Also, I thought it was the AP sales that were the bulk of Paizo's profits?
I guess that's another addition to my list of "Reasons I hate PFS".
You should be glad for PFS, even if you don't play it... because without it, Paizo would be just another backwater third party player.
You want artificers so bad for your home game, there's at least three people who've done Pathfinder compatible knockoffs of the Eberron class you want so much, but Paizo can't touch because of IP concerns. You don't need to wait for a Paizo blessed version.
I'm still pretty certain that it's their APs that drive the majority of their sales, not PFS.
And of course, you're assuming people want just a copy-paste of the Artificer. Which, I'm looking for something similar, but with some different and expanded mechanics.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You should be glad for PFS, even if you don't play it... because without it, Paizo would be just another backwater third party player.
Now that I think about it, Belkzen also has a large number of Artificer candidates toiling away in one of the lost Sky Citadels, creating horribly innovative new warmachines.
So there's another place the class would fit into the world.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, I thought it was the AP sales that were the bulk of Paizo's profits?
I guess that's another addition to my list of "Reasons I hate PFS".
You should be glad for PFS, even if you don't play it... because without it, Paizo would be just another backwater third party player.
You want artificers so bad for your home game, there's at least three people who've done Pathfinder compatible knockoffs of the Eberron class you want so much, but Paizo can't touch because of IP concerns. You don't need to wait for a Paizo blessed version.
I'm still pretty certain that it's their APs that drive the majority of their sales, not PFS.
And of course, you're assuming people want just a copy-paste of the Artificer. Which, I'm looking for something similar, but with some different and expanded mechanics.
Remember that these scenarios aren't being put out for free. They're sold and paid for, just like the AP's, only a good deal cheaper.
What they almost all want, is someone who cranks out magic items like a factory. All of the artificers I've seen have been variants on this basic trope. That simply is not going to fly in PFS.
[Looks through Cheapys list of tinker and artificer classes] Someone who cranks out magic itens? LOLNOPE. Someone who can temporaly enhance itens? Sure. Someone with special abilities when dealing with buildings, constructs, traps, certain materials, or something engineery like that? Would be good. Someone who can deploy turrets, drones or even robots? Yes. Someone capable of making one use inventions that mimic magic but aren't exctly magic, somewhat like the alchemist extracts? Definetly. Someone that can make a clockwork/staempunk suit of ironman armor? Hell yeah. But just crafting itens? Boring.
|
Yeah, the core idea of creating magic items does not need to be anywhere need the class. Now, archetypes that deal with item creation? Yes, that is fine.
Instead of creation, let's all focus on what ELSE you could do with items. Enhance them? Well, that's extremely basic (and boring) but necessary. Then again, anyone could enhance an item through magic item creation or through magic.
The class, at this time, needs something different and more substantial than item creation or enhancement. It needs something new.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering the amount of diverging ideas on what an Artificer is, writing this class is pretty much a recipe for disaster because whatever you do there will be a vocal, passionate group going against it. Kinda like with Summoner ("We wanted a celestial turtle spammer and you gave us a Pokemon trainer!", granted Master Summoner kind of alleviates this) and Gunslinger ("My idea about how guns should work in d20 is TOTALLY different from everybody else's!").
That's a great point Gorbacz on the pitfalls possible - I'm sure the opprobrium occurred, but that didn't make the Summoner any less popular in the long run - sure people may have been disappointrd, but plenty more weren't and that's the hope here - that a modular and generic enough Base Class with simple, elegant and rigorous mechanics can become the chassis for a huge variety of tropes, approaches and concepts.
The OP's title, I agree with. The big gripe about the Alchemist is a misunderstanding. An alchemist can dump an extract of magic weapon on the paladin's cold iron great sword before they go through the scary door.
As long as the Pathfinder version leaves enough options open, it's a good thing. The IP problem will be with the class title. That's why I'm calling it The Builder. You can also call it the Engineer, the Tinker, or any of a number of other things.
Dot on an artificer variant please!!!!
Another vote for artificer/ tinker/ engineer here.
Hopefully with an Alkenstar archetype that gives it firearms, too.
Yes please on this kind of class.
