Ask any kid, and he'll tell you that he's got one parent who does it better.
You would still have to attach it to your shoulder manually (I would say as an action) after creating it, because it has to start in on a horizontal surface in an unoccupied space within 5 ft of you. This applies regardless of the cannon's size or shape.
While I too have come to love Jeremy Crawford’s willingness to provide insight into mechanics, he wasn’t the sole author of the rules and has more recently said some things that just don’t jive with the RAW or his own stated RAI from previous years. Yes he’s a human, I don’t fault him for changing his opinion on things but I think, outside official errata (which I also encourage people to ignore if they prefer their own interpretation and their DM and their group signs off) he should be heard as any other DM, not a voice of god. Again, love him, love a lot of his insights, take issue with a few, you should always play what is most fun for you with your group’s fun and approval.
He also doesn't sound like he knows how crossbows work. If the ammunition magically reappears after the crossbow is shot, then you end up having to remove it in order to cock it.
@@cp1cupcake Ignoring loading means that it draws itself before summoning the next round. It's semi-automatic. The item does all the work. In fact with the way it works, depending on whether your DM allows the flavor you could even disregard it being a crossbow at all and flavor it as an arcane repeater.
Michael Marix That’s not what ignoring loading means in mechanical terms. Crossbow Expert also ignores loading, but I don’t think that means you are so skilled at shooting crossbows that it loads itself. The Loading property on weapons just means that you can only attack once irregardless of Extra Attack because it takes time to load. Chris is right that for there to be no doubt, technically the Infusion needs to also ignore the Ammunition property. Where the rules get fuzzy is that in the description of the Ammunition property it says the weapon needs a free hand to operate specifically because you have to use it to load the weapon. Since there is no ammunition, logic dictates that there’s nothing to load and your hand is free, but we end up with a weapon that RAW still has the ammunition property but no ammunition. But at least the RAI is clear. I think they just need to errata the Infusion and put the ignore Ammunition property bit in there to settle this for good.
Literally watched an interview yesterday (I believe for Dragon+) where he made it explicit, the infused crossbow requires only the hand to hold it, the infusion loads and cocks it. He was quite clear (paraphrasing) “it’s exactly as good as it seems.”
The only way to interpret that the crossbow doesn't cock itself is to completely disregard the intention of the item. FFS it's name is "repeating shot" THE WEAPON ITSELF ignores the loading property, to think that it doesn't cock itself is being ignorant at best and maliciously stupid at worst, the kind of thing that an asshole would misread to deny a class their playstyle. They don't have to say that it cocks itself because THEY SHOULDNT HAVE TO as its the only way for the item to work.
@31:09 With the Artificer's purpose, I would typically describe it as primarily being (vaguely) to a Wizard what a Paladin is to a Cleric. It has some of that martial-esque power and gets spellcasting, though its spellcasting is of the arcane variety. It also has plenty of support abilities, especially due to its ability to create magic items.
About being a MC with wizard, remember that you can use your infusions as a spellcasting focus. You could perfectly infuse a staff or better the shield itself gaining that sweet AC bonus. Of course that implies a least 2 lvls in artificer which I find a worthy investment.
You could also Infuse your armor thus you are wearing your focus at all times (as long as the armor is worn). Your spells, channeled through your armor, become like Ironman's repulsor bolts, chest beam, or other builtin weapons.
Treantmonk's Temple Perhaps, but the files for artificer foci states that ANY infused item can be used as a focus. In this case it's an example of where the specific rules over rides the general rule.
Spell Storing item seems like one of the things that can really screw with the DM's plans. "zone of silence"? Nope. Double spells? Yes, sir. "You'Re not able to cast magic here!" "Uhm, acshually.."
I am playing a artillirist artificer, my main question is how does concentration work for the class? (3 parter question) 1.) Artificer makes things in advance and takes times to make things. So does the artificer pay the concentration cost for the spell when they make the gadget? 2.) If not who does pay the concentration cost of the spell? The user of the gadget or the Artificer? 3.) If the artificer has to concentrate on a gadget when they are used regardless of who the user is. Does all the other gadgets you had to made earlier, (since you cast the spell to make the gadget in advance) just break or not function? Because it changes alot depending on how that works. My dm and I had decided in the beginning that I pay the cost for concentration when I made the gadget. So when someone used the gadget they simply just use it, since it was already made and I had paid the concentration part of the spell when it was made. Now I think my dm is trying to change it to that to I concentrate on it. When someone uses it, (which is terrible to me ) because that means I could have wasted my spell slots making multiple of the same gadgets but they can't be used or worst case I lose the gadgets even functioning. Wasting the spell, my time and effort. So to me it makes sense that the user using the gadget just simply uses the gadget. Because every spell put into a gadget should be paid in full upon making the gadget. You pay the concentration to make it, the spell slot too. It is the simplest way, makes sense and purpose for how a artillirist artificer would function. Otherwise I can't imagine how or why the artificer would do anything. Also I am a centaur with a spider cannon that fires force blasts. My dm ruled that My spider cannon can fold it's legs in such a way when it wants to mount onto my saddle bags (which are modified for it to do so). It can also separate and it can become separate and move around. Because to me it is stupid to have to chose, when a artificer would make it so it can do either.
Battle smith is just ranger with robotics but if you're a small race it's a Cavalier fighter with spells(also robotics) and if you're a Warforged you are an Eco knight Eco knight fighter with spells(again with robotics).
Giving your wand to a barbarian, the book says that the creature must maintain concentration. As such, if the creature is in a barbaric rage, their concentration is unavailable and the spell immediately breaks. I might allow a character to convince me that theu manage to get off some immediate impact of the spell if they make a pretty good case for it, like one turn of Witch's Bolt damage since the ongoing effect seems to be the concentration aspect.
> The first term is RAW In This Week's Episode of "Newbie's Guide to *ITS RAW!!!!"* we see 1st level artificers cooking up their concoctions while the ubermencer critiques their efforts th-cam.com/video/vBhyT5BJJaU/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/aDL0HJNvKXY/w-d-xo.html
As I listened more to the explanation of using the steel defender as a mount, the more I realized it is a pretty big leap for it to be used as a controlled mount.
Thanks for answering my question about mounts Chris! It’s kinda weird that Jeremy Crawford says that you can use the starting gold from your background to buy Tinker’s Tools when according to DND Beyond Tinker’s Tools cost 50gp. Anywho love you content!
From what I can tell, Alchemist role is the Healer / Support Buffing role. Alchemical Savant allows you to add int mod to Healing and some elemental damages, but the BIG boost is to the healing spells. RAW: Cure Wounds recovers 1d8+ Spellcasting Ability Mod, and then Alchemical Savant: "Whenever you cast a spell using your alchemist’s supplies as the spellcasting focus, you gain a bonus to one roll of the spell. That roll must restore hit points or be a damage roll that deals acid, fire, necrotic, or poison damage, and the bonus equals your Intelligence modifier (minimum of +1)." To me it looks like that means 1d8 + 10 (assuming you have 20 Inteligence). That PLUS the temp HP from lvl 9 feature seems to be pretty definitively supportive / healery. There's also a possible unintentional loop-hole where you can make your Spell Storing Item BE your Alchemical Supplies, which would conceivably permit the double dip healing from all 10 casts of your stored Cure Wounds spell. Maybe alchemist is the weakest sub-class in terms of DPR, but I feel it provides more than enough support/healing options to outweigh that lost of DPR.
At my table Interpret the rule and rule how I think makes sense, If Jeremy Crawford says it work another way, but the way I've ruled has worked out fine. There is nothing that even Jeremy Crawford can say to change my ruling. I just use his clarifications to assist with stuff that's harder to adjudicate, but IMO there is nothing more traditional in D&D than to have some house rules to fit your campaign.
One of the Alchemists potential uses would be to use experimental elixir as a way to give minor boosts that emulate spells without taking up concentration or specifically being a spell to dispel. Swiftness seems to be a long strider substitute that can’t be dispelled or counterspelled. Resilience seems to be a toned down version of armor of faith that can’t be dispelled, counterspelled, or broken from concentration being ended. Boldness is a single target bless that can’t be dispelled, counterspelled, and doesn’t require concentration. Flight is same thing as boldness in relation to fly spell. Transformation same benefits as flight or boldness in relation to alter self spell, but it’s balancing feature is being reduced to 10 minutes. This is added to the slight increase in survivability from being able to heal and give temp HP simultaneously later on. Average of 22 hp/temp hp allows for someone to potentially heal after being hit with the lessened likely hood of wasting hitpoints by rolling over on just hitpoint healing. While healing is almost never something to be done in combat, this at least might make operation meatshield a little easier when the DM turns on horde mode. It’s also less likely to be wasted if a low level NPC needs to heal during an escort quest. Not good enough for a combat role though... it seems that specific considerations were made to attempt to create synergy between the battle smith and artillerist features. This was not done for the alchemist, probably because it was “strong enough” with a homunculus helping to weaponize its bonus action. But the homunculus was taken away leaving a drop in power that doesn’t seem to have been defensively or offensively compensated for. I think this can be partially solved by giving the subclass primal savagery as a cantrip, the class doesn’t have enough resources to be the off healer it seems to be almost solely designed to be. Maybe something akin to war domain where it can cast a cantrip as a bonus action int mod times a day? So many people complained that it steps on a beast master subclass that they nerfed it to something worse. Maybe if there is prep time to drink your own elixirs to boost yourself? DMs don’t seem to give much prep time for combat though.
Thank you for this video! It actually answered all my questions and then some. Anyways, I was struggling to visualise what carrying an eldritch cannon with one arm looks like and then I realised it can be like Samus' arm cannon where it covers your whole forearm - I just find that very epic.
Mounting rules for an Eldritch Cannon also have a downside. It is no longer a held magical object so it will get hit by AoE that affects objects and, as the rider, can be targeted with both standard attacks and opportunity attacks against you.
