| 22 people marked this as a favorite. |
Throwing it in this forum because that's what Jason pointed me towards.
For a long while now, the artificer-type character has been in great demand from fans of Pathfinder. I've been compiling a list of homebrew and 3rd party solutions for artificers, and based off of that I think it's the most common class concept that is written by fans due to lack of an official version. Last time I updated the list, there are somewhere around 35-40 unique attempts at the concept. Since that last time I updated it, I now know of 2 or 3 new classes / archetypes that I should really add to the list. This is somewhere around 40 people (ok, a few of those are by Pluvia33) who wanted the concept so much that they went out and made a class or archetype rather than try to make another combination of classes work. Making a class / archetypes aren't some light undertaking, so I feel that the number of classes / archetypes really shows how many people want this class concept.
While the alchemist has generally been seen as somewhat close to this, the rulings regarding magic item creation and alchemists, as wells as James saying it wasn't meant to be the artificer replacement, kind of dampens the use of that class as the artificer.
The artificer character type has historically rewarded inventive thinking, and offers a wonderful way to do fantastical things without (necessarily) resorting to magic.
Who else would like to see Paizo's take on an artificer?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am always down for more artificer\mechanist\steampunk-esque class options, especially ones that are vetted by Paizo.
Dot.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Put me down for a yes. The concept clearly has legs, and plenty of real world clout from Archimedes to Leonardo Da Vinci in the West to the many technological advances made in the Near and Far East while Westerners were deciding whose god was fancier by blood and steel. Just to point out the less steampunk-aesthetic origins to diehard "fantasy=historia with spells'n'pointy ears/no scifi in my LOTR" gang.
Obviously there's a slew of fantasy tropes and spinoffs too...seems anime/manga/console gaming has run off with the concept presenting new begoggled, giant wrench toting steamsuited characters daily and the broad gearpunk/clockpunk/steampunk culture/fiction/gaming of course. There was Eberron's Artificer too. And as Cheapy points out - many dozen more here on the boards.
So yes, by all that is cobbled together with ingenuity, sweat and mystic chutzpah (or just hard work and force of personality) let's have an Artificer from Paizo. Really, just put it on the drawing board next to the Swashbuckler. ;)
I would support some class having a class feature called Chutzpah.
I'd like to see magitech/steampunkish class too. Not necessarily named artificer, though. Engineer perhaps?
Which reminds me I'd love to see Guild Wars 2 Engineer... *sigh*
Yes Please
I've been playing with the idea of converting the 3.5 Artificer to Pathfinder, but haven't found the time or dedicated drive. One of my top favorite characters from 3.5 was a goblin artificer that created alchemical bombs and a "vial-launcher/flame-thrower", so I would love to see him (his character concept at least) come back to Pathfinder. The Alchemist fits the bill, but I would miss all of the crafting and utility he was able to bring to the party.
I'd love to see Paizo's rendition of the Artificer, absolutely.
Also note, maybe not to Paizo but to 3rd party publishers. As far as I recall White Wolf's World Of Warcraft D20 tinkering rules were OGL. Obviously it should be confirmed by someone who actually has the book, but after removing references to Blizzard's IP they could be reused.
The pathfinder perferred "Forged" character race should be in the same book with their artificer. I had a gnome artificer named Ticlack, who was a great sidekick for the warforged monk, Ironman. By giving them Master Craftsman at first level, they can make magic items without knowing the spells.
As far as I recall White Wolf's World Of Warcraft D20 tinkering rules were OGL. Obviously it should be confirmed by someone who actually has the book, but after removing references to Blizzard's IP they could be reused.
I do believe that the tinkering rules in Sword & Sorcery's World Of Warcraft RPG is OGL. At least from the looks of it any way, but I could be wrong.
Put me down for a yes. The concept clearly has legs, and plenty of real world clout from Archimedes to Leonardo Da Vinci in the West to the many technological advances made in the Near and Far East while Westerners were deciding whose god was fancier by blood and steel. Just to point out the less steampunk-aesthetic origins to diehard "fantasy=historia with spells'n'pointy ears/no scifi in my LOTR" gang.
