Alchemist Class Preview

Monday, April 9, 2018

Just read any messageboards or comment threads, and you'll realize this truth about people: some of them love to throw bombs and blow things up. It's a visceral thrill. Lobbing bombs is dramatic and fun, and every so often all of us love to watch something burn. If you enjoy this activity more than most, do we have a class for you!

So far we've previewed the fighter and the rogue. You might have thought we'd showcase one of the original spellcasting classes next, but that involves talking a bit more about spellcasting, so instead, we decided to unleash the secrets of the alchemist in our newest preview of the Pathfinder Playtest Rulebook.

In the early days of Pathfinder First Edition, the alchemist saw release in the Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player's Guide. Since then, the alchemist has proven to be very popular. Unsurprisingly, when we surveyed the player base about what classes see the most play, the alchemist rose right to the top (along with the oracle, but more on that in a later preview). That alone would have promoted the class into the Pathfinder Playtest Rulebook, but tackling the alchemist early on during the design process was beneficial for another reason: it allowed us to take a hard look at alchemical item design with the alchemist in mind rather than as a later add-on.

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

Alchemist Features

While anyone trained in Crafting can take the Alchemical Crafter skill feat and craft their own alchemical items, the alchemist is much better at this crafting discipline. At 1st level, he gains Alchemical Crafter and a formula book for free, along with four bonus alchemical item formulas (for a total of eight, including the four from Alchemical Crafter). Each time he levels up, he gains two more formulas. This is on top of ones he either discovers or invents. Not only does he gain more access to alchemical tricks, by way of advanced alchemy and the quick alchemy action, but he can also spend resonance to create alchemical objects on the fly, though such hasty concoctions are potent for only a short period.

Crafting is all well and good, but what about bombing potential? The alchemist's bombs are now the basic alchemical items you are familiar with: things like alchemist fire, thunderstones, acid flasks and so on. He crafts these items and lobs them. At 3rd level, he gains the empower bomb feature, which allows him to multiply the damage of the bombs he creates. This multiplier increases with level until it reaches six times the alchemical bomb's base damage at 19th level.

But that's only the start—at 5th level the alchemist learns the secrets of mutagens, and as he progresses his ability to craft alchemical items on the fly becomes both greater and faster.

Alchemist Feats

Tying these features together is the selection of alchemist class feats. As with other class feats, they allow the alchemist to either focus or diversify his features and talents. In the case of the alchemist, class feats come in a few broad categories. If the alchemist wants to make the most of his crafting, he might choose Efficient Alchemy or Enduring Alchemy at 4th level. The former allows him to craft larger batches of alchemical items during downtime, while the latter extends the amount of time he can use alchemical items that he creates with the Quick Alchemy action. When he reaches 6th level, Powerful Alchemy allows him to increase the DCs of his alchemical effects, while the 18th-level Improbable Elixirs feat enables him to craft elixirs with the effects of magical potions.

Making stuff is great, but destruction is much more fun. Most alchemical bombs are splash weapons, which means that when the alchemist hits an enemy, those nearby take a bit of damage. At 4th level, an alchemist with the Calculated Splash feat can deal splash damage equal to his Intelligence modifier instead of the normal 1 splash damage. At 6th level, the alchemist can take the Precise Bomb feat, allowing him to hit everyone but his allies with the splash damage. Taking both feats increases the hurt he puts on enemies while saving his allies the pain. Of course, there are also plenty of feats that affect the primary target of a bomb. Debilitating Bomb at 6th level and its greater counterparts at 10th and 14th levels allow the alchemist to apply different types of conditions to the primary target of his bombs.

After an alchemist gains the mutagen crafting feature, he can take feats that modify how those powerful elixirs interact with his internal chemistry. For instance, the 8th-level Feral Mutagen feat boosts the alchemist's Intimidate checks and morphs his teeth into frightful jaws and his hands into rending claws. Other such modifications are subtler. The 10th-level Stalker Mutagen feat grants the alchemist Stealth as a signature skill and allows him to move up to his Speed when he sneaks. While all mutagens grant some bonuses and drawbacks, the Perfect Mutagen feat at 18th level allows the alchemist to ignore the drawbacks when under the effect of a mutagen he crafted.