As an Artillerist, I would have my tiny Flamethrower Eldritch Cannon cling to the underside of a flying Homunculus. I would direct the Homunculus to fly to a good overhead location but would only be able to fire the Flamethrower Cannon on the Artillerist's next turn. The ideal location for the Homunculus and its downward-pointing Cannon is to fly to 20' above the opponents (if medium-sized) during its turn so that it can fire downward with its 15' cone. Since the cone can fire downward into a 15'×15' square down to shoulder height, there's a better chance of the Flamethrower cannon hitting more opponents with a downward shot rather than if the cone was shooting horizontally, If it has to avoid hitting an ally with the cone, the Homunculus would have to fly to a location that it can shoot from on the next round without being hit by an opponent's melee attack until the start of the Artillerist's next turn.
I'd love to get your opinion on changing your war mage build to start with Artificer instead of fighter. You lose heavy armor proficiency, martial weapons, defense fighting style, short rest self heal and action surge, but you gain more cantrips (guidance!) and half caster levels for purpose of spell slot progression. You also get to move a lot of Stat points from strength to dex and con. When you take your 2nd level of Artificer, you get some cool invocation-like abilities. All in all, I still lean to fighter, but I'm curious what you think. For any build that thinks about a cleric 1 dip, the Artificer will provide a lot of benefits over that.
Yeah, I would really have to re-think the War mage. The Diviner build is easy - switch the Cleric level for Artificer and everything falls into place. War Mage is...harder.
@@TreantmonksTemple Something to keep in mind is that the Artificer, when used as a Multiclass option, halfs his level and rounds UP, not down. So a single Level of Artificer does not make you miss out on Spell Slot progression.
Great video! It answers a lot of questions, and good to see that the way I interpret a lot of the rules seem to be the same. I wish there were more videos about artificers though, and how they go in-game! We'll be starting a Strahd campaign in a few weeks, so I'm really stoked to try me new artificer! I agree with your thoughts on alchemist - it seems very bleh. Personally, I think the potions should have been a variant of the wild sorcerer wild magic surge - at least then it would have been a really fun character to use. So, I have a question about re-summoning the eldritch cannon. A lot of people in videos (I can't remember if you were one of them) say that you can expend a spell slot to re-summon it. I can't find this anywhere in the rules. The rules state that you can't re-summon it "until you expend a slot...". Now, RAW seems to suggest to me that the next time you cast a spell of level 1 or above, you immediately get access to it again, but you don't need to spend a slot *just* to bring it back. If that were the case, wouldn't it say "You can expend a slot to re-summon it"? Perhaps you could sacrifice a slot to bring it back, if you didn't want to cast a spell, but it'd probably be pointless doing that. As long as you cast spells in every battle, you should have almost constant access to it. Are there any clarifications on this? If my interpretation is incorrect, then it seems to be pretty poor wording to me! Anyway, thanks again! :)
Thank you for the shout out. It’s not often in my experience that conversations on game mechanics go well and stay cordial. I wasn’t expecting to be internet famous :)
Alchemist Build: Kobold (or V Human to move the feats up) Feat 1: Tavern Brawler Feat 2: Sharpshooter Throw vials of Acid, (Alchemist's Fire, or Holy Water as needed). Bonus action homunculus attack while flying 20 feet off the ground and concentrating on some other spell. OR the Alchemist is intended to be a healer/buffer. The clues are in their bonus spells and elixir effects. They don't get going until level 5, but I think they compare favorably to a Life Cleric/Wizard MC.
1d thinking. If you equip the party with the potions, then circumstantially, a character that can’t normally heal on a better iniative can get a fallen pc up. That PC may be able to act sooner and accomplish more or just disengage out of danger. If your initiative was later, waiting for you to heal might have cost that PC their action. Since you may not have to heal on your later turn, you can then act, mediocre damage or not. That said, overall Effectiveness can be debated, intent as the healer/support cannot.
@SharkForce, Yeah, all of that is circumstantial nonsense because it ignores the rest of the class and the subclass features. At 6 you get 2 free potions, more later. Free flight (or flight for a lvl 1 slot at 3rd, alter self, heals, yes pls). The class has yet to be put through its paces in published form. I can see how it's difficult to think inclusively of the both the class and subclass when subclass is so defining, but debating the effectiveness of the variety of clerics vs a single artificer subclass is probably a waste of time in this forum. I recommend Giant in the playground or rpg.net or the variety of discord servers if you'd like to see what can do what and how. As is you've described a variety of ways Artificers as a whole can contribute based on their subclass while zeroing in solely on peak performance cleric options that are Domain neutral that we've all had 5 years to play with. Pardon me but Yawn. I'll continue to tinker and focus on fun builds, you are welcome to join me or continue to hem and haw about DPR and top end healing. I didn't claim the alchemist was intended to compete with 9th level spell casting clerics, I made it clear the intent was for this to be the most heal and buff focused artificer. At the mid levels I think it will compare favorably and present unique options for healing and buffing we have not seen specifically because of its combination of bonus 1 and 2 slots, infusions, and elixirs. Feel free to debate me on that in a year or two.
36:20 A 1st level Artificer might have this focus issue, but a 2nd level Artificer can get an Enhanced Arcane Focus as an infusion and use it as a focus for both their Artificer and Wizard spells. It would still cause a problem for wizard spells that require a somatic component, but not a material component. However, that is less of an issue and can be overcome with the War Caster feat.
Can an Artillerist use Arcane Firearm on a wand that is infused with the Enhanced Arcane Focus infusion? Personally I would rule that yes, he can. Arcane Firearm doesn't specify that the item you use to make it has to be nonmagical. And while Infusions do say that they can only be placed into non-magical items, Arcane Firearm doesn't specify that the Firearm is a magical item.
I play with the interpretation that controlled mounts still have their own turn and do not act during the riders turn. Their initiative changes to match the riders. The rules state that when multiple creatures have the same initiative, and one of those creatures is a pc, then the players choose the order of those creatures turns, but they still have separate turns. Controlled mount effectively lets you choose for your mount go either immediately before or immediately after your turn, (decided when initiative is rolled, or when you mount your steed during combat, and then stuck in that order from then on), but crucially even a controlled mount does not share your actual turn, preventing you from splitting your mounts movement before and after your attack. Granted, this is a contentious rules matter, but the contention seems to come more from confusion with rules from previous editions and/or straight up wishful thinking rather than any actual ambiguity in the 5e rules, which are very clear about what happens when two creatures have the same initiative. Crawford has also endorsed this interpretation as the RAI in multiple tweets. Beyond that, the shared turns interpretation creates enough unintended consequences as to make me leery of it even as a house rule. At least, on its own. As part of a full bore rewrite of the mounted combat rules it could be fine. Honestly, the mounted combat rules are counterintuitive and excessively punitive and probably should be re-written, but that's neither here nor there.
The Steel Defender specifically says that it takes it's turn immediately after your turn though, and specific exceptions always supercede general rules, so even if your riding your steel defender, it would still go directly after your turn.
Question. Magic Item Savant. What are spell requirements for magic items in 5e and level requirements? If I'm an 18th LVL artificer do I get the 30ft range from a holy avenger? Or is this just idiot-proofing for homebrew magic items?
As to the role of the Alchemist, while healing is a suboptimal strategy for winning, it should be noted that the Alchemist is a remarkably efficient healer, especially when the random potions get upgraded.
I loved the video by the way and have just came back to watch it again since the release of Tasha's Cauldron Of Everything. One thing I wanted to comment upon was discussed about 35 minutes into the video (Reference "Question: Is the Artificer the new automatic one level dip for Wizards?"). It is regarding the WizardN/Artificer multiclass character and how to manage smoothly switching use of Spell Focuses between casting of Wizard and Artificer spell casting so that neither are impacted. I believe that the current conclusion was that you would have to avoid using a shield during spell casting? I may have come up with a possible solution that would involve taking a 2nd level of Artificer, now that TCOE option are available. I noticed that page 22 of TCOE states that the a 2nd level Artificer who uses the "Replicate Magic Item" infusion can replicate a magic item from the 2nd level table. Also it is stated that any infused Artificer item can be used as an Artificer Spell focus too. Also that alternatively you can choose from the "common magic items" in the game excluding scrolls and potions. The "enduring spell book" is a common magic item. So if the DM permits it, I was thinking that an "Order of Scribes" Wizard multiclass taking 2 levels of Artificer with "Replicate Magic Item" infusion could create an "Enduring spell book" (which would act as an Artificer spell focus) and then copy all of the Wizard's spells into that which will also serve as the "Order of Scribes" Wizard spell focus too? What do you think of that as a possibility?
Since the Enhanced Arcane Focus can act as the focus for Artificer and Wizard spells, a two or three level "dip" in Artificer may become more useful than a one level dip for medium armor and constitution saves. I hope Chris makes at least one wizard build to discuss when to take the various level dips of Artificer.
By your reading of the rules for replicate magic item infusion. Do you think you could use multiple of your infusions known slots on the same replicate item twice? Like at level three could I have infusions known Enhance Defense, Repeater, Replicate, Replicate? Do I explicitly have to use the only one item off the list for that slot on replicate? Also it says in the infuse item area at the end of a long rest you may infuse one mundane item, later in the same area it says I may infuse more than one item at the end of the long rest?
Your alchemist build should be a kobold with a crossbow. Get that juicy advantaged attack roll, higher ac/attack roll, and group advantage buff for those early levels before you get other abilities or bonused cantrips to fill in the gap.
How many infusions can artificer do in a day? I understand they can only have x number active but does that mean that they can repetitively infuse items throughout the day cause they just changed their mind or were showing how for coin over and over. Where does that state that?
I think that both the homunculus and steel defender should have extra +2 to their melee damage. As looking at their stats, they have the +2 proficiency bonus included in their saves, skills, and melee hit, but not on their damage.
To be honest, talking about that dip for wizard. You just take a 2 level dip to solve the problem instead of 1 level. Use the level 2 arcane focus option to take a wizard arcane focus and infusion, so you can cast both classes spells through the same. Boom. While you’re there keep taking levels in artificer 😅
So Crawford clarifies the whole casting a spell through an item still means you are casting a spell snd are subject to the rules of casting a spell. So they can be counter spelled. This does make some logical sense as well. A spell focus could look like anything, crystal ball, gem, rod, wand, staff, or even a shield and I cast lightning bolt and it can be countered. But if I cast a lightning bolt from my wand of lightning bolts, which looks like a lightning bolt, no wizard can counter spell it because I didnt need the V,S, or M and the spell effects are replicated even though the thing I used to cast the spell looks like a lightning bolt... That defys logic.