Obviously there's a slew of fantasy tropes and spinoffs too...seems anime/manga/console gaming has run off with the concept presenting new begoggled, giant wrench toting steamsuited characters daily and the broad gearpunk/clockpunk/steampunk culture/fiction/gaming of course. There was Eberron's Artificer too. And as Cheapy points out - many dozen more here on the boards.
So yes, by all that is cobbled together with ingenuity, sweat and mystic chutzpah (or just hard work and force of personality) let's have an Artificer from Paizo. Really, just put it on the drawing board next to the Swashbuckler. ;)
Yea, that's an important distinction to make, I think. The artificer doesn't have to be high-technology. There are a lot of tropes of someone just making do with their current tech level, rather than being some genius savant who can pull technology from ages ahead of themselves.
I'm working on a Scientist class, who basically designs technology. I haven't had much response. A science has various difficulty numbers for the harder designs.
I'm with OSW, Artificer and Swashbuckler both.
And while we're at it, can we get a subtype that deals in living creatures as well? Not just the guy who makes Flesh Golems, but also those fools who gave us Owlbears and Gelatinous Cubes.
And maybe one for making our own Exotic weapons.
|
The artificer is nice but it needs to be completely redrawn (compared to the old Eberron version). Rather than a strict focus on magic items, just items in general would be better suited. Something like a 'super' craftsman with the option of not being the type of character who does not need to create stuff.
The entire central theme of the artificer and creating items does not fit very well into Pathfinder Society. Now, creation can be a great archetype of the class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
yep...artificer/engineer seems to be the biggest hole in needed classes. Maybe if Pathfinder ever does a Steampunk rulebook?
I'm guessing a whole steampunk book wouldn't be done, but if they ever do another set of classes...
When Pathfinder first came out I did some work on converting the Ebberon Artificer myself, was one of my favorite classes for boggling my GMs mind with the variety of options at my disposal. Pure magic, magi-tech, or steampunk all sound like very fun options. Could almost use more than one artificer type, or some artificer-like archetypes (A robot builder variant on Summer, for instance). As is, the Gunslinger is the most high tech we have (especially the Experimental Gunsmith gnome racial archetype).
I'd be down with more than one too :)
I'll throw my vote in as well. I'd love to see two separate classes, honestly. Or one class and an alternate for it. I'd love an engineer/technologist class that focuses on non-firearm high-technology and gadgetry, but I'd also love to see a true artificer that is more of a master craftsman that can do new and unique things with magic items.
Honestly, the only problem I see with building a magic-item-artificer is simply that PF, as a system, already heavily leans on magic items. I'm not sure what a "super-craftsman" could really bring to the table. If it were something that functioned, mechanically, closer to the Incarnum classes of 3.5, or a class that was able to utilize magic items in different ways (maybe he can cause them to intentionally fail and explode or something), then you might have something. But if you did a strict "magic smith with magic devices"-style class, I really don't see room.
Additionally, I thought the artificer would have been a great addition to Ultimate Equipment. But alas, we still wait. Maybe the Ultimate Advanced Player's Guide 3 will have something.
Still pulling for an NPC codex 2 in 2014, though.
...Catch Phrase,
-Chris
That is true. One of the hallmarks of the 3.5 artificer was that they got to mitigate the main expensive portion of crafting, the XP loss. Without that in PF, and with PF's loosening of the magic item rules, just a 'this guy makes magic items' class wouldn't work out too well.
But at the same time, one that gets to choose which gadgets they can specialize in, in the vein of an alchemist's discoveries or rogue talents, would be pretty awesome, and this is a method that a lot of people have taken in their homebrew versions of the Artificer class. Including yours!
...But at the same time, one that gets to choose which gadgets they can specialize in, in the vein of an alchemist's discoveries or rogue talents, would be pretty awesome, and this is a method that a lot of people have taken in their homebrew versions of the Artificer class. Including yours!
I wasn't going to mention it...but y'all should totally check out my Engineer. Link in my profile.