All of this is only a small sample of what the class has to offer. The alchemist is also a master of poisons (which he can craft for free each day just like other alchemical items), has easy access to a number of skills, and can act as the party's trap disabler or healer if necessary. The diversity in the class allows you to pick and choose exactly how you want to manifest your particular brand of alchemical discoveries.

Stephen Radney-MacFarland
Senior Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest Wayne Reynolds
451 to 500 of 566 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

But why bother making the oracle an archetype of something else to begin with? I feel like "you were exposed to fundamental esoteric truths, which gave you access to power, but it messed you up since mortals aren't supposed to know these things" is a compelling enough idea that it deserves to be its own class.

{. . .}

Oracle: I'd rather make Cleric an archetype of Oracle: You were exposed to fundamental estoric . . . something, but the patron of that something wants you fully functional, and has conveniently identified themselves to you -- indeed in a lot of cases, they are well known to the general public -- and given you a code to follow, along with a mental library of spells, although you have to go a bit easy on the total number per day. Count me in for wanting Cleric Domains to be like mini-Mysteries.

John Lynch 106 wrote:

Biggest reason I've seen people play an Oracle is it makes war cleric builds better than the cleric and if you don't have to fill the healer role you can spam all those non healing spells to great advantage. Very rarely do I see it chosen for flavour or because prepared casters are too hard.

Make the Oracle better balanced and I think you would see its popularity tank.

Are you kidding? Cleric is powerful enough to stand up to Oracle (unless you need something specific to Oracle), but REALLY BLAND without a good deal of extra effort. Oracle is all about flavor . . . and then has pretty good power too.

* * * * * * * *

Alchemist: To those wondering how an Alchemist dip could be good in Pathfinder 1st Edition: You could get pretty good mileage out of dipping Vivisectionist Alchemist 1 and then taking Accomplished Sneak Attacker and then Wizard 4 to get into Arcane Trickster. Not only does Vivisectionist Alchemist 1 give you half of your Sneak Attack +2d6 requirement, but it also gives you:

  • Alchemy (including 1st level 1st Edition Alchemist Extract preparation) -- the bonus to Craft (Alchemy) will never rise above +1 since you are just dipping, but the Extracts are nice to have, especially if you need to patch yourself up in an emergency.
  • Brew Potion -- having a free Magic Item Creation Feat is not a bad thing.
  • Mutagen -- your Mutagen isn't going to be great, but still it could give you a boost, especially if you make it a Dex Mutagen.
  • Throw Anything (Alchemist version) -- this is better than the normal feat, and synergizes with Alchemical Weapons.
  • Some extra class skills, including Disable Device and Use Magic Device, which you are going to want for Arcane Trickster.
  • The +2 starting bonus for your Fortitude and Reflex Saves -- when you add your 1st Wizard level, you will have all 3 Saves good, although Fortitude and Reflex will gradually fall behind with increasing level.
  • Full Simple Weapon Proficiency -- remember that Pathfinder 1st Edition Wizards only get a small subset of this.
  • Light Armor Proficiency -- although you likely won't use this, the option is there.
So now if Arcane Trickster is still a thing in Pathfinder 2nd Edition (and not just outright made into a base class archetype), and if anything like a Vivisectionist Archetype still exists, I wonder how much of the above you would get from the same kind of build?


I do agree that Cleric makes a better archetype of Oracle than the other way around, but I don't think you could do away with the Cleric, so they should be different classes.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Are you kidding? Cleric is powerful enough to stand up to Oracle (unless you need something specific to Oracle), but REALLY BLAND without a good deal of extra effort. Oracle is all about flavor . . . and then has pretty good power too.

Perhaps I'm just too jaded after seeing Oracle after Oracle after Oracle, all with the same spells that get spammed, all in the same range of flavour (because the number of fun curses are limited). Always dual cursed (to get the reroll mechanic).