Also, it's interesting that the "Spell-storing Item" text doesn't mention concentration at all. You'd have thought it would clarify that concentration is still required and who needs to take the saves (and whose Con values it uses).
Question - Why would you need a focus in hand & a free hand to complete the Somatic component when the PHB quote on screen (at 6:07 for instance) says that a hand holding a focus can be the same hand used to make the somatic components? You just use the hand holding the focus. This is super easy once you have an infusion in your shield or weapon. Here's a question - how do you feel about an artificer using an infused suite of armour as a focus? How can you have it "in hand"? Do you just put your hand on your chest? Because with the RAW wearing it wouldn't be having it in your hand. Running with this thought here is a weird corner case: Could a Goliath (or similar high encumbrance race) Artificer infuse the armour of a kobold ally and then at need just pick him up (thereby having your infused item in hand) to cast an Artificer spell?
The rules for material/somatic components are really weird, especially after some sage advice. Basically, if a spell requires material and somatic components, your focus hand can perform both. If it only requires somatic components however, you can't use the hand that's holding a focus. I've never played at a table that actually followed those rules (thankfully) but some stickler DM's might think it's "fun". Here's the exact sage advice; "Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other. If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures."
@@BlackTempleGaurdian ....but the quote says "or hold a focus" which is what you are doing with the tools...holding your focus. Clearly I'm going to have to look up the focus rules when I get back to my books because I don't see why this is limited to spells with a material component.
For artillerest, the arcane focus infusion and arcane firearm should these stack? I feel like it should and raw it doesn't say the arcane firearm is enchanted just it is a focus that if used has the added bonus.
I’m actually pretty pleased with this class, especially the Battle Smith. I actually played it in a short campaign not long ago and I reflavored it as a Final Fantasy gunblade character. I’m not that big a fan of the Alchemist subclass though. It doesn’t do a good job imo at making you feel like an alchemist. Just an Artificer that dabbles in alchemy.
Firearms are an optional rule, so they may not be an option for every campaign, but if firearms are used in your campaign, they will definitely be a legal candidate for repeating shot.
What are your thoughts on an artificer that specializes in creating construct? Maybe the can create constructs at a fraction of the cost in about half the time. Maybe they are able to create an array of constructs, from the moldrons to the warforged. ???
Does not the dart qualify for returning weapon infusion and Sharpshooter feat? Honestly, I'm not sure if the other thrown weapons qualify for sharpshooter or not.
I've been thinking a lot about an alchemist build. I think a familiar flying around with a spell storing item. It concentrating on web and you flamin sphere. Its also delivering cure wounds to allies with your subclass bonus. You can even have a drink and elixir to give it temp hp invade it gets hit. It can also deliver YOUR elixers and perhaps use it's action like it would with a goodberry. Is it as good as life cleric? No but is it more versatile.... Probably
One of the questions I don't see often enough is what's the recharge condition for the Artilerist's cannon (besides a long rest) - does it require you to spend a spell slot to recharge it, or to have spent a spell slot casting a spell. The 3rd level ability indicates the second option, but the text refering to recharging cannons on the higher level ability that lets you have 2 cannons is written in a way that seems to offer the first option (this text is unchanged from the ua though).
The part with Crawford talking about the Repeating Shot makes me think he does not know how a crossbow works. You still need a second hand to draw back the string.
@@hadcam4962 Eh. There is something Games Workshop started doing where, instead of having stuff podcasts where they talk about the thought process behind rules, they just have designer notes next to the abilities.
I would disagree. Pulling back the string is how you load a crossbow with ammunition, so if a crossbow loads itself with ammunition, wouldn't it have to magically pull its own string back?
My only thought is,why would the spell storing thing you talked about on this video work different than the ring of spell storing? & this would break the rule of only being able to have one individual character being the source of no more than one concentration spell at a time.
I wonder/worry that by removing the ThunderCannon option that the Artificer won't be as strong on their own like the Cleric is. ...good luck to all of you Urchin or Outlander Artificers. I kinda wish that With the Artificer there will be new spells, since the opportunity is right there. I'm on the fence on whether I want Artificer type subclasses for other classes, like Eldritch knight or Arcane domain clerics for example. From a casual look, the Artificer seems like a better ranger. Better 'pets', half caster, can be good at melee or ranged but not great in either. So RBJ repeating shot does in fact crank the crossbow back? I kind of see certain 'infusions' as mods the Artificer builds and comes up with so yeah I can see that, especially for personal peace of mind. Though now I'm trying to come up with a reason not to have an artificer have multiple shots, beyond two, a turn since with the mod cranking and reloading... I personally disagree with the decision to make the Artificer a half caster. There really aren't enough 'bomb' potion options. There's Alchemist's fire and Acid Flask. That's it. And neither one is amazing at higher tiers, which makes their price kind of ludicrous as a side gripe.
I have a question about spells. Your spells and cantrips can be changed after a rest, but how does that work. Do I need a book that knows all my spells to be able to change them out, or do I always know all of the spells available and just change my list to what fits me that day?
Firstly, you can't switch cantrips. When you take a cantrip, you're stuck with it. If you look (at any spellcaster that prepares spells) it has this phrase: "The spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots." which means no cantrips. According to the flavor text, the artificer changes their preparations by adjusting their tool sets - presumably to make the required modifications to cast the new prepared spells. No book required.
I take back my question. Before artificer became official and these changes were made, the class said at the end of a long rest you can change your spells. Later "right catnip for the job" stated you can do the same with your cantrips. I didnt know they removed it.
As for the part about preparing spells, the flavor text doesnt answer my question much. Is the artificer able to just swap "spells" after a long rest (and tinkering time)? No spell scrolls, books, templates, or other information or items needed? Just takes a spell in their list and swaps it for another they have available at that level?
Know I'm super late on the response to this but the Artificer can change cantrips but only one and after a level up: "Cantrips (0-Level Spells) At 1st level, you know two cantrips of your choice from the artificer spell list. At higher levels, you learn additional artificer cantrips of your choice, as shown in the Cantrips Known column of the Artificer table. When you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer cantrips you know with another cantrip from the artificer spell list." Copy/pasted from Beyond
Is an Evoker 14, Artillerist 6 using Magic Missile and Jeremy Crawford’s rolling method for MM now the single highest single target damage dealer? Arcane Firearm adds a d8 to one damage roll of a spell. MM applies damage equally to all targets based on single roll. Evoker 10 adds Int bonus. D8+D4+6 x (3+[slot level-1]) Maximize a level 5 or below with Evoker 14. No save, no to hit, just 18/Missile Force.
I’m sorry, did the BBEG caster or enemy artillery just burn their reaction on shield instead of counterspell? I’ll take it, out Wizard or cleric can thank me later.
Unfortunately, this doesn't work. Arcane firearm only adds the extra damage to Artificer spells. So this only works if you can somehow make Magic Missile an Artificer spell.
Can you throw a returning weapon and cast haste on yourself and move in front of an different enemy right by and make that enemy also take the damage because it has to go through the new target to get back to you
One thing I've wondered, and maybe someone else has the answer, but the artillerist's level 9 feature says that at that level, the cannons damage rolls increase by 1d8. So would that exclude the benefit from extending to the protector turret? Since it is a roll for temp HP, rather than a damage roll. At my table we've had some back and forth, but no consensus yet. Either way, great video as always, very informative, and helped give me something to listen to while working on my term paper!
I think it would enhance your build videos if you include a short section in your build videos with regards to multiclassing options. Possibly even a quick level breakdown of a couple of potential builds. As far as your argument about using a shield and having to switch between casting both artificer and wizard spells, there is a simple solution. If you need to cast an artificer spell, then cast it. If you need to cast of wizard spell, drop your artificer tool, you can always just make another one during your next short rest 😏
I think you are wrong about the alchemist. The Alchemist is the ultimate maker class. So you have to prepare. Alchemist supplies and the alchemy jug can be used to create poison and acid. Ever read the poisons section of the dmg? Now take a glassblowers tools proficiency and you can craft vials filled with contact poison or gas in your offtime, or combine poison and acid to make the others work too! Then either throw them or use the catapult spell. And if firearms are available, repeating shot guns can be very good as well.
The shoulder mounted cannon says to me "this person has been watching the predator movies". You'd better get some decent ear protection if you're doing that though or you're getting a deafened status as far as I'm concerned.
Real firearms make noise because they need propellant to fire a solid projectile. The artificer's cannon shoots spells. Why would a magic spell cast from any device need to make noise?
If you can only use a particular infusion on a single object, does that mean you can only replicate one magic item of a certain type? Ever? Well, I guess that does prevent one from saturating the magic item market with bags of holding...
Sadly I thought this alchemist would be great but damn the first ability is so underwhelming it’s not worth it. Unless you want to try and go full healer
They normally can't use a traditional arcane focus, but they can use infusions as a focus, so if you infuse a traditional arcane focus, then you can use it. So the answers to each question is No and Yes.
Here's a question for dual class a Wizard/Artificer: if you have a spell that is on the list for both classes, such as Fireball, would the 5th level arcane firearm of the Artificer and 10th level empowered evocation of the Wizard both apply?
your arguement of "weapons that are arcane focus lets you cast spells that have somatic components even with a shield" isnt really agreed upon. The general consensus on the internet (for some reason...) is that focus(es) ONLY replace M comps, but do not add them. 1h+Sh, one of them is a focus, VSM yes, but VS no. The arguement they present there, is that there is no M component for the focus to substitute, so it doesnt work, makign you unable to use the focus holding hand to present the S comps.