Building magic items, making the Craft skill run smooth, modifying mundane weapons/armor, making crazy new weapons and gadgets, working on clockworks and constructs (possibly even melding with one like a synthesist <.< >.>) - I want to hear "I Want it All" in my head when I read this class with tons of builds like the Alchemist.
I know people immediately think of 'steampunk' with this kind of class, but I think a case could be made for stuff before the time more akin to Da Vinci and others. Things also get lost in time. I remember reading that some of the things that the Romans did like central heating in a house was not rediscovered until the later 1800s, and how they better used water wheels and power.
I think there's a reluctance to have a class that has the expectation of a crafter making it not as justifiable as an adventurer but I think there are enough third party artificers to show that it can be done without making it more adventurer than crafter so I'll vote for artificer as well.
I would love an Artificer style class.
They can call it Engineer, use my ideas for research points, and adapt all other ideas on this board that match their vision. I post on this because I love the game. The research feat may require at least 12 int or wis to take, but the classes that have it as a feature will have bonuses to gaining and max retaining points.
Seeing this thread i remember fondly of the Gnome Artificer prestige class of Forgotten Realms 3.0 ed. It was really flavorful, and i think it would work nicely as an inspiration and starting point for a full 20-level class.
I would love to see an artificer. Granted, I don't generally play PFS, so crafting is not an issue in the games I play, but keeping in mind that it IS an issue in PFS, there are still dozens of potential paths for an artificer-like class.
Instead of making custom magic items, he might be able to temporarily "combine" items, enhance the bonuses of current items, or create improved versions of similar tech. While not truly magical in nature (unless he actually takes the feats to create magic items) he could have a number of chemical/mechanical analogues to them, similar to an alchemist's infusions.
His inventions might only function because they feed off his otherwise untapped magical potential, and as such begin to break down and stop functioning if he is not there to maintain them, limiting the number of items or combinations he can have active at any given time.
Possible tropes include not just magic item creation or utilization, but also Dungeon Engineers with great skill crafting an disarming various dungeon hazards (including, possibly, those pesky slimes), Biochemists who specialize in mutating creatures to meet their needs (ankeg siege engine, anyone?), and even Construct Specialists who, while not necessarily making true golems, can stretch the limits of effects such as Animate Objects.
Personally, I would make this an archetype of the Alchemist, adding discoveries to mimic these abilities and possibly changing the list of infusions they have access to, but I can see many different possibilities. And so long as the available discoveries/talents are well written to list exactly what can be accomplished (instead of leaving it in ambiguous the realm of item creation) I see no reason this could not be included in PFS.
Put me down in the "Yes" column.
I'd think an artificer would make a great alchemist alternate class or something.
|
I think it should be combined with an extensive look at how to use Technology (with capital T) as a balanced element in the game.
Since we started inventing machinery, one of the motivations was basically to be able to do more, bigger, or more efficient. The very goal of technology is to change the balance of things.
I think the simple lever is a good example. A lever is a simple piece of technology that allows someone to move a disproportionate amount of weight. That's a perfect example of someone using technology to change balance.
In PF, that might mean that we start seeing more advanced weapons; swords that are just plain better than other swords. Not harder to buy/train; just plain better. Because they're the result of improved metallurgy, better balancing and so forth.
Going further on this, technology tends to integrate well with other technology and with other mechanically clearly delineated game elements, to create a whole that's even more powerful than the parts.
Another tricky point is that a lot of technology is person-independent. A machine works (provided you know how to operate it) for anyone. So if you make "real" technology with a class, other people without Artificer levels can also use it.
So far Paizo's managed to dance around this with gunslingers and alchemists. Gunslinging requires a lot of feats to deal with unreliable firearms. If those firearms were a bit more advanced, and about as reliable as a crossbow, bow or sling, you might have trouble justifying the gunslinger as a separate class. It's just a fighter that spends a lot of money on guns and ammo.
Alchemists have some slightly strained mechanics preventing others from using their bombs. There's some in-game explanation but it's a tad contrived. Just to keep alchemists from stacking up bombs for days on end, then detonating all of them to blow up the entire dungeon.
What's my point? Making a good technological class is pretty hard and requires good solutions to these problems.
---
I would be interested in the result though.