On a less chest-puffing note, I think the trick to a unique artificer or technomancer-type class is going to be not the simple fact that it can make magic items. Any caster (and non-casters who spend a couple of feats) can do that. The trick, I think, to a class like that is giving it unique abilities that focus around magic items (or, as you mentioned, abilities that grant them gadgets to manipulate that have their own powers).
One of the big, potentially overlooked issues that might face Paizo (should they decide to even create such a class) is that, like you said, there are TONS of homebrew and 3pp artificers out there. And while it might not be such a big deal to shift away from the 3pp classes, establishing some ideas that are wildly different from the homebrew classes might piss some people off. In addition, the sheer amount of homebrew classes means that there's likely to be some overlap with an official class, which might also piss some people off. It's such a widely-desired class that touching it is, in and of itself, a touchy subject, and one that should be handled with care.
That being said, I think Paizo's design team could pull it off.
...Catch Phrase,
-Chris
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm desirous of some kind of tinker/engineer/techie class.
Interjection games made a tinker class that may or may not be what you are looking for. I don't have it yet, but I have been thinking about getting it:
http://paizo.com/products/btpy8yja?The-Tinker-Master-of-Modular-Mechanical- Mayhem
I would personally like a couple. One that makes mechanical armors another that perhaps makes companions or weapons. Yes for me.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fantastic and historical "artificers" or "inventors":
Hephaestus - Twisted smith of the gods, Hephaestus was famously ugly but could create objects of such power and beauty he caused the goddess of love herself to love him.
Daedalus - Creator of the labyrinth that housed the Minotaur and the wax wings of Icarus. Daedalus would probably be considered the first mortal artificer. Throw in the ancient clockwork mechanism and I don't want anyone crying foul about anachronisms.
Archimedes - The archetypal natural philosopher. Even now we refer to the Eureka moment.
Leonardo da Vinci - flying machines, battle tanks, submersibles and other impossible devices all lived in this artistic genius' head.
Here's what I think. The Alchemist is the equivalent of a fantasy chemist/biologist. We should have the equivalent of a fantasy physicist/engineer to round out the sciences!
It could probably be done as an archetype of a wizard or alchemist, but it would need to do more than make magic items for it to stand out.
Call me cheap, but I don't think I an archetype would satisfy :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought you were Cheapy, not cheap. :D
I agree, a new class would do very well, but it would need more of an angle than magical items. Something like being able to invent this, bonuses to craft and engineering, able mend and repair, as well an make things broken, increasing the benefits of masterwork items, increasing competence bonuses from tools, able to increase/decrease hardness, change special materials (improve or regress them), improve certain equipment (range of a telescope, etc.), design and invent new contraptions (battle wagons, gear-work items, maybe even clockwork constructs at higher levels), etc.
The magical item aspect should be minimal, but useful, such as increasing/decreasing charges in items temporarily, using items without expending a charge, and able to craft them using Master Craftsman feat mechanics, but apply them to additional item creation feats as they gain levels, or a specific stream chosen at 1st level, instead of just the normal Master Craftsman feat. Some Use Magical Device benefits too.
Personally, I think the Artificer SHOULD NOT be arcane based, but tech based - able to duplicate certain spell-like effects through tech, alchemy, physics, etc. No spells or spell lists, perhaps even a deed-esque style of abilities, plus some discovery-like "Innovations" or a Research ability that allows them to design and develop their own unique contraptions and add to it like an eidolon increases in power and gains evolutions, but these would be advances or upgrades to the contraption.
Lots of ideas going through my mind. Lots of directions and possibilities.
The Alchemist and Builder, could share the recipes for glassteal, Ironwood, and woodstone. I realize 2 of these spells were game world specific, but only as spells.
And Talos was a bronze age iron golem. Very much a builder made monster even if he was a mech like in Disney's Hercules.
Call me cheap, but I don't think I an archetype would satisfy :-)
Your cheap.
Also, I agree! I fully think it should be an alternate class of Alchemist.
Partly because there aren't enough alternate classes but mostly because if you made it an archetype, you'd probably end up replacing just about every class ability the alchemist has for something more 'techy' anyway.
Everything in the post
I agree with this too! In fact, my version pretty much covers a lot of the ideas here... great minds and all that!