I prefer clerics myself (if only because I'm tired of seeing Oracle #2483 come out of the production line with the same tired stuff). But I can understand people feeling not very comfortable with the flavour of clerics (I was that way back in 2008 myself. I got over it). I just haven't seen anyone trot out the flavour argument in quite some time (and the only flavour I ever see attached to Oracles is "I'm a cleric who naturally has their abilities and serves a specific god even though by the flavour of the class no-one actually knows where I get my power from but that's okay because all I wanted was a war cleric that was better than the cleric class" or "I have the abilities I have and I don't bother roleplaying their source in any way shape or form because my class says I don't know where they come from so I'll just get all these cool mechanical abilities with no roleplay relating to them whatsoever").

Yes. I am bitter about oracles. I hope they get fixed in PF2 (or clerics get fixed although personally speaking I have no issue rolling up a CRB cleric).

[EDIT]: I fully acknowledge that the Oracle issue is my personal issue. Just to be clear.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My problem here is that I'm seeing absolutely no mention of the cool grotesquerie discoveries that I attribute to the Alchemist class (and Absolutely Love about it) like Mummification, Parasitic Twin, Bottled Ooze, Rag Doll Mutagen, Tentacles, Tumor Familiar, Alchemical Simulacrum, etc. I want more of These types of Discoveries, they're what made the Alchemist one of my Favorite classes!

I know, I know, I need to have patience, I'm sure they'll be there.... But what if they're Not? I want to have my mad science have permanent lasting effects on my body darn it.

Silver Crusade

Dracala wrote:
My problem here is that I'm seeing absolutely no mention of the cool grotesquerie discoveries that I attribute to the Alchemist class (and Absolutely Love about it) like Mummification, Parasitic Twin, Bottled Ooze, Rag Doll Mutagen, Tentacles, Tumor Familiar, Alchemical Simulacrum, etc. I want more of These types of Discoveries, they're what made the Alchemist one of my Favorite classes!

See this interview summary, which Mark linked upthread, for a few more details, including confirmation of an Alchemical Familiar class feat. But there will be a lot of class feats, I'm sure, so plenty of room for these kinds of gross goodies.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Are you kidding? Cleric is powerful enough to stand up to Oracle (unless you need something specific to Oracle), but REALLY BLAND without a good deal of extra effort. Oracle is all about flavor . . . and then has pretty good power too.

Perhaps I'm just too jaded after seeing Oracle after Oracle after Oracle, all with the same spells that get spammed, all in the same range of flavour (because the number of fun curses are limited). Always dual cursed (to get the reroll mechanic).

I prefer clerics myself (if only because I'm tired of seeing Oracle #2483 come out of the production line with the same tired stuff). {. . .}

In the PbPs I have followed (admittedly shamefully far behind on them now due to life and stuff) on these Messageboards, I have seen a mix of Clerics and Oracles, and some parties with neither one. Maybe somewhat more numerous Oracles than Clerics, but not a huge difference.

You wouldn't happen to be seeing a stream of Oracles coming out of the same production line, would you?

Silver Crusade

doc the grey wrote:

So... What exactly do you get level to level beyond either damage increases or the ability to qualify for more feats? As it stands it sounds more and more like a lot of the options that used to be features of the class you'd take as part of your leveling progression are just becoming feats you take instead when you qualify.

Now, don't get me wrong, it's an.. "interesting"? idea, but it feels like it's falling back into the dead level trap of 3.5, with more levels that are just devoid of anything save BAB & Save increases. Those were crap back then, and I'd hate to have another game where we've got levels where nothing unique is happening at that level.

Also, if a lot of these powers are being moved to feats, what are archetypes going to be modifying?

As in the other thread, I'll refer you to the Leveling Up Blog. No dead levels!


Joe M. wrote:
See this interview summary, which Mark linked Upthread, for a few more details, including confirmation of an Alchemical Familiar class feat. But there will be a lot of class feats, I'm sure, so plenty of room for these kinds of gross goodies.

A Golem is Not a necessarily a Tumor, in fact it feels more like the Homunculus Discovery..... And I read that interview, it didn't dissuade the fear.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dracala wrote:

My problem here is that I'm seeing absolutely no mention of the cool grotesquerie discoveries that I attribute to the Alchemist class (and Absolutely Love about it) like Mummification, Parasitic Twin, Bottled Ooze, Rag Doll Mutagen, Tentacles, Tumor Familiar, Alchemical Simulacrum, etc. I want more of These types of Discoveries, they're what made the Alchemist one of my Favorite classes!

