Artificer is a 2/3 caster. Get shit on, ranger. We got ritual spells and you don’t.

@TenBillionAnts

4 күн бұрын

Still only get 5th level spell slots lmao

@aprinnyonbreak1290

11 сағат бұрын

...is a warlock a 2/3 caster?

Not the go step on a d4 and you look like you hoard uncommon magic items 😭😭😭

@setster007

8 күн бұрын

Seriously, go step on a D4 is EVIL.

I played an artificer in a pirate campaign which had guns in it. The gun I had my character make was a 57mm portable anti tank cannon that could take on ships and airships.

Okey, so apparently an artificer is an IT guy

Ngl the things the other classes proposed were so much better than the actual class.

As a high level Artificer, the answer is yes, we can make those magic items

I badly need this voice acted by gianni mantragano and voice quills

What's that music that plays when the Warlock is saying something warlocky?

Artificer and Warlock could actually be good friends. Both of them are classes that nobody is taking past 4, and many aren't even taking past 1. Unless they're a hireling. Artificer hirelings are busted

@Donjonmastur-jb8ud

9 сағат бұрын

The friendship we can hope to see 🥲

Worth noting that paladins actually have things worse than the ranger. Smiting is supposed to be their big class feature, but since it’s locked to your spell slots, you’re having to make a decision between doing an extra 2d8 by yourself or your party being 5-20% more accurate and resistant on saves from bless. After that, you’re reliant on getting a good use of your channel divinity. Meanwhile rangers already just have better spells as long as you don’t trap yourself into Hunter’s Mark.

@Donjonmastur-jb8ud

6 сағат бұрын

Good points! I guess I was referring more to how people likes Paladin's personality, and don't like Ranger.

@StayinFoxy

5 сағат бұрын

@@Donjonmastur-jb8ud It’s honestly kinda a shame, but I think a lot of the lack of a fun personality has to do with WotC not really having a clear vision for what each class was supposed to be heading into 5e. Because like, sorcerers are supposed to be a metamagic oriented class, but it’s not like they get a personalized suite of spells designed around metamagic, plus as with the paladin’s smites you’ve only got so many sorcery points per day. Same with monks, everything from level 2 onwards eats into your ki, so you get maybe 1-5 rounds per short rest (depending on your level) to feel cool before falling below what every other martial class can do by default. Barbarians too, the class is reliant on rage to so that it can be sustainable in combat, but the pool of rage is way too small for a full adventuring day and if you don’t commit yourself fully to a completely unimaginative and frankly boring combat cycle of using reckless attack until you’re downed, you lose your rage. And fighters were probably done the dirtiest in this respect, they folded the fighter and warlord classes from 4e together and then stripped nearly all the functionality from both so all that’s left is their fighting style, weapon and armor proficiencies, and tacked on versions of basic features every class could access from older editions (namely action surge and second wind from 4e, and extra extra attacks coming from 3e.) Granted, as martial classes go, fighters are technically the strongest, but given how barebones the class is, it’s no wonder that it gets lampooned as “the boring class”. And while realistically, the ranger is one of the most powerful martial-adjacent classes, a lot of that is due to having a discount druid spell list and having good subclasses, so I get how people might not *get* or *like* the ranger.

Where’s sorcerer?

@scorch2155

4 күн бұрын

And barbarian.

@Donjonmastur-jb8ud

4 күн бұрын

@@scorch2155 They're probably still off in the Mother's Day video 😉

@aprinnyonbreak1290

11 сағат бұрын

They're busy trying to bring the Sorcbarian into the world.