Question – how would you feel if they handled the artificer like they are the psionic/mystic? Basically cannibalize into pieces as subclasses that are only vaguely evocative of an artificer? I can’t imagine #DarkSun without it. They DID handle the artificer the way they’re handling psionics; the first UA approach to the artificer was as a wizard subclass. UA is about experimenting with different approaches. The artificer didn’t END UP as a wizard subclass, so no reason to assume the psion will.
— Keith Baker (@HellcowKeith) November 26, 2019
What bothers me about the Artificer is that they totally gutted one of the subclasses that offered a -really unique- character fantasy and playstyle.
The old Gunsmith used to be my favorite, because it really played up the angle of a skilled sniper who only gets one shot per round, so they have to make it count, but if you land it you deal pretty impressive damage.
It incentivized you to really think about the terrain and your positioning on the battlefield, in order to always keep clear sightlines and maximize your chances to hit. It was a character option that offered a greater degree of “High Risk / High Reward” gameplay, which I feel is solely lacking in 5E.
—
I understand that player feedback about “firearms” was overwhelmingly negative (despite the thunder cannon being purely magical), but I really wish they had kept that playstyle as an option, even if they had to change the aesthetic or lore around it in order not to trigger the “Guns = Bad!” grognard reaction.
Instead, they turned the Artificer into a mandatory “Pet Class”, removing the option for your character to be powerful because of their own inherent skill, and instead forcing them to rely on external companion of one sort or another.
There’s nothing wrong with that character fantasy, it just feels strange that it’s forced upon the entire class, and the player is deprived of other options. We don’t force every Ranger to take a pet, we don’t force every Druid to use summons, we don’t force every Wizard to have familiars, so why do we force every Artificer to rely on some weird little magical companion?
—
To be fair, you can somewhat approximate certain aspects of the sharpshooter fantasy by playing a Rogue and relying on sneak attack, but only if you’re willing to give up an Artificer’s spellcasting, which is a big part of the character fantasy.
Likewise, you can retain some element of that “ranged magic-user” feel with an Arcane Archer, but only if you’re willing to give up the whole sharpshooter angle of dealing a lot of damage in a single precise shot, rather than peppering an enemy with two, three, four, or even more rapidfire shots per turn.
My issue is that the specific archetype I want to play currently isn’t really supported by any existing class options, without sacrificing something.