Talk:Artificer (Dungeons & Dragons)

Possibly some good sources for Artificer in DDO
I can't check all these right now, but they might have more info to show notability: —Torchiest talkedits 22:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Dungeons & Dragons Online update announced (March 3, 2006)
 * Dungeons & Dragons Online Update 11 Launches with Artificer Class (September 12, 2011)

Lost "Artificer_class_in_RPGs" discussion
Discussion now at Talk:Artificer probably got left behind when a Dab page was created ''' D&D-article material was split off from a Dab page. --Jerzy•t 02:02 '''& 02:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Reviews
Hey BOZ - I'm trying to find reviews of the class from before 5E. There's a review of 2E Player's Option: Spells & Magic in Arcane (Issue 9 - Aug 1996). Any chance you have a copy and can check to see if it mentions the artificer? Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 19:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * As a matter of fact, I actually do for this one. :)  From reading the description of the "class" from that book on this article, it sounds like a pretty minor aspect of the book, so I was not surprised to find that the review did not mention any artificer or any other individual specialist class, only going so far as to say "Specialist classes are next, complete with some new ones to choose from." BOZ (talk) 20:31, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking! I haven't found any reviews of the class specfically for 3.5 or 4E but I'll keep an eye out. Sariel Xilo (talk) 20:37, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile Sariel Xilo, got any more sources for the assassin class? BOZ (talk) 00:49, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I can take a look but I'm a bit busy this week. I'm going to add some stats from 538 on the classes listed in the 5E PHB. Sariel Xilo (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for tackling that as best you can Sariel Xilo - that is just one example of several high-profile targets hit this week. :\ BOZ (talk) 22:37, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Poking around several talks pages, it looks like some users are specfically coordinating to overwhelm because it takes a lot less time to put something up for deletion than to defend (especially on a holiday week). Not sure why there is this trend of targeting fiction right now... but it is a bummer. Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:44, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It's been going on since August, really, coinciding with the return of one of our most infamous exclusionists - while many of the things being deleted/redirected are no big loss, they seem to be targeting almost indiscriminately – I know they know that "sources exist but are not on the article yet" is a reason not to delete, but they assume that not showing sources mean they don't exist, and it is way easier to delete than it is to improve, so they favor that activity. There has been a small army of them with heavy activity on all sorts of fictional element articles for the last few months. If there is a bright side, it is that when/if good sources are located then articles can be restored, but most people would rather work on an existing article than start over from scratch or try to get a deleted article restored, so there you go. :( BOZ (talk) 23:10, 26 November 2019 (UTC)