Alchemist Class Preview

It sounds like there will be more powerful alchemical items so that you can scale up even if you don't take levels in alchemist. The one thing that worries me is that the alchemist is falling into the gunslinger trap:

We get bombs that are a weapon that (in theory) anyone can use. However, the alchemist is the only one who gets the bombs to scale into the late game. So if bombs are balanced for the alchemist, then it is pointless to use them for anyone else.

It also makes bombs a newbie trap in that a new player might make a "bomb using paladin" and then find that all his investment becomes useless by level 9 when the alchemist is doing 4 times his damage.

PF1 has the issue that too many classes got all their core abilities at level 1/2 and then as they leveled they just got bonuses to that. Alchemists were especially that since most discoveries have them bonuses to bombs or mutagens. Spellcasters actually scales as their level did and when they got new spells, which gave them new capabilities. PF2 is seeming to bring the same progression to PF2 for non casters so as they level they get new stuff they can do. So for people accustomed to PF1 it looks a bit painful as lower levels to not have options always on like they were used to.

But I think this can provide much of the variety of play between low and high level play that PF mostly lacks. What’s the real difference between a level 2 and 10 fighter right now? Basically the hit/damage modifiers with one exception, that being the iterative attacks, which vastly changes how classes behave in PF1 in the 6-8 range. And the difference between 10 and 20 is even less. Now everyone gets iterative attacks and everyone doesn’t get so many abilities given out in first couple levels. This will give different feels to the game at different level tiers.

I actually interpreted the 18th level ability to make elixirs/potions as a "The alchemist is totally not magical, but at the height of his abilities he can start to duplicate some of the things the magical types get at 1st level". Not something bad in and of itself, but I'll have to be really impressed by the changes to potions/elixirs to be less than underwhelmed about this - especially as he went from Mutagen+Bombs+6th level "casting" to Bombs+slow mutagen. And with a focusing flask/a bit of time and effort standard mundane characters could get 3-4 times the damage out of alchemists fire... (EDIT: In PF1). Certainly the new alchemist is better at it, but not leaps and bounds better.
I'm also in the camp of mutagen is cool, bombs are meh. Mechanically bombs are awesome, I just don't like them.

I'm not concerned about DPR, I was pointing out that we come from 10x, so you telling me we go to 6x is not in any way a kind of "wow" factor. Especially since it means a slower damage progression, which again hits low levels hard.

Alchemist Fire started off at least 2x as strong as lv 1 bombs.

Alchemical equivalents of healing potions?

TheFinish wrote:

Overall not very happy

This evaluation suffers from the same issue as many others in that it takes the VERY limited peak into the rules and views them through the scope of 1E rules. For example, yes bombs only do x6 base at capstone instead of the x10 they do in 1E, but what's to say that isn't a HUGE amount of damage within the scope of 2E?

The other previews. HP bloat is amplified even over 3e. HP per level is maxed instead of a die (cleric gets 8), and race throws a bonus on top. So lessened damage to more HP. It's the Starfinder flashlight laser problem all over again.

Essentially, I think we should all be cautiously optimistic about 2E. Don't get too excited, nor too discouraged by what you read in these VERY limited previews. It sounds like DPR is a bit more limited than it is in 1E, but there will be a lot more options for players to choose from for their character.

Sadly, though, the 'options' are just basic abilities split off into tiny chunks. This is pretty consistent in every preview. Oh dwarves can buy back resist poison, oh non-fighters can by back attacks of opportunity.

This really looks like a level 5 P2 alchemist is a level 1 alchemist with ~60 odd hit points. And no spells.

I guess full casters have something to look forward to and be optimistic about. They're getting another spell level jammed in.

MerlinCross wrote:

Wild Spirit wrote:

It's nice to see a preview that isn't followed by senseless rage in the comments :)

Yet. Alchemist is my favorite class to mess with and this preview has left me with more concerns than anything else.

Weren't you full of concerns already? Is there any room to spare? :)

I am a Sea of Concerns, doubts, panic, mistrust, and other terms. So I still have room.

Outright dislike or hate however, that'll come when I get the full info/book.