@@TreantmonksTemple I think I heard you saying arcane focuses "add material components to spell, letting you cast S or V S spells with both hands full" If you didnt, then I should sleep more
@@texteel My mistake, I misread your initial post. I understand why the consensus would be that requiring a Focus doesn't add an M component to spells, and that's the way I read it by RAW. In the video, I'm talking about what I believe the RAI is, because the designers have universally up to now made sure one hand was capable of casting spells, and I think if they were to intentionally change that now, it's something they would have mentioned.
@@LazyVideosGAME You could always pick warforged and be Robo from Chrono Trigger if you wanted. Describing all your spells and items as extensions and augments of your mechanical form. Naturally you'd have to get the arcane propulsion arm if you went that route.
34:32 the Alchemist only makes sense to me if there potion's can all be converted into ointments and or injectables.Any other way you seem to lose too much turn economy as far as I can imagine at this time.
Using the rules for renaissance firearms in the DMG (Chapter 9), they use the loading and ammunition property like crossbows, so it should work. Repeating shot also works with a sling.
11:23 "Every background in the game has enough starting gold to buy these tools." Huh? No? *_No_* Background in the game has enough gold to buy Tinker's Tools. They cost *_50 gp_* IF you choose to forgo _any_ starting equipment you can instead begin with between 50 and 200 gp (5d4*10), in which case yes, you could buy the Tinker's Tools. And barely anything else unless you roll particularly well.
They really should have let alchemesy just know the create homunculus spell from xanathar instead of going the infusion route. Push it into an out of combat utility role
Chris, you have to be kidding me. You don’t know what the Alchemist will be doing on Combat? It’s not called the God Alchemist for no reason. All kidding aside it is built to be a heavy support and I imagine most spell slots will go to making potions, as a +1d4 to all attack rolls and saving throws is crazy good for your GWM+Polearm Master Fighters, Paladins, and Barbarians. Alternatively nothing says you can’t be under the effects of more than one potion at a time meaning +1AC and +1d4 on all attacks and saving throws encourages me heavily to take a 5 level Dip into Eldritch Knight and ten use Gauntlets of Ogre Power and a Headband of Intellect at later levels. Alternatively taking 5 levels into Barbarian so you can do Reckless attack, pick up an Amulet of Health at later levels so it really bumps up your AC and use GWM on both attacks while having Advantage +1d4....pretty enticing. Second benefit as a Barbarian, you get extra mileage from having resistance whenever you heal yourself or alternatively whenever you gain Temp HP. Kalashastar Bear Totem Barbarian/Alchemist Artificer. Could be very strong. Then you could Infuse your shield with Spells to cast as well as giving it an infusion so it’s your focus.
SharkForce so you’re telling me a non-concentration bless on a single target is something you wouldn’t take? That’s a hard to pass up thing in my opinion especially when you can plan in a battle beforehand. Also a 2 dip into Warlock gets you 2 free potions every short rest. Pretty strong.
Treantmonk's Temple I can see how you would say that, but none of your full caster can infuse the Barbarian’s shield with spells and make it stronger so they can cast from it and concentrate from it like you said in your video. I’m pretty sure if I offered a Barbarian a once a day free Casting of cute wounds they wouldn’t say no. Let alone 10 of those. Or ten uses of Armor of Agathys or any other 1 action spell I can cast that is first or second level. I can see a lot of Utility and helpful support coming from this Character, they cannot manipulate the physical battlefield or enemies like the Wizard can, but they can manipulate their allies more than anyone else in the game. This is also by far the most cost effective use of a 1st level spell slot for healing in the game assuming you’re table doesn’t allow Goodberry to be the most powerful healing spell in the game due to Life Cleric levels. Furthermore I can administer it to someone in battle and can flavor it as food which would be very fun to throw healing muffins in my allies mouths and they suddenly gain 2d4+Int mod HP.
So you’re saying if you give someone this potion before they break down the door to fight the Orc’s you can’t contribute meaningfully in combat? I think you’re not seeing what this can do at low levels. I agree that this isn’t a build that deals damage, but neither is the GOD WIZARD. Damage isn’t the only meaningful thing in combat that you can do in combat. I’m certain a +1 AC boost non-concentration would be terrible. I’m sure a 10ft fly speed outside of combat would be terrible. I’m sure getting a Magical Weapon, Water Breathing, or a non-illusion based physical looking change is terrible at 3rd level for a 1st level spell slot. Alter Self makes you have +1 Magical Attacks at 3rd level. 2d4+Int is much better than your average cure wounds spell. I agree that the Flight speed, Alter Self, and the 10ft walking speed are not that strong at later levels. But I’ve never had a character that could concentrate on Flaming Sphere and could give out a Pseudobless Spell. Or that could cast healing word and a better cure wounds in the same turn if need be. I’m not trying to be rude but I think that what you lose out in just straight strength you far make up in versatility. And by the time everything else has lost it’s purpose your can heal 2d4+Int and grant 2d6+Int Temp HP for a 1st level spell slot. Maybe it just comes down to a difference of opinion but having the ability to ensure your allies can do what they need to do, I believe can make some very powerful builds and considering the base class can already be a pretty strong fill in for most roles, this strongly brings you into the support role in my opinion.
Alchemist is a support subclass. How is that hard to figure out? You use your experimental flask ability Once high enough it always heals some Take all the support spells. Aid, false life, etc. You get a boost to your healing if you use alchemy tools. You get lesser restoration a number of times equal to your int mod per long rest without needing anything but alchemist tools. You get heal or greater restoration once per long rest eventually too.
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.83[2/2] ประสบการณ์ขนหัวลุกจากตำนานวงการผี!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/T_kFecQw7Ds/mqdefault.jpg)
Let's just take a moment to appreciate that Chris always sticks to (and sometimes exceeds) his youtube schedule. So many content creators are irregular, and it's nice to have something to look forward to every Monday and Friday morning.
And his videos are exactly as long as they should be. Long enough to cover the subject and short enough to remain in point.
Agreed. It's huge. Not that I think it would hurt him if he were to fall off the schedule every once in awhile, but his consistency is appreciated and admirable.
he's insane!
Sorry to be offtopic but does any of you know a way to log back into an instagram account?
I was dumb forgot my login password. I would love any assistance you can give me.
@Yousef Matthew instablaster :)
If one were to infuse a shield, by the wording of the tools required paragraph it could be used as a spellcasting focus. This leaves your other hand free to gesticulate and complete somatic components.
But infusions require a second level of Artificer.
Thank for the video Chris. One thing I've noticed about the Artificer: I can already see arguments between players and DM's in campaigns where characters are created at any level above 1. "Well I have four possible infusions, so I have this, this, this and this magic item on my level 5 Artificer" "No, you can't start with any already-created magic items!" etc etc. I think there will be the occasional DM that doesn't get how weak Artificer is without making full use of their infusions as soon as possible.
session 0 is everything in that case. Magical items are not an addon on an artificer, it's a core feature, don't play a class if the DM is nerfing a core feature I guess? Might also want to change DMs?
I'd just kind of chuckle and be like "Okay, I've learned how to turn normal items into magic ones without ever having done it, so at the start of the first session I'll start doing it for the first time." 😂
The artillerist that is a mount for his own gun is now a character I totally want to play.
And now I can only imagine the Predators and War Machine as being ridden by their respective cannons. 😅
Centaur weapon platform
Hear me out: tortle artillerist with a cannon strapped to its back - now you have a blastoise
I think the Homunculus is intended to be another pet, so I think it just gets your proficiency bonus period, which is the simplest solution.
Alchemist is clearly intended to be a Support/Healer given his substandard damage, but wide array of Utility spells and respectable single target Healing. Whether it succeeds is up for debate.
I agree and don't understand why it or the steel defender wouldn't have the exact same PB as you have. Since there's no way that you can game the system to make your PB skyrocket like that then neither can theirs.
It has been three years now, and I’m guessing it’s been updated because everything I look at for the homunculus and steel defender just references your proficiency bonus. There’s nothing about adding 1 or anything like that. I’m guessing that maybe it was added originally to explain that it goes up with your PB 🤷♂️
On the last one, about the artillerist, I would think that you kind of have to go with yes. Since the cannon is something that the artillerist creates, any challenge to whether it fits on the shoulder or is secure would simply be answered by, "Yes, I designed it to do that."
A more complicated situation would be if the cannon were going to ride on another character...
Respectfully, I don't see why the same answer can't work with regards to the cannon riding on other characters as well.
@@theonlymatthew.l in principal, I'd think it's the same. But when it's the same character building and wearing it, the question of whether it fits is pointless. Just like you can tie your shoes to the right tightness without much thought. Using that same metaphor though, it's entirely easy to tie someone else's shoes wrong. Ask any kid, and he'll tell you that he's got one parent who does it better.
You would still have to attach it to your shoulder manually (I would say as an action) after creating it, because it has to start in on a horizontal surface in an unoccupied space within 5 ft of you. This applies regardless of the cannon's size or shape.
@@sillvvasensei that's completely fair. Essentially like mounting a vehicle. Ideally, this would be done before combat begins.
@@sillvvasensei it's got legs, it seems to me it could attach itself to you
While I too have come to love Jeremy Crawford’s willingness to provide insight into mechanics, he wasn’t the sole author of the rules and has more recently said some things that just don’t jive with the RAW or his own stated RAI from previous years.
Yes he’s a human, I don’t fault him for changing his opinion on things but I think, outside official errata (which I also encourage people to ignore if they prefer their own interpretation and their DM and their group signs off) he should be heard as any other DM, not a voice of god.
Again, love him, love a lot of his insights, take issue with a few, you should always play what is most fun for you with your group’s fun and approval.
He also doesn't sound like he knows how crossbows work. If the ammunition magically reappears after the crossbow is shot, then you end up having to remove it in order to cock it.
@@cp1cupcake Ignoring loading means that it draws itself before summoning the next round. It's semi-automatic. The item does all the work. In fact with the way it works, depending on whether your DM allows the flavor you could even disregard it being a crossbow at all and flavor it as an arcane repeater.
Michael Marix That’s not what ignoring loading means in mechanical terms. Crossbow Expert also ignores loading, but I don’t think that means you are so skilled at shooting crossbows that it loads itself.
