Combat Effectiveness of Artisans

[Ragnarok]

Without doubt one of the most defining features of the 2.0 play test has been the change of prerequisites for rogue or fighter toys to the total build/XP spent on fighter or rogue skills. Oddly enough my first thought didn't go to how this would affect my fighter but how this would affect artisans.

My initial idea along this line is to aquire a heavy crossbow and take the blow for a single Prof or backstab in addition to becoming a master of alchemy and blacksmithing. That would allow for a lot of prerequisites filled for fighter and rogue toys. The idea being you can fill a small pseudo-fighter roll.

The biggest road block to this style is some pretty big costs to toys for artisans which I understand - they're not supposed to be fighters. But even so I feel that the costs are a bit on the high side and I'd love to see the combat viability of artisans improve outside of scrolls and gasses.

Thoughts?

 

[ASFDan]

First thought: Given that, as you noted, Artisans were never designed to be combat-oriented I'd be really hesitant to change any rules to make them more viable in that way; changing up production costs and such seems like a pretty high-risk move balancewise for something that would net a minimal return on player engagement.

That said, I feel like coin costs are the only thing limiting the effectiveness of artisans in combat, so if you're willing to put your money on the line you can get some serious bang for your buck. A fully bankrolled potion/scroll/alchemy artisan is a scary mofo.

EDIT: Just realized you're probably talking about build costs for fighter/rogue skills, not production costs. Sorry about that. I think there are still significant balance concerns; you don't want an artisan to be equal to a minimum prof/stab fighter/rogue, at least not without a heavy investment in crafting skills required to bridge the gap in combat efficiency.

 

[ASFDan]

I'd probably aim for something that would end up looking a bit like this:

Potions 20
Scrolls 20
Alchemy 20

One hand edge
Archery

1-2 Weapon profs

4-3-2-1 Celestial

Fighter/Rogue skills to fit whatever particular role I had in mind to fill.

Play style would be a highly mobile gap filler. Burn scrolls or use archery with coatings for range, potions for emergency healing, fighter/rogue skills and coatings for melee. Globes mostly to deal with my team when the production bill comes in.

 

[Muir]

I always forget that you don't actually need spell slots to make potions or scrolls, just a full book.

That said, you could likely build that character as a MWE and take the 120 build it has in potions and scrolls and put them all in Craftsman for a superior result at the end of the day.

12 gold a day will fund a lot of Alchemy production.

 

[Ragnarok]

My general idea was to focus on blacksmith and alchemy and pick up either a prof or back stab depending on which side I wanted more toys from. What really holds back that pseudo fighter idea at the moment is that artisans pay to most of any class for slays and the only reason I can really guess at for that is to encourage them to buy assassinates which are just better anyway on a heavy crossbow.

Globes mostly to deal with my team when the production bill comes in.

I laughed far too much at this.

 

[ASFDan]

That said, you could likely build that character as a MWE and take the 120 build it has in potions and scrolls and put them all in Craftsman for a superior result at the end of the day.

That might be more efficient, but it wouldn't be an artisan at that point either; it'd likely be either a rogue or scout depending on the skill spread. Not that that wouldn't be a fun build on its own, but for the play style specified I'd probably keep the build as outlined above.

 

[Ragnarok]

I'll be honest I haven't fully run the numbers on it so it might very well.be more build efficient as a scout. I do know that a master alchemist artisan is 40 build is more efficient than a master alchemist scout (60 vs 100) and that might make the difference right there.

 

[ASFDan]

My general idea was to focus on blacksmith and alchemy and pick up either a prof or back stab depending on which side I wanted more toys from. What really holds back that pseudo fighter idea at the moment is that artisans pay to most of any class for slays and the only reason I can really guess at for that is to encourage them to buy assassinates which are just better anyway on a heavy crossbow.

Yeah, I can see that. I honestly think there wasn't a whole lot of effort put into exactly where their price points were for fighting skills since they weren't expected to ever really have them, for the most part.

I think I'd price this kind of build against Scout and see where it came out.