Granted, I come from a video game background and have had to sit through similar instances before of leaked info and possible changes. Some of them are good, others are bad and still others are scams. Now I don't think Paizo will scam their playerbase/customers but that sort of history has made me a more 'glass half empty' until shown or experienced otherwise.

I guess full casters have something to look forward to and be optimistic about. They're getting another spell level jammed in.

Prepare for disappointment when it gets revealed spells are now 1-10 rather than 0-9...

TheFinish wrote:

I'm not concerned about DPR, I was pointing out that we come from 10x, so you telling me we go to 6x is not in any way a kind of "wow" factor. Especially since it means a slower damage progression, which again hits low levels hard.

Alchemist Fire started off at least 2x as strong as lv 1 bombs.

Might get a nice headstart there with lv1 weaponry that actually hurts.

What do you mean by that? In 2E or in 1E?

Because in 1E, Alchemist Fire was 1d6, Splash 1, and then the next round, if the target didn't take a Full Round action and passed Reflex DC 15, an extra 1d6.

Meanwhile, a 1st level bomb from an Int 18 Alchemist was 1d6+4, Splash 5, no reflex.

So Alchemist Fire was maybe an average of 7 damage over two rounds while a bomb was average 7 in one.

If you mean 2E I got no idea.

EDIT: Not to mention alchemist bombs have double the range increment.

Have you seen how many things are resistant or immune to poison? That and Fort seems to be a high save for most creatures anyway.

It's really hard to play a poison build.

I know I haven't seen how many, since the Playtest book hasn't came out yet. It all depends on how much the game mechanics of the new system change.

Ranged Poison>?<Melee Poison

Voss wrote:

I guess full casters have something to look forward to and be optimistic about. They're getting another spell level jammed in.

Prepare for disappointment when it gets revealed spells are now 1-10 rather than 0-9...

Isn't that basically confirmed already - something about there are still cantrips & there are no level 0 spells ?

ChibiNyan wrote:

TheFinish wrote:

I'm not concerned about DPR, I was pointing out that we come from 10x, so you telling me we go to 6x is not in any way a kind of "wow" factor. Especially since it means a slower damage progression, which again hits low levels hard.

Alchemist Fire started off at least 2x as strong as lv 1 bombs.

Might get a nice headstart there with lv1 weaponry that actually hurts.

What do you mean by that? In 2E or in 1E?

Because in 1E, Alchemist Fire was 1d6, Splash 1, and then the next round, if the target didn't take a Full Round action and passed Reflex DC 15, an extra 1d6.

Meanwhile, a 1st level bomb from an Int 18 Alchemist was 1d6+4, Splash 5, no reflex.

So Alchemist Fire was maybe an average of 7 damage over two rounds while a bomb was average 7 in one.

If you mean 2E I got no idea.

EDIT: Not to mention alchemist bombs have double the range increment.

Oh crap, I thought Alchemist fire dealt 2d6 AND burn. I stand corrected. Wow, it's pretty weak <.<

It sounds like there will be more powerful alchemical items so that you can scale up even if you don't take levels in alchemist. The one thing that worries me is that the alchemist is falling into the gunslinger trap:

We get bombs that are a weapon that (in theory) anyone can use. However, the alchemist is the only one who gets the bombs to scale into the late game. So if bombs are balanced for the alchemist, then it is pointless to use them for anyone else.

It also makes bombs a newbie trap in that a new player might make a "bomb using paladin" and then find that all his investment becomes useless by level 9 when the alchemist is doing 4 times his damage.

Well said, items should not be gated behind classes, being bombs or powder guns.

MerlinCross wrote:

Have you seen how many things are resistant or immune to poison? That and Fort seems to be a high save for most creatures anyway.

It's really hard to play a poison build.

I know I haven't seen how many, since the Playtest book hasn't came out yet. It all depends on how much the game mechanics of the new system change.

I believe it's been said that poison will be very different in PF2 compared to the previous edition. It's definitely to early to tell how viable poison builds are going to be.

If Alchemical Crafter, as a feat, gives non-Alchemists four alchemical item formulas, does that mean that anyone can effectively pick up formulas? Are formulas still pseudo-spells?

If I had to guess I'd say it probably works in a similar manner to the Spheres of Might's Alchemy sphere Formulae. Basically, alchemical items with powerful effects that scale based on your skill ranks (ie Proficiency). Naturally, Alchemists would have easier access to the higher-tier proficiencies than other classes.