The Loading property on weapons just means that you can only attack once irregardless of Extra Attack because it takes time to load. Chris is right that for there to be no doubt, technically the Infusion needs to also ignore the Ammunition property. Where the rules get fuzzy is that in the description of the Ammunition property it says the weapon needs a free hand to operate specifically because you have to use it to load the weapon. Since there is no ammunition, logic dictates that there’s nothing to load and your hand is free, but we end up with a weapon that RAW still has the ammunition property but no ammunition.
But at least the RAI is clear. I think they just need to errata the Infusion and put the ignore Ammunition property bit in there to settle this for good.
Literally watched an interview yesterday (I believe for Dragon+) where he made it explicit, the infused crossbow requires only the hand to hold it, the infusion loads and cocks it. He was quite clear (paraphrasing) “it’s exactly as good as it seems.”
The only way to interpret that the crossbow doesn't cock itself is to completely disregard the intention of the item. FFS it's name is "repeating shot" THE WEAPON ITSELF ignores the loading property, to think that it doesn't cock itself is being ignorant at best and maliciously stupid at worst, the kind of thing that an asshole would misread to deny a class their playstyle. They don't have to say that it cocks itself because THEY SHOULDNT HAVE TO as its the only way for the item to work.
@31:09 With the Artificer's purpose, I would typically describe it as primarily being (vaguely) to a Wizard what a Paladin is to a Cleric. It has some of that martial-esque power and gets spellcasting, though its spellcasting is of the arcane variety.
It also has plenty of support abilities, especially due to its ability to create magic items.
The artificer dip of 1 has that focus problem, but a 2 level dip has infusions to cover it up.
About being a MC with wizard, remember that you can use your infusions as a spellcasting focus. You could perfectly infuse a staff or better the shield itself gaining that sweet AC bonus. Of course that implies a least 2 lvls in artificer which I find a worthy investment.
You could also Infuse your armor thus you are wearing your focus at all times (as long as the armor is worn). Your spells, channeled through your armor, become like Ironman's repulsor bolts, chest beam, or other builtin weapons.
@@LordMorin The artificer rules do specify the focus must be held in your hand.
Treantmonk's Temple Perhaps, but the files for artificer foci states that ANY infused item can be used as a focus. In this case it's an example of where the specific rules over rides the general rule.
Spell Storing item seems like one of the things that can really screw with the DM's plans. "zone of silence"? Nope. Double spells? Yes, sir. "You'Re not able to cast magic here!" "Uhm, acshually.."
I am playing a artillirist artificer, my main question is how does concentration work for the class? (3 parter question)
1.) Artificer makes things in advance and takes times to make things. So does the artificer pay the concentration cost for the spell when they make the gadget?
2.) If not who does pay the concentration cost of the spell? The user of the gadget or the Artificer?
3.) If the artificer has to concentrate on a gadget when they are used regardless of who the user is. Does all the other gadgets you had to made earlier, (since you cast the spell to make the gadget in advance) just break or not function? Because it changes alot depending on how that works.
My dm and I had decided in the beginning that I pay the cost for concentration when I made the gadget. So when someone used the gadget they simply just use it, since it was already made and I had paid the concentration part of the spell when it was made.
Now I think my dm is trying to change it to that to I concentrate on it. When someone uses it, (which is terrible to me ) because that means I could have wasted my spell slots making multiple of the same gadgets but they can't be used or worst case I lose the gadgets even functioning. Wasting the spell, my time and effort.
So to me it makes sense that the user using the gadget just simply uses the gadget. Because every spell put into a gadget should be paid in full upon making the gadget. You pay the concentration to make it, the spell slot too. It is the simplest way, makes sense and purpose for how a artillirist artificer would function. Otherwise I can't imagine how or why the artificer would do anything.
Also I am a centaur with a spider cannon that fires force blasts. My dm ruled that My spider cannon can fold it's legs in such a way when it wants to mount onto my saddle bags (which are modified for it to do so). It can also separate and it can become separate and move around.
Because to me it is stupid to have to chose, when a artificer would make it so it can do either.
Battle smith is just ranger with robotics but if you're a small race it's a Cavalier fighter with spells(also robotics) and if you're a Warforged you are an Eco knight Eco knight fighter with spells(again with robotics).
Giving your wand to a barbarian, the book says that the creature must maintain concentration. As such, if the creature is in a barbaric rage, their concentration is unavailable and the spell immediately breaks. I might allow a character to convince me that theu manage to get off some immediate impact of the spell if they make a pretty good case for it, like one turn of Witch's Bolt damage since the ongoing effect seems to be the concentration aspect.
> The first term is RAW
In This Week's Episode of "Newbie's Guide to *ITS RAW!!!!"* we see 1st level artificers cooking up their concoctions while the ubermencer critiques their efforts
th-cam.com/video/vBhyT5BJJaU/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/aDL0HJNvKXY/w-d-xo.html
As I listened more to the explanation of using the steel defender as a mount, the more I realized it is a pretty big leap for it to be used as a controlled mount.
Thanks for answering my question about mounts Chris! It’s kinda weird that Jeremy Crawford says that you can use the starting gold from your background to buy Tinker’s Tools when according to DND Beyond Tinker’s Tools cost 50gp. Anywho love you content!
From what I can tell, Alchemist role is the Healer / Support Buffing role. Alchemical Savant allows you to add int mod to Healing and some elemental damages, but the BIG boost is to the healing spells. RAW: Cure Wounds recovers 1d8+ Spellcasting Ability Mod, and then Alchemical Savant: "Whenever you cast a spell using your alchemist’s supplies as the spellcasting focus, you gain a bonus to one roll of the spell. That roll must restore hit points or be a damage roll that deals acid, fire, necrotic, or poison damage, and the bonus equals your Intelligence modifier (minimum of +1)." To me it looks like that means 1d8 + 10 (assuming you have 20 Inteligence). That PLUS the temp HP from lvl 9 feature seems to be pretty definitively supportive / healery. There's also a possible unintentional loop-hole where you can make your Spell Storing Item BE your Alchemical Supplies, which would conceivably permit the double dip healing from all 10 casts of your stored Cure Wounds spell. Maybe alchemist is the weakest sub-class in terms of DPR, but I feel it provides more than enough support/healing options to outweigh that lost of DPR.
At my table Interpret the rule and rule how I think makes sense, If Jeremy Crawford says it work another way, but the way I've ruled has worked out fine. There is nothing that even Jeremy Crawford can say to change my ruling. I just use his clarifications to assist with stuff that's harder to adjudicate, but IMO there is nothing more traditional in D&D than to have some house rules to fit your campaign.
One of the Alchemists potential uses would be to use experimental elixir as a way to give minor boosts that emulate spells without taking up concentration or specifically being a spell to dispel.
Swiftness seems to be a long strider substitute that can’t be dispelled or counterspelled.
Resilience seems to be a toned down version of armor of faith that can’t be dispelled, counterspelled, or broken from concentration being ended.
Boldness is a single target bless that can’t be dispelled, counterspelled, and doesn’t require concentration.
Flight is same thing as boldness in relation to fly spell.
Transformation same benefits as flight or boldness in relation to alter self spell, but it’s balancing feature is being reduced to 10 minutes.
This is added to the slight increase in survivability from being able to heal and give temp HP simultaneously later on. Average of 22 hp/temp hp allows for someone to potentially heal after being hit with the lessened likely hood of wasting hitpoints by rolling over on just hitpoint healing. While healing is almost never something to be done in combat, this at least might make operation meatshield a little easier when the DM turns on horde mode.
It’s also less likely to be wasted if a low level NPC needs to heal during an escort quest.
Not good enough for a combat role though... it seems that specific considerations were made to attempt to create synergy between the battle smith and artillerist features. This was not done for the alchemist, probably because it was “strong enough” with a homunculus helping to weaponize its bonus action. But the homunculus was taken away leaving a drop in power that doesn’t seem to have been defensively or offensively compensated for. I think this can be partially solved by giving the subclass primal savagery as a cantrip, the class doesn’t have enough resources to be the off healer it seems to be almost solely designed to be. Maybe something akin to war domain where it can cast a cantrip as a bonus action int mod times a day?
So many people complained that it steps on a beast master subclass that they nerfed it to something worse.
Maybe if there is prep time to drink your own elixirs to boost yourself? DMs don’t seem to give much prep time for combat though.
Thank you for this video! It actually answered all my questions and then some.
Anyways, I was struggling to visualise what carrying an eldritch cannon with one arm looks like and then I realised it can be like Samus' arm cannon where it covers your whole forearm - I just find that very epic.
Mounting rules for an Eldritch Cannon also have a downside. It is no longer a held magical object so it will get hit by AoE that affects objects and, as the rider, can be targeted with both standard attacks and opportunity attacks against you.
As an Artillerist, I would have my tiny Flamethrower Eldritch Cannon cling to the underside of a flying Homunculus. I would direct the Homunculus to fly to a good overhead location but would only be able to fire the Flamethrower Cannon on the Artillerist's next turn.
The ideal location for the Homunculus and its downward-pointing Cannon is to fly to 20' above the opponents (if medium-sized) during its turn so that it can fire downward with its 15' cone. Since the cone can fire downward into a 15'×15' square down to shoulder height, there's a better chance of the Flamethrower cannon hitting more opponents with a downward shot rather than if the cone was shooting horizontally,
If it has to avoid hitting an ally with the cone, the Homunculus would have to fly to a location that it can shoot from on the next round without being hit by an opponent's melee attack until the start of the Artillerist's next turn.
37:00 Luckily, Tasha's introduced Artificer Initiate, which let's Wizards cast their INT spells with the Artisan's tools they get from the feat.
Kind of wish the cannon could take the mounted combat feat.
How about a cannon with animate object and enlarge, and permanence. Then, do we have a tank for someone of small size?
21:50 Technically, a 3rd option would be if multiclassed sorcerer, take the distant spell metamagic. All touch spells gain a 30' range then.
I'd love to get your opinion on changing your war mage build to start with Artificer instead of fighter.
