So, how do these two compare, balance- or power-wise? I've never played 3.x (in its original incarnation, only Pathfinder), but have read several of the novels for the Eberron setting. I'm using Tzizimine's Eberron as a basis - would Eberron classes imported into a typical Golarion be unbalancing?
They are miles apart if you go with the 3.5 rule set, but closer together under the Pathfinder rule set. In 3.5 artificers could not only break WBL, they could also break the experience charts. They were, without question, Tier 1. Maybe even the top of Tier 1.
Now with the pathfinder ruleset changing the way magic items are crafted and Tzizimine some of their ability to break WBL on the level that they could before (make no mistake, they still can, just not as easily) they're probably hovering between Tier 1 and 3, which is to say they remain a perfectly viable class. (Probably closer to the bottom of 1 than the top of 3.)
If you are unclear about the Tiers concept I'll explain in a spoiler.
Spoiler:
Tier 1 classes are the strongest and most flexible. They are, with only 1 exception, level 9 spell casting classes (well, if we consider the psionic euridite a caster, which realistically he is), and that 1 exception is the artificer.
Tier 2 classes are just as powerful as Tier 1, but lack the flexibility. A sorcerer (from 3.5) is Tier 2, it is just as powerful as the wizard (having 9th level spells) but it can't change its spells on a day to day basis like the wizard can.
Tier 3 classes lack the power of Tier 1 and 2 classes, but may be even more flexible than those classes. These classes often possess some spellcasting though generally do not possess 9th level spell casting. (Or possess really bad 9th level spell casting.)
Thanks! That helps quite a bit. I'm not really so familiar with the "Tiers" (abgesehen von 'Tier' auf Deutsch...); Where does the Alchemist fit in? My buddy was wanting to do the Artificer more based on character-concept (heavily influenced from the novels) than on any "power-gaming" thing... actually, all the characters are based on concepts- we've never had a "power problem". I hope it stays that way :)
Alchemist would be solidly Tier 3. It can do many things, and it can do them very well, but it can't command the mightiest of angels, stop time, or create its own demiplanes. But to address your question about would bringing the classes into Paizo's world be unbalancing, the answer to that is no. He has worked very hard to balance them in and of themselves, they're solid but they aren't broken.
@Ciaran Barnes: The artificer and the alchemist are actually very different classes, despite being built on the same basic skeleton. (BAB, spells, etc.)
I'd take the alchemist any day. Jeckyll and Hyde >>> lazy dude who sits in his tower working on magic items all day. And Dr. Moreau trumps jeckyll and hyde.
As to the construct crafting prc, artificer is so good at crafting it'd have to be brokenly good to be worth leaving.
Well I do think that the Alchemist makes more sense as a PC honestly. The Artificer was nice if you wanted to make items for your friends but the item creation point pool wouldn't anywhere near as useful in Pathfinder as it was in Eberron during the 3.5 era.
It all comes down to RP though really. An Alchemist roaming the land, seeking out adventure makes more sense than a guy who sits in his lab making magic items. Even if he could use just about any item he wanted.