MerlinCross wrote:

Have you seen how many things are resistant or immune to poison? That and Fort seems to be a high save for most creatures anyway.

It's really hard to play a poison build.

I know I haven't seen how many, since the Playtest book hasn't came out yet. It all depends on how much the game mechanics of the new system change.

And until info comes out, all we can do is make guesses based off the system we already have and other systems.

Poisons tend to be something commonly hard to use against the game and more a drain on player Resources. So Paizo is going to have to really change things around. And even then depending on the AP and setting I can see some issues shutting down the use of poison.

I mean, you can probably come up with an explanation for it but pretty sure Undead are still going to be immune to it so an Undead heavy campaign will shut down Poison builds.

Tarik Blackhands wrote:

Voss wrote:

I guess full casters have something to look forward to and be optimistic about. They're getting another spell level jammed in.

Prepare for disappointment when it gets revealed spells are now 1-10 rather than 0-9...

Isn't that basically confirmed already - something about there are still cantrips & there are no level 0 spells ?

Pretty sure it's to do with 10 into 20 as part of the tidying up of the arithmatic in the system.

I honestly don't know. If it was mentioned anywhere it would have been in those podcasts that I never bothered to watch. I was mostly speaking in terms to not hold high hopes about the mythic extra spell level amounting to a whole lot. Considering the other class previews, it's probably just a lot of old stuff divided up and shuffled around.

Awkward question: If Bombs are now Alchemist's Fire, Thunderstones, Acid Flasks etc... Shouldn't the artwork NOT show "Grenades"?

TheFinish wrote:

ChibiNyan wrote:

TheFinish wrote:

I'm not concerned about DPR, I was pointing out that we come from 10x, so you telling me we go to 6x is not in any way a kind of "wow" factor. Especially since it means a slower damage progression, which again hits low levels hard.

Alchemist Fire started off at least 2x as strong as lv 1 bombs.

Might get a nice headstart there with lv1 weaponry that actually hurts.

What do you mean by that? In 2E or in 1E?

Because in 1E, Alchemist Fire was 1d6, Splash 1, and then the next round, if the target didn't take a Full Round action and passed Reflex DC 15, an extra 1d6.

Meanwhile, a 1st level bomb from an Int 18 Alchemist was 1d6+4, Splash 5, no reflex.

So Alchemist Fire was maybe an average of 7 damage over two rounds while a bomb was average 7 in one.

If you mean 2E I got no idea.

EDIT: Not to mention alchemist bombs have double the range increment.

Oh crap, I thought Alchemist fire dealt 2d6 AND burn. I stand corrected. Wow, it's pretty weak <.<

Yep, especially since that DC doesn't scale.

Still pretty useful at low levels to deal with swarms that are Fine or smaller.

Awkward question: If Bombs are now Alchemist's Fire, Thunderstones, Acid Flasks etc... Shouldn't the artwork NOT show "Grenades"?

Well, in PF1, grenades where themselves alchemical weapons, separate from an Alchemist's bombs.

Perchance, they are back, so you can have bombs, that are grenades!

The madness!

I think just the fact that it lets Paizo re-evaluate and rebuild alchemical items right from the start in the CRB equipment tables is a good justification for Alchemist being promoted to Core. I agree with this. :)

My main concern is the money issue. There was no mention in the description of bombs, mutagens, alchemical items, etc being free. Is the alchemist going to be a class that never has money for anything because they have to spend it all to do anything? If the only way they get anything for free is to spend Resonance, which they need to wear magic items, that is going to REALLY suck.

Splash damage: come /on/, don't make it just 1 point to adjacent squares again. What the heck. It should be half damage to adjacent squares, not ONE damage. Then the Int feat (which should maybe just be a class feature instead of a feat tax) would add to the base damage rolled.

Otherwise, I like what I see. I hope there is a huge and powerful variety of alchemical items!

Awkward question: If Bombs are now Alchemist's Fire, Thunderstones, Acid Flasks etc... Shouldn't the artwork NOT show "Grenades"?

I was asking myself the same question. The answer that I came up with is ???.