So unless there is a dedicated archetype for the Investigator, I don't think we'll be seeing this too soon. So sad. Would be very nice for Pathfinder Unchained...
Another tricky point is that a lot of technology is person-independent. A machine works (provided you know how to operate it) for anyone. So if you make "real" technology with a class, other people without Artificer levels can also use it.So far Paizo's managed to dance around this with gunslingers and alchemists. Gunslinging requires a lot of feats to deal with unreliable firearms. If those firearms were a bit more advanced, and about as reliable as a crossbow, bow or sling, you might have trouble justifying the gunslinger as a separate class. It's just a fighter that spends a lot of money on guns and ammo.
Not all technology is person independent. Even during the Industrial Revolution, engineers and the populace did not possess our modern notions of user-friendly design. Most complicated devices could only be operated by the inventor or someone very specially trained to handle it. Even a 100 years ago, this was true, and I doubt you'd ever find a user's manual for any kind of contraption in the medieval period. The reason behind the accessibility of our modern technology is because they were specifically designed for usability. Otherwise, consumers wouldn't buy them.
So, it's entirely plausible to have technology unique to a class. I honestly love the idea of special equipment with interesting mechanics as a class feature. However, like any other class, it can't be the only interesting mechanic the class has. Even the alchemist has mutagens and extracts and discoveries. Gunslinger just had guns and deeds, and I was hoping for a class feature called "grit" to actually have abilities that can do more than just shoot things.
Grit for other classes merits it's own topic.
That's why I made mutations. Having weird energies get in your DNA will effect even NPCs. There's a show, called the listener, where a telepath is a paramedic, and the crime unit needs him as a consultant.
Artificers might have bonuses to use items they can create.
Yep...still think it's an awesome idea.
No clue what the 2015 Gencon hardcover is, but with Pathfinder Unchained and the Advanced Class Guide, they might sadly want to take a break from introducing new classes (like the engineer/artificer/tinker/whatever) for a bit.
I like the idea of the Adamant artificer because it's a normal person making magic his b$+$@ like the wizard but less OP. It shows a creative workaround to the magic system.
I would like aforementioned idea of two classes/archetypes. One of magic item based and one of machine based. The artificer has some cool steampunk inventions powered by magical means. He can use low-level magical items more efficiently and make them better.
The Tinkerer can create clockwork items to help the party. Like a little wind-up toy to blow up less complicated traps. (Rogues would still be need for magical traps or super complex ones that can tell the difference between a toy and a person.) They can create clockwork companions to aid them like a druid's animal companion or even a summoner's eidolon.
Both can make unique magical items based on classic mythology and literature. Something like the wings of Daedalus or Archimedes' death ray.
If conceptualized properly I see no reason tech could not be user-specific. In a fantasy realm where nearly all but the most basic tech is magically enhanced to function at all, anything "advanced" could require special "battery packs" that only an artificer can create. Without these packs the tech simply doesn't function. And anyone who has worked with old-time batteries (salt and acid cells) knows that they require constant maintenance just to prevent the cathode and anode from corroding away, on top of not being very efficient.
The main bar to an official artificer of whatever style (steampunk, clockpunk, magitech, biotech, etc) is the PFS bar on crafting. As I see it, this bar is primarily in place due to a short list of factors:
1 - The current item creation guidelines are just that, guidelines, and a crafty player can use them to validate a number of custom items which fly in the face of game balance (Ring of True Strike, anyone?). Attempts to overhaul this would require extensive lists of abilities and restrictions on those abilities which, if not properly handled, may become more limiting than viable for these concepts which increases the difficulty of this task accordingly.
2 - The current crafting and selling rules, while initially balanced (craft for 1/2 cost, sell for 1/2 cost, net gain 0), have sufficient leeway with various discoveries feats and other mechanics (especially the downtime rules) that this could easily break the game economy unless the DM makes prodigious use of the "wealth by level fairies". However, in this case the players of these characters start to become miffed (indirect, but still not good for PFS).