You lose heavy armor proficiency, martial weapons, defense fighting style, short rest self heal and action surge, but you gain more cantrips (guidance!) and half caster levels for purpose of spell slot progression. You also get to move a lot of Stat points from strength to dex and con. When you take your 2nd level of Artificer, you get some cool invocation-like abilities.
All in all, I still lean to fighter, but I'm curious what you think.
For any build that thinks about a cleric 1 dip, the Artificer will provide a lot of benefits over that.
Yeah, I would really have to re-think the War mage. The Diviner build is easy - switch the Cleric level for Artificer and everything falls into place. War Mage is...harder.
@@TreantmonksTemple Something to keep in mind is that the Artificer, when used as a Multiclass option, halfs his level and rounds UP, not down. So a single Level of Artificer does not make you miss out on Spell Slot progression.
Great stuff! I was already looking forward to magical savant for nabbing a holy avenger but the scroll stuff blew my mind!
Great video! It answers a lot of questions, and good to see that the way I interpret a lot of the rules seem to be the same. I wish there were more videos about artificers though, and how they go in-game! We'll be starting a Strahd campaign in a few weeks, so I'm really stoked to try me new artificer! I agree with your thoughts on alchemist - it seems very bleh. Personally, I think the potions should have been a variant of the wild sorcerer wild magic surge - at least then it would have been a really fun character to use.
So, I have a question about re-summoning the eldritch cannon. A lot of people in videos (I can't remember if you were one of them) say that you can expend a spell slot to re-summon it. I can't find this anywhere in the rules. The rules state that you can't re-summon it "until you expend a slot...". Now, RAW seems to suggest to me that the next time you cast a spell of level 1 or above, you immediately get access to it again, but you don't need to spend a slot *just* to bring it back. If that were the case, wouldn't it say "You can expend a slot to re-summon it"? Perhaps you could sacrifice a slot to bring it back, if you didn't want to cast a spell, but it'd probably be pointless doing that. As long as you cast spells in every battle, you should have almost constant access to it. Are there any clarifications on this? If my interpretation is incorrect, then it seems to be pretty poor wording to me!
Anyway, thanks again! :)
Always insightful and thought provoking
Thank you for the shout out. It’s not often in my experience that conversations on game mechanics go well and stay cordial.
I wasn’t expecting to be internet famous :)
I can be stubborn, but I try not to be totally closed minded ;) I appreciate your help.
Does the alchemists int bonus to damage apply when shooting a melf's acid arrow/ray of sickness out of a spell storing item?
No. Only when you cast a spell through your focus
Alchemist Build: Kobold (or V Human to move the feats up)
Feat 1: Tavern Brawler
Feat 2: Sharpshooter
Throw vials of Acid, (Alchemist's Fire, or Holy Water as needed). Bonus action homunculus attack while flying 20 feet off the ground and concentrating on some other spell.
OR
the Alchemist is intended to be a healer/buffer. The clues are in their bonus spells and elixir effects. They don't get going until level 5, but I think they compare favorably to a Life Cleric/Wizard MC.
Meh, a cleric is a cleric. Handing out your healing before hand has its own impact on action economy and character action choices.
1d thinking. If you equip the party with the potions, then circumstantially, a character that can’t normally heal on a better iniative can get a fallen pc up. That PC may be able to act sooner and accomplish more or just disengage out of danger. If your initiative was later, waiting for you to heal might have cost that PC their action. Since you may not have to heal on your later turn, you can then act, mediocre damage or not.
That said, overall Effectiveness can be debated, intent as the healer/support cannot.
@SharkForce, Yeah, all of that is circumstantial nonsense because it ignores the rest of the class and the subclass features. At 6 you get 2 free potions, more later. Free flight (or flight for a lvl 1 slot at 3rd, alter self, heals, yes pls).
The class has yet to be put through its paces in published form. I can see how it's difficult to think inclusively of the both the class and subclass when subclass is so defining, but debating the effectiveness of the variety of clerics vs a single artificer subclass is probably a waste of time in this forum.
I recommend Giant in the playground or rpg.net or the variety of discord servers if you'd like to see what can do what and how.
As is you've described a variety of ways Artificers as a whole can contribute based on their subclass while zeroing in solely on peak performance cleric options that are Domain neutral that we've all had 5 years to play with. Pardon me but Yawn. I'll continue to tinker and focus on fun builds, you are welcome to join me or continue to hem and haw about DPR and top end healing.
I didn't claim the alchemist was intended to compete with 9th level spell casting clerics, I made it clear the intent was for this to be the most heal and buff focused artificer. At the mid levels I think it will compare favorably and present unique options for healing and buffing we have not seen specifically because of its combination of bonus 1 and 2 slots, infusions, and elixirs.
Feel free to debate me on that in a year or two.
Lots of good answers. Thanks for the video
36:20 A 1st level Artificer might have this focus issue, but a 2nd level Artificer can get an Enhanced Arcane Focus as an infusion and use it as a focus for both their Artificer and Wizard spells. It would still cause a problem for wizard spells that require a somatic component, but not a material component. However, that is less of an issue and can be overcome with the War Caster feat.
They will still need the warcaster feat to cast Wiz spells with S component but no M component.
Can an Artillerist use Arcane Firearm on a wand that is infused with the Enhanced Arcane Focus infusion? Personally I would rule that yes, he can. Arcane Firearm doesn't specify that the item you use to make it has to be nonmagical. And while Infusions do say that they can only be placed into non-magical items, Arcane Firearm doesn't specify that the Firearm is a magical item.
Yes, as long as you are casting an artificer spell through the focus, you get the arcane firearm bonus. Doesn't matter if the focus is magical or not.
I play with the interpretation that controlled mounts still have their own turn and do not act during the riders turn. Their initiative changes to match the riders. The rules state that when multiple creatures have the same initiative, and one of those creatures is a pc, then the players choose the order of those creatures turns, but they still have separate turns.
Controlled mount effectively lets you choose for your mount go either immediately before or immediately after your turn, (decided when initiative is rolled, or when you mount your steed during combat, and then stuck in that order from then on), but crucially even a controlled mount does not share your actual turn, preventing you from splitting your mounts movement before and after your attack.
Granted, this is a contentious rules matter, but the contention seems to come more from confusion with rules from previous editions and/or straight up wishful thinking rather than any actual ambiguity in the 5e rules, which are very clear about what happens when two creatures have the same initiative.
Crawford has also endorsed this interpretation as the RAI in multiple tweets.
Beyond that, the shared turns interpretation creates enough unintended consequences as to make me leery of it even as a house rule.
At least, on its own. As part of a full bore rewrite of the mounted combat rules it could be fine. Honestly, the mounted combat rules are counterintuitive and excessively punitive and probably should be re-written, but that's neither here nor there.
The Steel Defender specifically says that it takes it's turn immediately after your turn though, and specific exceptions always supercede general rules, so even if your riding your steel defender, it would still go directly after your turn.
Question. Magic Item Savant. What are spell requirements for magic items in 5e and level requirements? If I'm an 18th LVL artificer do I get the 30ft range from a holy avenger? Or is this just idiot-proofing for homebrew magic items?
As to the role of the Alchemist, while healing is a suboptimal strategy for winning, it should be noted that the Alchemist is a remarkably efficient healer, especially when the random potions get upgraded.
Except, as a half caster, your lack of spell slots makes the alchemist suck as a healer unless you manage to take the Healer feat.
I loved the video by the way and have just came back to watch it again since the release of Tasha's Cauldron Of Everything. One thing I wanted to comment upon was discussed about 35 minutes into the video (Reference "Question: Is the Artificer the new automatic one level dip for Wizards?").
It is regarding the WizardN/Artificer multiclass character and how to manage smoothly switching use of Spell Focuses between casting of Wizard and Artificer spell casting so that neither are impacted.
I believe that the current conclusion was that you would have to avoid using a shield during spell casting?
I may have come up with a possible solution that would involve taking a 2nd level of Artificer, now that TCOE option are available.
I noticed that page 22 of TCOE states that the a 2nd level Artificer who uses the "Replicate Magic Item" infusion can replicate a magic item from the 2nd level table. Also it is stated that any infused Artificer item can be used as an Artificer Spell focus too.
Also that alternatively you can choose from the "common magic items" in the game excluding scrolls and potions. The "enduring spell book" is a common magic item. So if the DM permits it, I was thinking that an "Order of Scribes" Wizard multiclass taking 2 levels of Artificer with "Replicate Magic Item" infusion could create an "Enduring spell book" (which would act as an Artificer spell focus) and then copy all of the Wizard's spells into that which will also serve as the "Order of Scribes" Wizard spell focus too?
What do you think of that as a possibility?
Since the Enhanced Arcane Focus can act as the focus for Artificer and Wizard spells, a two or three level "dip" in Artificer may become more useful than a one level dip for medium armor and constitution saves. I hope Chris makes at least one wizard build to discuss when to take the various level dips of Artificer.
By your reading of the rules for replicate magic item infusion. Do you think you could use multiple of your infusions known slots on the same replicate item twice? Like at level three could I have infusions known Enhance Defense, Repeater, Replicate, Replicate? Do I explicitly have to use the only one item off the list for that slot on replicate? Also it says in the infuse item area at the end of a long rest you may infuse one mundane item, later in the same area it says I may infuse more than one item at the end of the long rest?
Your alchemist build should be a kobold with a crossbow. Get that juicy advantaged attack roll, higher ac/attack roll, and group advantage buff for those early levels before you get other abilities or bonused cantrips to fill in the gap.
How many infusions can artificer do in a day? I understand they can only have x number active but does that mean that they can repetitively infuse items throughout the day cause they just changed their mind or were showing how for coin over and over. Where does that state that?
I think that both the homunculus and steel defender should have extra +2 to their melee damage. As looking at their stats, they have the +2 proficiency bonus included in their saves, skills, and melee hit, but not on their damage.
My question is are there any magic items from the DMs guide that are slated for a specific class, like wizard, that the artificer gets to use.
To be honest, talking about that dip for wizard. You just take a 2 level dip to solve the problem instead of 1 level.