TheFinish wrote:

ChibiNyan wrote:

TheFinish wrote:

I'm not concerned about DPR, I was pointing out that we come from 10x, so you telling me we go to 6x is not in any way a kind of "wow" factor. Especially since it means a slower damage progression, which again hits low levels hard.

Alchemist Fire started off at least 2x as strong as lv 1 bombs.

Might get a nice headstart there with lv1 weaponry that actually hurts.

What do you mean by that? In 2E or in 1E?

Because in 1E, Alchemist Fire was 1d6, Splash 1, and then the next round, if the target didn't take a Full Round action and passed Reflex DC 15, an extra 1d6.

Meanwhile, a 1st level bomb from an Int 18 Alchemist was 1d6+4, Splash 5, no reflex.

So Alchemist Fire was maybe an average of 7 damage over two rounds while a bomb was average 7 in one.

If you mean 2E I got no idea.

EDIT: Not to mention alchemist bombs have double the range increment.

Oh crap, I thought Alchemist fire dealt 2d6 AND burn. I stand corrected. Wow, it's pretty weak <.<

YEAH that's why you don't see anyone use it much past level 3 or if Swarms are expected. You can extend the life a bit with Hybridazation Funnel but the Alchemical weapons tend to hit a brick wall real fast.

So I'm interested in seeing what they do but the changes to bombs seem kinda.... eh?

I think just the fact that it lets Paizo re-evaluate and rebuild alchemical items right from the start in the CRB equipment tables is a good justification for Alchemist being promoted to Core. I agree with this. :)

My main concern is the money issue. There was no mention in the description of bombs, mutagens, alchemical items, etc being free. Is the alchemist going to be a class that never has money for anything because they have to spend it all to do anything? If the only way they get anything for free is to spend Resonance, which they need to wear magic items, that is going to REALLY suck.

Splash damage: come /on/, don't make it just 1 point to adjacent squares again. What the heck. It should be half damage to adjacent squares, not ONE damage. Then the Int feat (which should maybe just be a class feature instead of a feat tax) would add to the base damage rolled.

Otherwise, I like what I see. I hope there is a huge and powerful variety of alchemical items!

I'd imagine they get X ammount free each day, and you can't sell them because of "reasons". Because yeah, if you have to pay to make them, it's going to be horrible.

I get enough of that in the Iron Kingdoms RPG, I don't need it in Pathfinder too!

I really hope they aren't folding the Oracle into the Cleric.

I really hope they are folding the Oracle into the Cleric! :)

(Less glibly, I hope they adopt a spellcasting system that allows every class to be either spontaneous or prepared. Or, alternatively, adopt a spellcasting system which collapses the distinction.)

I really hope they aren't folding the Oracle into the Cleric.

Really hope they ARE folding the oracle into the Cleric. I always felt their concept was somewhat muddy - their mysteries list gods, so they might worship them, or might not - but oh, so could the PHB Cleric! The Oracle was mechanically different (and by that I mean way, way more interesting) but I always saw it being used as a Cleric 2.0 - the worshipper of a god with divine powers.

So they got rid of all the Alchemist's Caster niftiness, made bombs just normal alchemical items (and weaker), made the PF1E normal features (Bombs gets Int mod to damage) into a Feat, moved precise bombs to 6th level (not that it matters much, if Splash is now a measly 1 damage) and mutagen is no longer level 1.

Oh, but you can make stuff that works like potions....at 18th level. And spend Resonance to get Alchemical Items on the fly.

Yay?

Also the original alchemist's bombs scaled so that a 19th level alchemist had bombs ten times as powerful as a 1st level alchemist, so I don't really see how six times is an improvement there.

Overall not very happy.

It sounds like you are no longer limit to the number of bombs you can use in a day, if you are willing to burn some money. If the alchemical items are still cheap like they were in PF1, you can bring a lot of fire power to a fight. So a lower power level is needed per a bomb if you can bring a lot more bombs to a fight.

It sounds like there will be more powerful alchemical items so that you can scale up even if you don't take levels in alchemist. The one thing that worries me is that the alchemist is falling into the gunslinger trap:

We get bombs that are a weapon that (in theory) anyone can use. However, the alchemist is the only one who gets the bombs to scale into the late game. So if bombs are balanced for the alchemist, then it is pointless to use them for anyone else.