I know, I know, I need to have patience, I'm sure they'll be there.... But what if they're Not? I want to have my mad science have permanent lasting effects on my body darn it.

I had the same concerns as you when I read it, but then I figured, even if the Alchemist gets none of this to start, do I really think it won’t get them soon after? I can see them leaving some of the weird Alchemist stuff out of core, but as soon as we get our first books of options, I’m sure somebody at Paizo will push to get the old weirdness back.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Deadmanwalking wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Bruno Mares wrote:
ryric wrote:

so it's entirely possible that the foe's touch AC is based on metagaming nonsense like its CR rather than the fact that it's a lumbering beast the size of a house.

Please, Paizo, don't do that.

Paizo has to do that, Critical Hits are easier now than they ever were.

Take my Paladin in PFS right now, at level 10 he has (on average) a 23 AC (27 if smiting a target) and, for touch AC that is a 12 Touch AC (something like that) meaning he'd be critted on by anyone and everything with a touch attack just because he uses armor.

This is a major problem in the game atm which is why it is so dex favored.

Based on the Proficiency Blog it seems very likely that all PCs will add their level to their AC. This presumably holds true for CR on enemies as well, and I can't imagine such a bonus not applying to Touch AC. So that should help, though I'd still imagine armor won't apply.

The other option is that they could balance touch attack damage around critting often. I'd prefer that to the scenario where dragons "ninja-flip" out of the way of attacks.


Think I'll take Core Oracle at this rate if they say Paladin is gonna be a prestige or some new global archetype so that we can keep the restrictions on it.

From my experience people pick Oracles to be like a Cleric, except they are very proud of their IRL Atheism and refuse to compromise that for the fantasy world. The class, however, has a mechanical niche and can fill a primary healer role. Always good to have more options for this "dreaded" role.


Like most of the PF1 original classes, the Oracle existed mainly to patch a hole in the rules and will likely be superceded by the new Cleric.

On the other hand, Eric Mona did mention on 'Know Direction' that they probably wouldn't be 'demoting' existing classes to archetypes so I suspect the class either will be retired altogether or will be brought back in a few years once problems with the Cleric have been identified.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ChibiNyan wrote:

Think I'll take Core Oracle at this rate if they say Paladin is gonna be a prestige or some new global archetype so that we can keep the restrictions on it.

From my experience people pick Oracles to be like a Cleric, except they are very proud of their IRL Atheism and refuse to compromise that for the fantasy world. The class, however, has a mechanical niche and can fill a primary healer role. Always good to have more options for this "dreaded" role.

In my experience, players pick oracle because they don't care for prepared casting. Almost every oracle I've seen has been highly religious. The player just wants spontaneous spellcasting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

With all of this talk of Oracles being archetypes, I feel that people aren't too far off the mark, but I'm pretty sure what Paizo is doing is by taking a book out of 3.5: folding the Cleric and Oracle into the same general class concept.

WotC did it with the Wizard and Sorcerer in 3.5, and granted it was easily justifiable to do since neither were particularly complex in regards to class abilities, but I have a strong feeling they will be bringing this back, and folding the Wizard/Sorcerer and Cleric/Oracle into the same general class chassis.

This is just conjecture, but considering the Oracle, which (as far as we know) is non-core, is showing up in talks about the playtest for the core rulebook, leads me to believe that they will be taking this approach to the full casters, as it's the only way it makes sense without Oracles being delegated as an archetype.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
ryric wrote:
ChibiNyan wrote:

Think I'll take Core Oracle at this rate if they say Paladin is gonna be a prestige or some new global archetype so that we can keep the restrictions on it.

From my experience people pick Oracles to be like a Cleric, except they are very proud of their IRL Atheism and refuse to compromise that for the fantasy world. The class, however, has a mechanical niche and can fill a primary healer role. Always good to have more options for this "dreaded" role.

In my experience, players pick oracle because they don't care for prepared casting. Almost every oracle I've seen has been highly religious. The player just wants spontaneous spellcasting.