Use the level 2 arcane focus option to take a wizard arcane focus and infusion, so you can cast both classes spells through the same.
Boom.
While you’re there keep taking levels in artificer 😅
A wizard will need a free hand for S component even if they are holding an arcane focus unless they have the warcaster feat
The replicate infusion can be used multiple times.
Really getting inspired to make an Artillerist in the style of Man-at-Arms from Masters of the Universe.
So Crawford clarifies the whole casting a spell through an item still means you are casting a spell snd are subject to the rules of casting a spell. So they can be counter spelled. This does make some logical sense as well. A spell focus could look like anything, crystal ball, gem, rod, wand, staff, or even a shield and I cast lightning bolt and it can be countered. But if I cast a lightning bolt from my wand of lightning bolts, which looks like a lightning bolt, no wizard can counter spell it because I didnt need the V,S, or M and the spell effects are replicated even though the thing I used to cast the spell looks like a lightning bolt... That defys logic.
Also, it's interesting that the "Spell-storing Item" text doesn't mention concentration at all. You'd have thought it would clarify that concentration is still required and who needs to take the saves (and whose Con values it uses).
It does say. It's the creature that activates the item
@@TreantmonksTemple my mistake!
Question - Why would you need a focus in hand & a free hand to complete the Somatic component when the PHB quote on screen (at 6:07 for instance) says that a hand holding a focus can be the same hand used to make the somatic components? You just use the hand holding the focus. This is super easy once you have an infusion in your shield or weapon.
Here's a question - how do you feel about an artificer using an infused suite of armour as a focus? How can you have it "in hand"? Do you just put your hand on your chest? Because with the RAW wearing it wouldn't be having it in your hand.
Running with this thought here is a weird corner case: Could a Goliath (or similar high encumbrance race) Artificer infuse the armour of a kobold ally and then at need just pick him up (thereby having your infused item in hand) to cast an Artificer spell?
Because, as Chris even starts off with, that applies only to spells with a material component.
The rules for material/somatic components are really weird, especially after some sage advice. Basically, if a spell requires material and somatic components, your focus hand can perform both. If it only requires somatic components however, you can't use the hand that's holding a focus. I've never played at a table that actually followed those rules (thankfully) but some stickler DM's might think it's "fun". Here's the exact sage advice;
"Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.
If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures."
@@BlackTempleGaurdian ....but the quote says "or hold a focus" which is what you are doing with the tools...holding your focus.
Clearly I'm going to have to look up the focus rules when I get back to my books because I don't see why this is limited to spells with a material component.
The rules are complex, but I give a full rundown in my video titled "Can you cast with your hands full?"
Just remember that the specific can over ride the normal. In this case the rules, as pertaining to the artificer, may overrule those in the PHB.
Made a Hobgoblin Alchemist with a heavy crossbow and dualing scimitars. No problems here.
Are there any changes or updates to these answers with the release of the Artificer in Tashe's?
If you make your steel defender humanoid, can you give it armor?
Even with the image provided (a dog) you could have it wear barding. However, it wouldn't stack with its base AC.
I believe it would also lack proficiency with the armor adding penalties
For artillerest, the arcane focus infusion and arcane firearm should these stack? I feel like it should and raw it doesn't say the arcane firearm is enchanted just it is a focus that if used has the added bonus.
I’m actually pretty pleased with this class, especially the Battle Smith. I actually played it in a short campaign not long ago and I reflavored it as a Final Fantasy gunblade character.
I’m not that big a fan of the Alchemist subclass though. It doesn’t do a good job imo at making you feel like an alchemist. Just an Artificer that dabbles in alchemy.
Really looking forward to an artillerist or battlesmith build.
Such a shame that we can't look forward to an alchemist build. Alas, alchemist is the weakest thing since beast master ranger
Does the repeating shot infusion work on firearms? Saw it was listed as a possible infusion on DNDBeyond and was unsure
Firearms are an optional rule, so they may not be an option for every campaign, but if firearms are used in your campaign, they will definitely be a legal candidate for repeating shot.
What are your thoughts on an artificer that specializes in creating construct? Maybe the can create constructs at a fraction of the cost in about half the time. Maybe they are able to create an array of constructs, from the moldrons to the warforged. ???
I sincerely want to play a Human Battlesmith with Find Familiar and Homunculus because I am lord of pets
urchin background for a pet mouse too ^_^
@@ifauxq Don't forget tiny servant as well. Have all the tiny things!
Does not the dart qualify for returning weapon infusion and Sharpshooter feat? Honestly, I'm not sure if the other thrown weapons qualify for sharpshooter or not.
Dart is the only thrown weapon that qualifies for sharp shooter
War caster seems pretty essential for the Aritificer/wizard!
I've been thinking a lot about an alchemist build. I think a familiar flying around with a spell storing item. It concentrating on web and you flamin sphere. Its also delivering cure wounds to allies with your subclass bonus. You can even have a drink and elixir to give it temp hp invade it gets hit. It can also deliver YOUR elixers and perhaps use it's action like it would with a goodberry. Is it as good as life cleric? No but is it more versatile.... Probably
When you detonate an Eldritch Cannon, can you still like... mend it back?
Or was it reduced to atoms.
I would say it would be like casting cure wounds on a corpse
@@Vawk20 Nevermind, i reread it and it actually disappears when reduced to 0
Play a centaur. Make your steel defender 2 legged. You be the mount for your pet.
For the "1 level dip" for Wizards and your casting issue, what about War Caster feat and a component pouch as a fix?
Yep, warcaster is going to be very important.
@@brutalusgaming8809 I think that's the best option.
One of the questions I don't see often enough is what's the recharge condition for the Artilerist's cannon (besides a long rest) - does it require you to spend a spell slot to recharge it, or to have spent a spell slot casting a spell.
The 3rd level ability indicates the second option, but the text refering to recharging cannons on the higher level ability that lets you have 2 cannons is written in a way that seems to offer the first option (this text is unchanged from the ua though).
JC says the spell slot must be spent on recharging the cannon
The part with Crawford talking about the Repeating Shot makes me think he does not know how a crossbow works. You still need a second hand to draw back the string.
I think he's focusing on "it's magic".
@@hadcam4962 Eh. There is something Games Workshop started doing where, instead of having stuff podcasts where they talk about the thought process behind rules, they just have designer notes next to the abilities.
Playing only 5e these days, mostly because I had to create my table to have a regular game and don't have the money or time to learn a new system
I would disagree. Pulling back the string is how you load a crossbow with ammunition, so if a crossbow loads itself with ammunition, wouldn't it have to magically pull its own string back?
My only thought is,why would the spell storing thing you talked about on this video work different than the ring of spell storing? & this would break the rule of only being able to have one individual character being the source of no more than one concentration spell at a time.
Alchemist(make and throw a ton of homemade bombs or firebombs
as far as 1 level dip keep a tool and a component pouch on a string round neck. just drop and grab the other?
I wonder/worry that by removing the ThunderCannon option that the Artificer won't be as strong on their own like the Cleric is.
...good luck to all of you Urchin or Outlander Artificers.
I kinda wish that With the Artificer there will be new spells, since the opportunity is right there.
I'm on the fence on whether I want Artificer type subclasses for other classes, like Eldritch knight or Arcane domain clerics for example.
From a casual look, the Artificer seems like a better ranger. Better 'pets', half caster, can be good at melee or ranged but not great in either.
So RBJ repeating shot does in fact crank the crossbow back? I kind of see certain 'infusions' as mods the Artificer builds and comes up with so yeah I can see that, especially for personal peace of mind. Though now I'm trying to come up with a reason not to have an artificer have multiple shots, beyond two, a turn since with the mod cranking and reloading...
I personally disagree with the decision to make the Artificer a half caster.
There really aren't enough 'bomb' potion options. There's Alchemist's fire and Acid Flask. That's it. And neither one is amazing at higher tiers, which makes their price kind of ludicrous as a side gripe.
I have a question about spells. Your spells and cantrips can be changed after a rest, but how does that work. Do I need a book that knows all my spells to be able to change them out, or do I always know all of the spells available and just change my list to what fits me that day?
Firstly, you can't switch cantrips. When you take a cantrip, you're stuck with it. If you look (at any spellcaster that prepares spells) it has this phrase: "The spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots." which means no cantrips.
According to the flavor text, the artificer changes their preparations by adjusting their tool sets - presumably to make the required modifications to cast the new prepared spells. No book required.
I take back my question. Before artificer became official and these changes were made, the class said at the end of a long rest you can change your spells. Later "right catnip for the job" stated you can do the same with your cantrips. I didnt know they removed it.
As for the part about preparing spells, the flavor text doesnt answer my question much. Is the artificer able to just swap "spells" after a long rest (and tinkering time)? No spell scrolls, books, templates, or other information or items needed? Just takes a spell in their list and swaps it for another they have available at that level?
@@piroshadow Yes
Know I'm super late on the response to this but the Artificer can change cantrips but only one and after a level up:
"Cantrips (0-Level Spells)
At 1st level, you know two cantrips of your choice from the artificer spell list. At higher levels, you learn additional artificer cantrips of your choice, as shown in the Cantrips Known column of the Artificer table.
When you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer cantrips you know with another cantrip from the artificer spell list."
Copy/pasted from Beyond
Is an Evoker 14, Artillerist 6 using Magic Missile and Jeremy Crawford’s rolling method for MM now the single highest single target damage dealer?
Arcane Firearm adds a d8 to one damage roll of a spell. MM applies damage equally to all targets based on single roll. Evoker 10 adds Int bonus. D8+D4+6 x (3+[slot level-1])
Maximize a level 5 or below with Evoker 14. No save, no to hit, just 18/Missile Force.
19 if you have the Force damage boosting implement?
Unless the target has a shield spell...
I’m sorry, did the BBEG caster or enemy artillery just burn their reaction on shield instead of counterspell? I’ll take it, out Wizard or cleric can thank me later.
Unfortunately, this doesn't work. Arcane firearm only adds the extra damage to Artificer spells. So this only works if you can somehow make Magic Missile an Artificer spell.
I thought it was on the Artillerist list.