 

[Muir]

It'd be self-sustaining. Playing a coin-fed character can get you some pretty good force multipliers, but generally falls flat over time because all your money goes into feeding production and you end up without resources to craft or bid on magical items that are much greater force multipliers. It might work in a team that's willing to bankroll you, but that's about it.

 

[ASFDan]

It'd be self-sustaining. Playing a coin-fed character can get you some pretty good force multipliers, but generally falls flat over time because all your money goes into feeding production and you end up without resources to craft or bid on magical items that are much greater force multipliers. It might work in a team that's willing to bankroll you, but that's about it.

No argument there at all, but as I said it probably wouldn't be an artisan at that point (not that that's bad either, just trying to keep on topic ).

 

[Avaran]

it probably wouldn't be an artisan at that point

Does that mean that there's no more choice for "fluid classing"? Like, if I am a Fighter and I buy a lot of spells, will the system automatically make me a Templar once I cross that threshold now?

 

[Muir]

Under the new rules, almost nothing -will- be an Artisan unless you make a very exacting effort to counterbalance your crafting skills evenly. With Blacksmith under Fighter, Alchemy under Rogue, and Potionmaking/Scrolling under Scholar, any Artisan that doesn't build out 2:2:1:1 and buy no other classed skills is going to eventually end in one of the other classes if fluid classing is forced.

 

[ASFDan]

Does that mean that there's no more choice for "fluid classing"? Like, if I am a Fighter and I buy a lot of spells, will the system automatically make me a Templar once I cross that threshold now?

That's a pretty big stretch to read into that comment, but for what it's worth I haven't heard any indication of movement away from the current fluid class system.

 

[ASFDan]

Under the new rules, almost nothing -will- be an Artisan unless you make a very exacting effort to counterbalance your crafting skills evenly. With Blacksmith under Fighter, Alchemy under Rogue, and Potionmaking/Scrolling under Scholar, any Artisan that doesn't build out 2:2:1:1 and buy no other classed skills is going to eventually end in one of the other classes if fluid classing is forced.

I think you're confusing skill points with build cost; what makes an artisan isn't changing because the build costs and ratios aren't changing (example: Blacksmith is a Fighter skill now, but it's still 3 build for a fighter and 3 build for an artisan, same as it ever was, and so on). What does change is what arsenal of skills you have available to you as an artisan, since your craft skills in 2.0 count as prerequisites for skills you might not otherwise have access to in the current rules.

 

[Inaryn]

Under the new rules, almost nothing -will- be an Artisan unless you make a very exacting effort to counterbalance your crafting skills evenly. With Blacksmith under Fighter, Alchemy under Rogue, and Potionmaking/Scrolling under Scholar, any Artisan that doesn't build out 2:2:1:1 and buy no other classed skills is going to eventually end in one of the other classes if fluid classing is forced.

Don't forget Trap making... Looking forward to picking that up myself...

 

[Muir]

Don't forget Trap making... Looking forward to picking that up myself...

I try very, very hard to forget trap making. It and legerdemain are the two things on my main's sheet that I most regret ever taking and have gotten the least use out of, to include Merchant and C/O's.

 

[markusdark]

.

 

[Inaryn]

I try very, very hard to forget trap making. It and legerdemain are the two things on my main's sheet that I most regret ever taking and have gotten the least use out of, to include Merchant and C/O's.

Having played with some of the new trap grenades, I can reasonably say you should give the new trap rules a look over...

 

[mikestrauss]

The artisan class literally exists because non-combat players wanted an option that wasn't entirely combat focused. The description of the class even mentions that (or did at some point in the past). The fact that it has any combat effectiveness is more an artifact of the game rules itself than an intentional design decision. I'm not saying that you can't lobby for what you want, but I think everyone should keep the concept of the class in mind when considering changes to it.

-MS

 

[Inaryn]

The artisan class literally exists because non-combat players wanted an option that wasn't entirely combat focused. The description of the class even mentions that (or did at some point in the past). The fact that it has any combat effectiveness is more an artifact of the game rules itself than an intentional design decision. I'm not saying that you can't lobby for what you want, but I think everyone should keep the concept of the class in mind when considering changes to it.

-MS

Couldn't have said that better myself. Any combat stuff I do have on my artisan is all for avoiding more combat.