I can't say that's my experience: Most Oracles I've seen either don't have a deity or it isn't a major part of their character. Before desna came up with a fighting technique, it was pretty close to 0 that had a need for a deity.

Silver Crusade

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild, Tales Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I rather not they fold Oracle and Cleric into the same thing in some fashion, they're too different in how they function.

Cleric has faith in a Deity and gets power in return.

Oracle gets slapped with powers and a curse and they get no say in it.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The posts about the Oracle/Cleric topic are quite interesting but hard to follow mixed as they are with the Alchemist preview thread. I hope someone can put them together in their own thread


Rysky wrote:

I rather not they fold Oracle and Cleric into the same thing in some fashion, they're too different in how they function.

Cleric has faith in a Deity and gets power in return.

Oracle gets slapped with powers and a curse and they get no say in it.

Assuming Paizo did that, I'm sure that they would still maintain their distinct differences, much like how the Wizard and Sorcerer are distinctly different, and that they would also do it with the Wizard and Sorcerer to maintain fidelity - the Cleric and Oracle/Wizard and Sorcerer share spell lists, after all, so if they were to do a split akin to the Wizard/Sorcerer in 3.5 it would probably be like that.

That being said, Paizo has not given a distinct number of the classes that are considered core (as far as I'm aware), just that they're adding Alchemist to the core, so it's also likely they'll just throw the Oracle into the mix as a separate class, as a non-advertised addition. This is, of course, all just conjecture.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Hi tall folks.

I'm here just to say that the class looks pretty cool. Also tall folk Reynolds did a very good job sketching the alchemist as a goblin folk...i mean, nobody better to blow things up, right?

"All of this is only a small sample of what the class has to offer. The alchemist is also a master of poisons (which he can craft for free each day just like other alchemical items), has easy access to a number of skills, and can act as the party's trap disabler or healer if necessary. The diversity in the class allows you to pick and choose exactly how you want to manifest your particular brand of alchemical discoveries."

This part is the best, variety is allways a good thing unless you try to do everything.

Also, talking about healers...¡¡¡¡please tall folks show us some healer powa and feats, us healers are a small group, but we are still here!!!


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Graelsis wrote:
Also tall folk Reynolds did a very good job sketching the alchemist as a goblin folk...i mean, nobody better to blow things up, right?

{Craft (conspiracy) check: (1d20 + 1 ⇒ (15) + 1 = 16 vs DC 17)} Wayne Reynolds is actually a goblin, a gremlin, and a plush owlbear totem-poled on each other in a trench coat.

Dark Archive

I only hope they not going to allow possibility to throw more bomb (actually its to powerfull) and have the same limitation of the spellcaster (Speed not increase number of attack because you still need time to make your bomb preparation, not allowed a third arm, etc..) or only thru a feat with limitation of level like quicken Magic Missile who use a Level 4 Spell Quicken Bomb must have level limitation. They have already benefit from none Spell Resistance on Bomb because is not magic, allow more attack than a single spellcasting is unbalancing the game.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Natasha Salisfer wrote:
I only hope they not going to allow possibility to throw more bomb (actually its to powerfull) and have the same limitation of the spellcaster (Speed not increase number of attack because you still need time to make your bomb preparation, not allowed a third arm, etc..) or only thru a feat with limitation of level like quicken Magic Missile who use a Level 4 Spell Quicken Bomb must have level limitation. They have already benefit from none Spell Resistance on Bomb because is not magic, allow more attack than a single spellcasting is unbalancing the game.

It's important to keep in mind that bombs are no longer a class feature; hypothetically anyone can use them, as the alchemist can now just make alchemical weapons like alchemist fires and (hypothetically) grenades on a regular basis. While ensuring they're balanced when compared to spells is important, they're not hard tied to the alchemist and, realistically, should be balanced to ensure they can keep up with spells when used by anyone.

Grand Lodge

Based on almost no information at all, I'm predicting(hoping) that poisons, at least some, will work like some spells, in that they will have a minor effect, maybe sickened 1, on a save, a more serious effect on a failed save, and a catastrophic effect on a critical failure. That would make them worth using. I have a feeling that that's the direction they're going with them.