Can you throw a returning weapon and cast haste on yourself and move in front of an different enemy right by and make that enemy also take the damage because it has to go through the new target to get back to you
Can’t you use an infused wand for both artificer and wizard?
Yes, I mentioned this in the video
Pretty sure the “ignores requirements” feature specifies in regards to attunement, not just general use.
Most creatures can shove, but its not on any creature's stat block. I dont think that not saying a homunculous can use an item means that they can't.
I think tinkersmithory is intended to remain it's own thing kinda like lore master is not a required class for all wizards
One thing I've wondered, and maybe someone else has the answer, but the artillerist's level 9 feature says that at that level, the cannons damage rolls increase by 1d8. So would that exclude the benefit from extending to the protector turret? Since it is a roll for temp HP, rather than a damage roll. At my table we've had some back and forth, but no consensus yet. Either way, great video as always, very informative, and helped give me something to listen to while working on my term paper!
By RAW it wouldn't add, though I wonder if that's the intent.
I think it would enhance your build videos if you include a short section in your build videos with regards to multiclassing options. Possibly even a quick level breakdown of a couple of potential builds.
As far as your argument about using a shield and having to switch between casting both artificer and wizard spells, there is a simple solution. If you need to cast an artificer spell, then cast it. If you need to cast of wizard spell, drop your artificer tool, you can always just make another one during your next short rest 😏
You can do that, unless it's a reaction spell as you can't drop items when it isn't your turn.
I think you are wrong about the alchemist. The Alchemist is the ultimate maker class. So you have to prepare. Alchemist supplies and the alchemy jug can be used to create poison and acid. Ever read the poisons section of the dmg? Now take a glassblowers tools proficiency and you can craft vials filled with contact poison or gas in your offtime, or combine poison and acid to make the others work too! Then either throw them or use the catapult spell. And if firearms are available, repeating shot guns can be very good as well.
The shoulder mounted cannon says to me "this person has been watching the predator movies". You'd better get some decent ear protection if you're doing that though or you're getting a deafened status as far as I'm concerned.
Real firearms make noise because they need propellant to fire a solid projectile. The artificer's cannon shoots spells. Why would a magic spell cast from any device need to make noise?
@@TheMadJestyr If not for the cannon being magical we could of totally used magical tinkering to make the cannon go pew pew every time it fires. 😆
If you can only use a particular infusion on a single object, does that mean you can only replicate one magic item of a certain type? Ever? Well, I guess that does prevent one from saturating the magic item market with bags of holding...
how about what every your pb is thats what it scales as so as your pb gose up his bonus goes up to reflect.
Sadly I thought this alchemist would be great but damn the first ability is so underwhelming it’s not worth it. Unless you want to try and go full healer
Will artificers be able to use traditional arcane focus ie. Wand, staff for their spell casting?
Can they benefit from their infusion +1/+2 wands?
They normally can't use a traditional arcane focus, but they can use infusions as a focus, so if you infuse a traditional arcane focus, then you can use it. So the answers to each question is No and Yes.
Here's a question for dual class a Wizard/Artificer: if you have a spell that is on the list for both classes, such as Fireball, would the 5th level arcane firearm of the Artificer and 10th level empowered evocation of the Wizard both apply?
I don't think so. When you cast a spell - you are either casting it as a Wizard or as an Artificer, even if it's on both lists.
@@TreantmonksTemple I had a feeling that was the case, but drat anyway.
Your last name is the same as the name of the first elementary school I went to.
@@charlessaintpe8574 Where was that?
@@jimwolford7294 McKinney, a city just north of Dallas, Texas.
your arguement of "weapons that are arcane focus lets you cast spells that have somatic components even with a shield" isnt really agreed upon.
The general consensus on the internet (for some reason...) is that focus(es) ONLY replace M comps, but do not add them. 1h+Sh, one of them is a focus, VSM yes, but VS no.
The arguement they present there, is that there is no M component for the focus to substitute, so it doesnt work, makign you unable to use the focus holding hand to present the S comps.
That is correct. Did I say otherwise in the vid?
@@TreantmonksTemple I think I heard you saying arcane focuses "add material components to spell, letting you cast S or V S spells with both hands full"
If you didnt, then I should sleep more
@@texteel My mistake, I misread your initial post. I understand why the consensus would be that requiring a Focus doesn't add an M component to spells, and that's the way I read it by RAW. In the video, I'm talking about what I believe the RAI is, because the designers have universally up to now made sure one hand was capable of casting spells, and I think if they were to intentionally change that now, it's something they would have mentioned.
Can steel defender fly?
I kind of want a backpack cannon
Back Pack Life Support System with the Generator thingy. I like the idea. :D
@@LazyVideosGAME You could always pick warforged and be Robo from Chrono Trigger if you wanted. Describing all your spells and items as extensions and augments of your mechanical form.
Naturally you'd have to get the arcane propulsion arm if you went that route.
Rage is basically a cantrip.
Alchemists! Huh! Good Gawd, y'all!
What is it good for?
34:32 the Alchemist only makes sense to me if there potion's can all be converted into ointments and or injectables.Any other way you seem to lose too much turn economy as far as I can imagine at this time.
What is about firearms and repeating Shot?
Using the rules for renaissance firearms in the DMG (Chapter 9), they use the loading and ammunition property like crossbows, so it should work.
Repeating shot also works with a sling.
11:23 "Every background in the game has enough starting gold to buy these tools." Huh? No? *_No_* Background in the game has enough gold to buy Tinker's Tools. They cost *_50 gp_*
IF you choose to forgo _any_ starting equipment you can instead begin with between 50 and 200 gp (5d4*10), in which case yes, you could buy the Tinker's Tools. And barely anything else unless you roll particularly well.
artificer doesnt get the fabricate spell... wtf?
It's under artificer on beyond
They really should have let alchemesy just know the create homunculus spell from xanathar instead of going the infusion route. Push it into an out of combat utility role
Also can a number of tiny servants use the spell storing item multiple times on the same turn? Say for a burst option like scorching ray/shatter
Chris, you have to be kidding me. You don’t know what the Alchemist will be doing on Combat?
It’s not called the God Alchemist for no reason.
All kidding aside it is built to be a heavy support and I imagine most spell slots will go to making potions, as a +1d4 to all attack rolls and saving throws is crazy good for your GWM+Polearm Master Fighters, Paladins, and Barbarians.
Alternatively nothing says you can’t be under the effects of more than one potion at a time meaning +1AC and +1d4 on all attacks and saving throws encourages me heavily to take a 5 level Dip into Eldritch Knight and ten use Gauntlets of Ogre Power and a Headband of Intellect at later levels.
Alternatively taking 5 levels into Barbarian so you can do Reckless attack, pick up an Amulet of Health at later levels so it really bumps up your AC and use GWM on both attacks while having Advantage +1d4....pretty enticing. Second benefit as a Barbarian, you get extra mileage from having resistance whenever you heal yourself or alternatively whenever you gain Temp HP. Kalashastar Bear Totem Barbarian/Alchemist Artificer. Could be very strong. Then you could Infuse your shield with Spells to cast as well as giving it an infusion so it’s your focus.
I'm not sure any of that compares to what a full caster support character can do.
SharkForce so you’re telling me a non-concentration bless on a single target is something you wouldn’t take? That’s a hard to pass up thing in my opinion especially when you can plan in a battle beforehand.
Also a 2 dip into Warlock gets you 2 free potions every short rest. Pretty strong.
Treantmonk's Temple I can see how you would say that, but none of your full caster can infuse the Barbarian’s shield with spells and make it stronger so they can cast from it and concentrate from it like you said in your video. I’m pretty sure if I offered a Barbarian a once a day free Casting of cute wounds they wouldn’t say no. Let alone 10 of those. Or ten uses of Armor of Agathys or any other 1 action spell I can cast that is first or second level.
I can see a lot of Utility and helpful support coming from this Character, they cannot manipulate the physical battlefield or enemies like the Wizard can, but they can manipulate their allies more than anyone else in the game. This is also by far the most cost effective use of a 1st level spell slot for healing in the game assuming you’re table doesn’t allow Goodberry to be the most powerful healing spell in the game due to Life Cleric levels.
Furthermore I can administer it to someone in battle and can flavor it as food which would be very fun to throw healing muffins in my allies mouths and they suddenly gain 2d4+Int mod HP.
But then again maybe I’m just missing something obviousl.
So you’re saying if you give someone this potion before they break down the door to fight the Orc’s you can’t contribute meaningfully in combat?
I think you’re not seeing what this can do at low levels. I agree that this isn’t a build that deals damage, but neither is the GOD WIZARD. Damage isn’t the only meaningful thing in combat that you can do in combat. I’m certain a +1 AC boost non-concentration would be terrible. I’m sure a 10ft fly speed outside of combat would be terrible. I’m sure getting a Magical Weapon, Water Breathing, or a non-illusion based physical looking change is terrible at 3rd level for a 1st level spell slot. Alter Self makes you have +1 Magical Attacks at 3rd level. 2d4+Int is much better than your average cure wounds spell. I agree that the Flight speed, Alter Self, and the 10ft walking speed are not that strong at later levels. But I’ve never had a character that could concentrate on Flaming Sphere and could give out a Pseudobless Spell. Or that could cast healing word and a better cure wounds in the same turn if need be.
I’m not trying to be rude but I think that what you lose out in just straight strength you far make up in versatility. And by the time everything else has lost it’s purpose your can heal 2d4+Int and grant 2d6+Int Temp HP for a 1st level spell slot.
Maybe it just comes down to a difference of opinion but having the ability to ensure your allies can do what they need to do, I believe can make some very powerful builds and considering the base class can already be a pretty strong fill in for most roles, this strongly brings you into the support role in my opinion.
Alchemist is a support subclass. How is that hard to figure out?
You use your experimental flask ability
Once high enough it always heals some
Take all the support spells. Aid, false life, etc.
You get a boost to your healing if you use alchemy tools.
You get lesser restoration a number of times equal to your int mod per long rest without needing anything but alchemist tools. You get heal or greater restoration once per long rest eventually too.