It also makes bombs a newbie trap in that a new player might make a "bomb using paladin" and then find that all his investment becomes useless by level 9 when the alchemist is doing 4 times his damage.

You have just described 1e's alchemical items.

I like the "can act as the party's trap disabler or healer if necessary" part, but other parts sure look worrying.

1) No bombs per day, just increases in the potency of alchemist's fire and acid? :(
2) No mutagens until level 5?
3) No magic potions until level 18?
4) No int bonus on bombs until level 4 and no precise bombs until 6?

Kind of looks like they don't get their core class features until mid game. Imagine if fighters only got light weapon proficiencies at level one, single handed at level 3, and two handed at level 6. I love PF1 alchemists, but this looks kind of lackluster.

Fuzzypaws wrote:

I think just the fact that it lets Paizo re-evaluate and rebuild alchemical items right from the start in the CRB equipment tables is a good justification for Alchemist being promoted to Core. I agree with this. :)

My main concern is the money issue. There was no mention in the description of bombs, mutagens, alchemical items, etc being free. Is the alchemist going to be a class that never has money for anything because they have to spend it all to do anything? If the only way they get anything for free is to spend Resonance, which they need to wear magic items, that is going to REALLY suck.

Splash damage: come /on/, don't make it just 1 point to adjacent squares again. What the heck. It should be half damage to adjacent squares, not ONE damage. Then the Int feat (which should maybe just be a class feature instead of a feat tax) would add to the base damage rolled.

Otherwise, I like what I see. I hope there is a huge and powerful variety of alchemical items!

I'd imagine they get X ammount free each day, and you can't sell them because of "reasons". Because yeah, if you have to pay to make them, it's going to be horrible.

I get enough of that in the Iron Kingdoms RPG, I don't need it in Pathfinder too!

Lore reasons was either the Bomb was charged with an Alchemists own magical essence(Strong enough to set off the reaction but not to say cast spells) and/or the chemical reactions within the bomb broke down extremely fast to the point you had to toss them after mixing to get any use out of them.

Well, it's interesting but doesn't really do much for me either way. Just another bit of information to add to the rest of the pile. I give it a 5 on the excitement scale.

TheFinish wrote:

Fuzzypaws wrote:

I think just the fact that it lets Paizo re-evaluate and rebuild alchemical items right from the start in the CRB equipment tables is a good justification for Alchemist being promoted to Core. I agree with this. :)

My main concern is the money issue. There was no mention in the description of bombs, mutagens, alchemical items, etc being free. Is the alchemist going to be a class that never has money for anything because they have to spend it all to do anything? If the only way they get anything for free is to spend Resonance, which they need to wear magic items, that is going to REALLY suck.

Splash damage: come /on/, don't make it just 1 point to adjacent squares again. What the heck. It should be half damage to adjacent squares, not ONE damage. Then the Int feat (which should maybe just be a class feature instead of a feat tax) would add to the base damage rolled.

Otherwise, I like what I see. I hope there is a huge and powerful variety of alchemical items!

I'd imagine they get X ammount free each day, and you can't sell them because of "reasons". Because yeah, if you have to pay to make them, it's going to be horrible.

I get enough of that in the Iron Kingdoms RPG, I don't need it in Pathfinder too!

Lore reasons was either the Bomb was charged with an Alchemists own magical essence(Strong enough to set off the reaction but not to say cast spells) and/or the chemical reactions within the bomb broke down extremely fast to the point you had to toss them after mixing to get any use out of them.

Oh, I am well aware how it used to work, I just put reasons in quotes because they could use whatever ones you like. Thing is though, it now has to apply to all alchemical items the Alchemist makes, not just bombs (since the Formula book is for all Alchemical stuff).

Just strange they didn't say how it works in the preview, but oh well.

Paladinosaur wrote:

I really hope they aren't folding the Oracle into the Cleric.

Really hope they ARE folding the oracle into the Cleric.

Or Sorcerer because of spontaneous casting.

I'm willing to bet we'll see scaling levels of alchemical weapons, ala grenades in Starfinder.

Your base-level achemist's fire may do 1d6, and only require Trained proficient in Craft to make it.