I'd also like to see bombs be a 1/round thing. I prefer the idea of one big explosion to a bunch of smaller ones. At least as an option for a stronger bomb thrown less frequently.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So what I gather from the Alchemist so far is:
- Every Alchemist must love bombs, and bombs are a bonus on regular alchemical items (only beginning at 3rd level!) instead of a proper class feature.
- Alchemists need to choose between creating bombs and creating other useful things, since they're all just normal alchemical items.
- The splash damage on bombs is nearly worthless.
- If you like the Mutagen angle and want an Alchemist based more around that from the start, then too bad. Doubly so if you liked the idea of an Alchemist using transformative extracts in PF1.
- Alchemists suck at helping their friends, not only needing to give them the item and have them use the item, but also requiring Resonance expenditure to use the item.

Also, we now know that Craft(Alchemy) requires a feat on top of a skill and it requires a Wizard-like formula for each item.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm finding it fairly refreshing that the power level of classes is being spread out toward later levels. This means that 1 or 2 level dips in classes won't be as beneficial and harder to make broken characters by doing so. Hopefully multiclassing, though, will be made useful for various character concepts without reducing the power of the character overly much.

I know it feels like PF2 is nerfing PF1 at this point, but I like it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paradozen wrote:
I'd also like to see bombs be a 1/round thing. I prefer the idea of one big explosion to a bunch of smaller ones. At least as an option for a stronger bomb thrown less frequently.

I recall someone saying [don't recall which thread] that drawing one is an action and throwing one is an action, so normally it'd be 1/round unless you carry some in hand.

They did say something about a feat to draw 2 in one action so it seems 2/round is going to be possible.

Scarab Sages

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Bloodrealm wrote:

So what I gather from the Alchemist so far is:

- Every Alchemist must love bombs, and bombs are a bonus on regular alchemical items (only beginning at 3rd level!) instead of a proper class feature.
- Alchemists need to choose between creating bombs and creating other useful things, since they're all just normal alchemical items.
- The splash damage on bombs is nearly worthless.
- If you like the Mutagen angle and want an Alchemist based more around that from the start, then too bad. Doubly so if you liked the idea of an Alchemist using transformative extracts in PF1.
- Alchemists suck at helping their friends, not only needing to give them the item and have them use the item, but also requiring Resonance expenditure to use the item.

Also, we now know that Craft(Alchemy) requires a feat on top of a skill and it requires a Wizard-like formula for each item.

I'm not sure I follow. Here is what I gathered:

- The Alchemist has been refocused to an item class and crafting alchemical items is the basis for how it works.
- The power level of the class has been brought back in line with the base classes.
- Elixirs will be transformative from the beginning, the blog and the other online interview explained as much. They just don't have magic anymore.
- I did not get that once an item is made, that resonance would be needed to use it. The Alchemist will only need to use resonance to quickly make alchemical items on the spot. But they get a daily allotment of items they can prepare without using resonance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Aristophanes wrote:
Based on almost no information at all, I'm predicting(hoping) that poisons, at least some, will work like some spells, in that they will have a minor effect, maybe sickened 1, on a save, a more serious effect on a failed save, and a catastrophic effect on a critical failure. That would make them worth using. I have a feeling that that's the direction they're going with them.

I agree. The little we have in the First Look blog

Paizo Blog wrote:
Poisons, curses, and diseases are a far more serious problem to deal with, having varied effects that can cause serious penalties, or even death.

Combined to what we more recently learned about spells and degrees of success goes that way.

It also makes more sense in my opinion. Even if you manage not to die because of those curare-tipped blowgun darts, you're going to feel it.


Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

So with the bombs now being the normal alchemical splash weapons that removes the need for the discoveries that change the type of damage your bomb does. SO I guess that's a plus, but the bombs overall seem to be weakened

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I felt at first that the Alchemist was greatly nerfed, focussing so much on alchemical items. Then I realized that alchemy as a whole had become its own important part of the game, on par with magic and that the Alchemist is the specialist of this new area

I like it very much :-D

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It also lays the groundwork for Gunslinger in a future publication.