All that said, I think this can be accomplished, though it may take multiple classes, archetypes, and tricks/discoveries to do so. Magic item crafting, as it currently stands, would probably be the least part of any such class, as for PFS play it would have to be limited to existing items and possibly enhanced/combined versions of these items. However, the Artificer may gain the ability to craft certain specific "upgrades" into his constructions, such as flight, energy effects, or static bonuses, but limited in # or applicable slot. And I believe that there are likely enough different ideas already out there for this to be more an issue of collecting and consolidating those ideas into something balanced and PFS friendly than creating a whole new concept. Of course, the existing writers would have to agree to this unless they have listed it as open source, but most of them have already done the latter and would likely be flattered should their ideas be used in an official concept, I would think.
The hard parts would be making the class feel unique from what already exists while allowing it to still permit those concepts, and making it balanced in terms of game economy so that the WBL fairies need not rear their ugly faces.
One of my favorite characters ever played was an Artificer. Creating custom magic items, gearing up the party and having the opportunity to prepare ahead for greater challenges was awesome.
Obviously, Paizo cannot make the same Artificer from Eberron, and that's a good thing. They can make a better one, with more flavor, real spellcasting and unexpected uses for magic items.
For now, it could be an archetype for the Arcanist or Magus. Later it could become its own class, with 9th level fully customizable, but diminished spellcasting (Very few spells/day) relying mostly on magic items, constructs, and disabling enemy gear/traps.
I would certainly approve the effort of bringing Pathfinder's Artificer to light.
I would so wholeheartedly support the inclusion of my all time favorite class. I know it's impossible to port over directly due to it not be OGL, but a new version that at least keeps the spirit.
Personally I think it has to be it's own Class and not an Archtype of an already existing one. There are t0o many similar but separate (steampunk, magitech, clockwork, technologist etc.) ideas to pigeonhole it as an some other classes Archetype, and by making it its own Class you would already have some built in Archetypes for it.
I would throw so much money at an official product that brings them in. No if I can only get people to accept the idea of a Half-Dwarf (not the desert bound slave version)...
There are a number of tinker/artificier style classes out in 3pp. Why not just use those? Pathfinder allows for 3pp content for a reason, why not take advantage?
1. Many GMs do not allow 3rd-party content.
2. PFS does not allow 3rd-party content.
You asked why people requested stuff. I answered. No need to get agitated.
And as for the crafting bit, just read over the thread. It's been pointed out several times that people have a lot of ideas about what they want out of an Artificer, and not all of them want a one-man item-crafting factory.
I suspect a "alchemist" model would probably be used for an artificer. I mean alchemists play around with the idea of a dedicated potion-making class, but do so in a way that doesn't really lend itself to crafting problems.
. . . So there's another place the class would fit into the world.
...anywhere there are DWARVES!
CLOCKWORK CRANES! HUGE POWER DRILLS! AUTOMATED GARGANTUAN BREWERIES!!!
What? Too much?
I also vote for this. I would also like to see them take on a version of the Wandering Artist as Little Red Goblin Games did.
There are going to be those who read these classes and see "crafting, crafting, and more crafting". But the concepts are so much more than that.
For the vast majority of history there have been lone inventors with unique inventions. However, an Artificer should not be seen simply in the light of someone who can create new items; they could be the MacGyvers of the Pathfinder world - piecing things together to work out something new.
As for the Wandering Artist, there have been journeymen historically. It wasn't strange for someone learning a profession to travel and learn under others. Though they are similar to Bards, the materials they deal with make them unique.
I'm not sure that these two classes can ever be non-crafting enough for something like Pathfinder Society, but I think their concepts - particularly that of the Artificer - resonates deeply with the average Pathfinder player. Otherwise, there wouldn't be nearly as many attempts to create it.
Next year's Steam Adventures with Five new classes.
The Artificer, who creates constructs and weapons out of aether.
The Engineer, who specialises in interacting with the new mechanical 'innovations' on mundane weapons.
The Forgeling, who replaces her body with the parts of constructs turning her body into a living weapon.
The Biomancer, who rather than construct spells with their magic use it to power technology that would otherwise be useless.
The Transmuter, who applies alchemist extract effects spontaneously by touch instead of creating extracts.
Well that's just wishful thinking...
Arguably, the Alchemist fits the bill. It seems to be the same basic concept, just with potions instead of devices.
I'd like to see an artificer class that uses the pre-existing mechanics of formulae, rather than those hundreds of "this class can make this specific list of inventions"