Later, once you hit Master proficiency in Craft, you might get access to "alchemists inferno" which does 3d6 fire damage and maybe has a cool rider effect or a wider splash radius.

My main concern is the money issue. There was no mention in the description of bombs, mutagens, alchemical items, etc being free. Is the alchemist going to be a class that never has money for anything because they have to spend it all to do anything? If the only way they get anything for free is to spend Resonance, which they need to wear magic items, that is going to REALLY suck.

The blog implies that they can craft a number of free alchemical items each day.

The alchemist is also a master of poisons (which he can craft for free each day just like other alchemical items)

The blog implies that they can craft a number of free alchemical items each day.

Hey! No actually reading the Blog allowed!

Sounds good thus far.

Revised action economy will require DPA be reduced, and increasing the damage dice of different Alchemical items does away with the need to have umpteen different types of Discoveries to use different damage types.

It would have been nice to see more about non-combat items so we could see how loss of infusions affects the class, but I guess that can wait...

Sounds good thus far.

Revised action economy will require DPA be reduced, and increasing the damage dice of different Alchemical items does away with the need to have umpteen different types of Discoveries to use different damage types.

It would have been nice to see more about non-combat items so we could see how loss of infusions affects the class, but I guess that can wait...

To be fair, the Discoveries also gave effects on top of those different damage types. Frost Bombs get picked up a lot not just for the Cold damage but for the Staggered effect.

Given the new action system, will we still have those bonus effects? To early to say

Ehh, there nothing I really, really hate here. Or love. Alchemy seems like it's going to be pretty tightly regulated. Are you going to need a not-spell book to craft the items? Is a times six multiplier on a single class a kind of soft cap on what kind of damage those items can do?

I'm guessing Mutagen is going to get thrown around a lot by archetypes, and potions better be pretty damn good if the option of making magic drinks is only available to the people that mix freaky substances in magic land near the end of a campaign. And resonance...

Reliance on gold and downtime was something I was a bit worried about, but whatever. If the other DMs at my table keep skimping on them, and if we actually switch over to PF2, they'll just have to suck it up, because It's Sister Jenny's Turn to Throw the Bomb!

having seen a playtest and played several starfinder sessions, i think i can answer the question regarding six multiplier. weapons in sf grow in power and cost by increasing the number of dice. a staff does 1d6 at 1st level, but by the highest levels you can get one that does 5d6. in sf, it's a little gamey, but in a fantasy setting, it will just be a +5 staff that does 6d6 damage. the six multiplier is a way for alchemists to keep pace with magic weapons others will use.

As someone who has come to the like the alchemist, I do hope they keep some of 1e's versatility.

The art puts me in mind of this: https://goo.gl/images/KPcgeD
:D

Crayon wrote:

Sounds good thus far.

Revised action economy will require DPA be reduced, and increasing the damage dice of different Alchemical items does away with the need to have umpteen different types of Discoveries to use different damage types.

It would have been nice to see more about non-combat items so we could see how loss of infusions affects the class, but I guess that can wait...

To be fair, the Discoveries also gave effects on top of those different damage types. Frost Bombs get picked up a lot not just for the Cold damage but for the Staggered effect.

Given the new action system, will we still have those bonus effects? To early to say

Well, since the items themselves will already dictate the damage time, I'm assuming that those bonus effects are all the feat will grant. For example, instead of taking one Discovery that lets you make frost bombs that cause staggered, you'd take this feat and it makes your alchemist's frost cause staggered, your alchemist's fire catch the target on fire, your thunderstones cause knockback, and so on. Basically, instead of one discovery that unlocks an element and an effect, it'd be one feat that unlocks an effect for each element.

Curious. So, this makes it sound like Alchemists are losing spellcasting altogether to instead get stuff that's more akin to souped-up alchemical items? It's certainly an interesting angle, though it's kind of odd that it locks the ability for the class to become either a melee or casting focus behind 5 levels. Also, I have to hope that alchemicals in 2e are better than the ones we have now, where 90% of them are too weak or situational to use past level 3.