Greylurker wrote:
So with the bombs now being the normal alchemical splash weapons that removes the need for the discoveries that change the type of damage your bomb does. SO I guess that's a plus, but the bombs overall seem to be weakened

Yeah, but I believe that you're going to be more effective in melee combat (thus not needing to rely as much on bombs) and will have access to use poisons a lot more (upping your melee potential)


I wonder if one of the things that PF2 is going to do is make characters less broadly competent at fighting right out of the gate in exchange for being more broadly competent at everything else. A whole lot of PF1 characters ended up getting built with nothing in mind except combat for the first few levels, and weren't able to really do much that didn't involve except "make level appropriate skill checks with the skills you have put ranks into."


Alchemy has a prominent role in my setting and I'm excited by the proposed revisions to it and the Alchemist. Having played several Alchemists over the years the preview for the class feels familiar and yet different. Should be fun to try out during the playtest!


Tallow wrote:
- I did not get that once an item is made, that resonance would be needed to use it. The Alchemist will only need to use resonance to quickly make alchemical items on the spot. But they get a daily allotment of items they can prepare without using resonance.

I'm certain we were told elsewhere that characters other than the Alchemist that created it would need to spend Resonance to consume an elixir.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Bloodrealm wrote:
Tallow wrote:
- I did not get that once an item is made, that resonance would be needed to use it. The Alchemist will only need to use resonance to quickly make alchemical items on the spot. But they get a daily allotment of items they can prepare without using resonance.
I'm certain we were told elsewhere that characters other than the Alchemist that created it would need to spend Resonance to consume an elixir.

We really need a blog post on Resonance.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Card Game, Class Deck, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Subscriber
Bloodrealm wrote:
Tallow wrote:
- I did not get that once an item is made, that resonance would be needed to use it. The Alchemist will only need to use resonance to quickly make alchemical items on the spot. But they get a daily allotment of items they can prepare without using resonance.
I'm certain we were told elsewhere that characters other than the Alchemist that created it would need to spend Resonance to consume an elixir.

yeah they have said that


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
The Raven Black wrote:
The posts about the Oracle/Cleric topic are quite interesting but hard to follow mixed as they are with the Alchemist preview thread. I hope someone can put them together in their own thread

I just started such a thread.

I doubt that I will have time to fill it up with the oracle posts from this thread.


The Raven Black wrote:

I felt at first that the Alchemist was greatly nerfed, focussing so much on alchemical items. Then I realized that alchemy as a whole had become its own important part of the game, on par with magic and that the Alchemist is the specialist of this new area

I like it very much :-D

Gregg Reece wrote:
Greylurker wrote:
So with the bombs now being the normal alchemical splash weapons that removes the need for the discoveries that change the type of damage your bomb does. SO I guess that's a plus, but the bombs overall seem to be weakened
Yeah, but I believe that you're going to be more effective in melee combat (thus not needing to rely as much on bombs) and will have access to use poisons a lot more (upping your melee potential)

I feel both of these will have to wait to be proven until we get the numbers for both. And even then they could be still overshadowed due to Magic still being good or just how many things are poison resistant/immune.

Sorry if it sounds I'm raining on peoples parade but maybe some careful levels of hype instead?

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
They did say something about a feat to draw 2 in one action so it seems 2/round is going to be possible.

Not only is this a thing, the 1st level Iconic Alchemist used in the demo games has it, so it's available from 1st level if you want it.

Scarab Sages

The Raven Black wrote:

I felt at first that the Alchemist was greatly nerfed, focussing so much on alchemical items. Then I realized that alchemy as a whole had become its own important part of the game, on par with magic and that the Alchemist is the specialist of this new area

I like it very much :-D

Same


MerlinCross wrote:

I feel both of these will have to wait to be proven until we get the numbers for both. And even then they could be still overshadowed due to Magic still being good or just how many things are poison resistant/immune.

Sorry if it sounds I'm raining on peoples parade but maybe some careful levels of hype instead?

These are valid concerns, but no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater based on previews. I'm optimistic about the system thus far, but I realize nothing is certain until we get to see the playtest. Even then, they may still replace sections before it reaches full publication.