Kaer Maga has a gnome attempting to invent a working hangglider. We have our first artificer! Maybe. It's happened before -- I seem to recall that the Sun Orchid Elixir's creator existed before they ever released the Alchemist.
The hallmark of base classes is that a lot of different things can be made out of them -- choices, choices, choices! You can build a rogue, fighter, sorceror or cleric dozens of different ways without even resorting to feats. So what makes two artificers different?
One artificer is the distinguished and bright inventor, working just at the edge of known science to expand what is possible to improve and gradually change the world. Aqueducts and the advent of steel may have been the work of artificers yesterday, and the rise of gunpowder may be the work of artificers today. Some of these produce impressive next-generation models of modern technology, while others find brilliant new uses for existing materials (equipment tricks?)
Other artificers take it to the extreme and delve deeply into sciences (and perhaps related but darker crafts) to make creations that Golarion would not reach for centuries yet, or to replicate creations that have been forgotten for millenniae. Numerian researchers, Thassilonian archeologists and dangerously brilliant men with radical new ideas work doggedly in isolated laboratories on concepts far out of mortal reach, and emerge with frightening and unpredictable masterpieces.
What other kind of artificers does one see?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's true only if you have an extremely limited and unimaginative take on what the artificer is. There are thousands of ways to make an artificer class that doesn't involve the creation of magic or even mundane items. Even if they got a bonus to craft checks, they could just do what they do with the alchemist, despite that class being all about creating mixtures of chemicals.
|
|
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!").
| 3 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".
That's true only if you have an extremely limited and unimaginative take on what the artificer is. There are thousands of ways to make an artificer class that doesn't involve the creation of magic or even mundane items. Even if they got a bonus to craft checks, they could just do what they do with the alchemist, despite that class being all about creating mixtures of chemicals.An artificer that can't use crafting is practically ndistinguishable from an alchemist.
Once again, only if you have an extremely limited take on it. That's like saying that a ranger without spells is practically indistinguishable from a fighter. That's not true in the slightest.
Alchemists make 'potions' all the time for 2 of their 3 main class features. Their other main class feature is making small bombs. And yet, despite their main class features being all about the crafting of things and crafting not being allowed in PFS, PFS was able to find a way to allow alchemists in their framework.
The design team could easily do the same thing if they were going to cow down to the wants of PFS.
It's not going to happen. For one major reason.
You really can't use the class in Pathfinder Society. and that drives the bulk of Pathfinder sales. Case in point... the Gamemaster Guide was the worst selling hardback in Pathfinder history because it was absolutely useless for PFS players.
I figured it was because most of the information was not needed by all GM's and many players had no use for it at all.
From what I understood the AP's are the biggest sellers, not the modules, scenarios, or rule books.
With that aside just put the class in the next major hardback. It does not have to be the main attraction, just an added feature.
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 exactly it though. Between the choices you make internal to a class, and the archetypes that can be selectable, a great variety of concepts can be simultaneously certified.
Some people think of a rogue as a sneak-attacking trap disarmer, but there are rogues who instead select rogue talents about following up on information to see through lies like a detective or move effectively on walls and tightropes like an acrobat.
Similarly, an Artificer might be filled with a series of inventions (repeatably selectable class ability) that allow players to create the artificer they want: Perhaps one that invents next-generation steels for use in improved armor and weapons; perhaps one that designs and builds new siege weapons; perhaps one that tinkers with personal conveyances like gliders or personal blimps.
To satisfy people looking for more of a 'super-science' edge, different options may exist for artificers that delve too deeply. Some may perform surgery on themselves, or perform eldritch experiments to augment their limbs with inhuman strength and flexibility. Some may create devices that mimic magical effects (such as flight), but without using magic. Others may gain access to the ability to synthesize loyal automatons (or living creatures?) that can combine or split apart in combat to deadly effect. But far-reaching powers such as these may be dangerous and prone to terrific backfires.
People will select what they like. Defined concepts may (or may not) be put into paths, allowing characters to dabble or specialize their concepts. The existence of two different Artificer concepts don't spoil each other, any more than the noble dandy-rogue spoils the assassin-rogue.