Curious. So, this makes it sound like Alchemists are losing spellcasting altogether to instead get stuff that's more akin to souped-up alchemical items? It's certainly an interesting angle, though it's kind of odd that it locks the ability for the class to become either a melee or casting focus behind 5 levels. Also, I have to hope that alchemicals in 2e are better than the ones we have now, where 90% of them are too weak or situational to use past level 3.

Well, the blog states the damage will scale as an Alchemist advances (beginning at 3rd level), so in that regard they'll be fine.

As for save DCs, the blog mentions a 6th level Feat that upgrades them, though I'm not sure how much. Hopefully it scales with Alchemist level.

Splash damage: come /on/, don't make it just 1 point to adjacent squares again. What the heck. It should be half damage to adjacent squares, not ONE damage. Then the Int feat (which should maybe just be a class feature instead of a feat tax) would add to the base damage rolled.

I have to agree here, splash damage should be half the original damage. The Int to damage feat I imagine is a Class feat so in that case it is class feature

Not sure how I like 2e's seeming habit of taking 1e classes and turning their abilities into feats. A big complaint I always had about 1e was the plethora of feat taxes. Sure, you do get twice as many feats, but I really think it hurts verisimilitude to have to "spec into" every little thing. To be absurd: I predict that Pathfinder 3e won't have skills, it will have skill feats. You'll still have to roll skill checks, but--shock horror--you can't roll on that skill without the feat. Good luck avoiding that trap!

Not sure how I like 2e's seeming habit of taking 1e classes and turning their abilities into feats. A big complaint I always had about 1e was the plethora of feat taxes. Sure, you do get twice as many feats, but I really think it hurts verisimilitude to have to "spec into" every little thing. To be absurd: I predict that Pathfinder 3e won't have skills, it will have skill feats. You'll still have to roll skill checks, but--shock horror--you can't roll on that skill without the feat. Good luck avoiding that trap!

Good Sir, it may be you're new to the playtest, but Skill Feats are already here. As far as we know they don't prevent rolling the skill unless you possess them (that falls to Proficiency), but they do let you do special things.

I really like this change to how alchemists work with alchemical items, it's very interesting.

That said, I'm starting to get concerned about how far back abilities are being pushed. Three classes in and it's starting to feel like abilities are coming online well later than we'd expect. This is a gripe I've always had with some classes/archetypes/builds in 3.5/PF1e, that it takes so much time and effort to get to the mechanics to fit concepts that aren't really that out there.

I'm reaaaaally hoping that abilities aren't being spread around to the point were it takes until mid-levels to feel like the adventurer concept you had at 1st level.

But like I've said before, we won't know until the playtest releases, so I'm not going to go all doom and gloom.

But an Alchemist can brew these things up quicker, and for FREE with Resonance.

i don't think that is quite right. an alchemist can brew items for free in the morning and burn resonance to mix reagents on the fly.

MerlinCross wrote:

Crayon wrote:

Sounds good thus far.

Revised action economy will require DPA be reduced, and increasing the damage dice of different Alchemical items does away with the need to have umpteen different types of Discoveries to use different damage types.

It would have been nice to see more about non-combat items so we could see how loss of infusions affects the class, but I guess that can wait...

To be fair, the Discoveries also gave effects on top of those different damage types. Frost Bombs get picked up a lot not just for the Cold damage but for the Staggered effect.

Given the new action system, will we still have those bonus effects? To early to say

Well, since the items themselves will already dictate the damage time, I'm assuming that those bonus effects are all the feat will grant. For example, instead of taking one Discovery that lets you make frost bombs that cause staggered, you'd take this feat and it makes your alchemist's frost cause staggered, your alchemist's fire catch the target on fire, your thunderstones cause knockback, and so on. Basically, instead of one discovery that unlocks an element and an effect, it'd be one feat that unlocks an effect for each element.

That seems to make sense but that's a lot of power into 1 feat quite possibly.

I don't see required specialization Paths as being necessarily "hard" specialization... Seems pretty reasonable an option to allow picking from other Path(s) at Level-5 or something would be pretty obvious. (there could be distinction of Pre-Req: Alchemist and Pre-Req: Alchemist 1 with latter being more restrictive until Level 6, for example, allowing anybody to get most basic abilities from any Path from low level if they choose, but also enforcing distinction of Path focus) And some options could exist to become equally proficient in all sides, if not as good in one as a specialist.