Scarab Sages

Bloodrealm wrote:
Tallow wrote:
- I did not get that once an item is made, that resonance would be needed to use it. The Alchemist will only need to use resonance to quickly make alchemical items on the spot. But they get a daily allotment of items they can prepare without using resonance.
I'm certain we were told elsewhere that characters other than the Alchemist that created it would need to spend Resonance to consume an elixir.

We were told someone would need to spend Resonance to drink a potion. But nothing about an elixir as far as I have seen. Can you cite that source?


Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Tallow wrote:
Bloodrealm wrote:
Tallow wrote:
- I did not get that once an item is made, that resonance would be needed to use it. The Alchemist will only need to use resonance to quickly make alchemical items on the spot. But they get a daily allotment of items they can prepare without using resonance.
I'm certain we were told elsewhere that characters other than the Alchemist that created it would need to spend Resonance to consume an elixir.
We were told someone would need to spend Resonance to drink a potion. But nothing about an elixir as far as I have seen. Can you cite that source?

It was mentioned in the GCP Playtest games, at least. The threads on those should have more precise info.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Joe M. wrote:
Bloodrealm wrote:
Tallow wrote:
- I did not get that once an item is made, that resonance would be needed to use it. The Alchemist will only need to use resonance to quickly make alchemical items on the spot. But they get a daily allotment of items they can prepare without using resonance.
I'm certain we were told elsewhere that characters other than the Alchemist that created it would need to spend Resonance to consume an elixir.
We really need a blog post on Resonance.

Yeah, I called for that a couple pages back. Someone else suggested it be a Monday post because of the huge flamewar that is inevitably going to happen with such a post. I suggested a Wednesday Blog Post instead as that doesn't take the place of a Class Blog but also will have time to be moderated that weekend posts sometimes lack.


QuidEst wrote:
I don't think this is a fair comparison. Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard aren't common dips (taking that as an indication of front-loading), and you're asking why they aren't having what little they get taken away. Paladin, Alchemist, and Sorcerer are a lot more common. Paladin sounds like it is getting smite evil moved from first, and Alchemist is getting mutagen moved. I wouldn't be surprised to see Sorcerer's bloodline arcana either moved or tweaked.

Uh... say what, now?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gregg Reece wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:

I feel both of these will have to wait to be proven until we get the numbers for both. And even then they could be still overshadowed due to Magic still being good or just how many things are poison resistant/immune.

Sorry if it sounds I'm raining on peoples parade but maybe some careful levels of hype instead?

These are valid concerns, but no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater based on previews. I'm optimistic about the system thus far, but I realize nothing is certain until we get to see the playtest. Even then, they may still replace sections before it reaches full publication.

Again, I'm used to being some what pessimistic about 'new release' due to my background(Huh you could make backgrounds that affect personalities now, weird move Paizo) but I'll also be willing to say I was wrong. How'd that chart I saw put it? Smug satisfaction if right, pleasently surprised if wrong?

It's not so much throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but sitting at the window with the bath water that hasn't even gotten warm enough for a bath yet.

Huh this Anologly breaks down a bit.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cognita wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
I don't think this is a fair comparison. Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard aren't common dips (taking that as an indication of front-loading), and you're asking why they aren't having what little they get taken away. Paladin, Alchemist, and Sorcerer are a lot more common. Paladin sounds like it is getting smite evil moved from first, and Alchemist is getting mutagen moved. I wouldn't be surprised to see Sorcerer's bloodline arcana either moved or tweaked.
Uh... say what, now?

They get Lay on Hands at first level now instead, based on the demo games.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

OK. I really, really want to give Paizo the benefit of the doubt here (they've earned it by producing a fantastic quality product)... but this is looking to me more and more like Windows 8: making changes nobody asked for and breaking things that actually worked just fine.

Remember Windows 8? It went something like this:

M$: hey, everyone! We've noticed you're all using smartphones now, so we've taken away the 'start' menu - oh, and we've made your monitors touchscreen. You're welcome!

Entirety of computer-using world: lolwhut

M$: uh... You know what? Our bad.

I think I'm going to stop reading these previews and wait for the playtest. This drip, drip of partial information and half-rumor is only going to annoy me.

451 to 500 of 566 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Playtest / Paizo Blog: Alchemist Class Preview All Messageboards