|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Just what the subject says. Are extracts considered spells? Are alchemists even spellcasters?
I was thinking an alchemist/ eldritch knight would be an interesting monstrosity but it's not entirely clear the alchemist would qualify for a prestige class that requires arcane caster levels or if his extracts are a unique thing which would exclude him from such things.
Unique. They are not casters, and even their special on brew potion is that -- special, it wouldn't be available normally if they didn't have the exception clause built into them.
Can I piggy back on this and ask about Arcane Strike? I have a new campaign starting up, and a player selected this for his Alchemist, but I don't believe it would apply, due to the special nature of the Alchemists "spell casting". Thoughts?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The DM in me that has learned the wise old rule of "Look for ways to say YES to your players, rather than NO" wants to say that Extracts are close enough to spells to work for things like Eldritch Knight and Arcane Strike. The Alchemist does have a caster level, and the extracts have levels that mesh with calculating Arcane Strike results.
The English Degree I worked so hard for, however, rails in the back of my mind, screaming that I must look at the wording. As such, because Eldritch Knight and Arcane Strike both specifically mention "spells" and the Alchemist specifically mentions "Extracts" then my inclination is to be negative.
Then, my massive mental database of all things game related is given the question. To which it replies "Perhaps it is similar to a warlock? Invocations which mimic spells specifically allow it to qualify for classes/feats which require those spells."
But I do not recall seeing such a mention for Alchemist explicitly. Hopefully we can get James or someone to give us an official answer to this, as I think its valid enough to warrant attention.
yeah, it's kinda ambiguous, BUT I am also relying on Extracts being classified as Supernatural, which means they work in Anti-magic fields, and are there fore NOT spells, but I'm open to schooling :)
FWIW: I usually say yes, just trying to pare this one out to prevent future confusion.
Just what the subject says. Are extracts considered spells? Are alchemists even spellcasters?
Nope.
Having said that, I might be willing to let them enter and benefit from a "+1 spellcasting level" prestige class, depending on the class (e.g. Loremaster yes, mystic theurge probably not).
yeah, it's kinda ambiguous, BUT I am also relying on Extracts being classified as Supernatural, which means they work in Anti-magic fields, and are there fore NOT spells, but I'm open to schooling :)
Supernatural abilities don't work in Antimagic Fields.
By saying extracts are not spellcasting you limit the prestige class options and rely solely on the APG to provide for the alchemist. This is poor thinking. Until the APG comes out I say let extracts count as arcane spellcasting until told otherwise.
I am hoping Paizo doesn't shoot themselves in the foot with this one. If extracts don't count as spellcasting it could suck.
I hear people saying that it would be awful if the Alchemist can't take spellcasting prestige classes. I could understand that attitude if this were D&D 3.5, but isn't the Alchemist base class quite workable on its own? Do people really believe the prestige classes are needed to make it viable?
Supernatural abilities don't work in Antimagic Fields.
ha, go me reading the chart wrong :(
re: PrCs- What Prestige classes would fit with Alchemist?
|
I hear people saying that it would be awful if the Alchemist can't take spellcasting prestige classes. I could understand that attitude if this were D&D 3.5, but isn't the Alchemist base class quite workable on its own? Do people really believe the prestige classes are needed to make it viable?
That, and you know, there are plenty of *non*-spellcasting prestige classes out there. The extracts are only part of the alchemist class, I could easily see a mutagen specialist going into a melee themed prestige or something.
This is an excellent topic. Because while the ability is (Su) Supernatural, it is frequently referenced to being spell-like and magical (even being susceptible to Dispel Magic). I would think that this line, "When an alchemist creates an extract or bomb, he infuses the concoction with a tiny fraction of his own magical power" is enough to at least fudge in letting an Alchemist be treated as a Caster, and the fact they can basically scribe formulas from a Wizard's Spell Book lends weight to treating them like an Arcane Caster.
Again excellent topic.
This is an excellent topic. ...
Hey!!! You don't get to read this!!!!
(He's my player :))
I would allow an Alchemist to take prestige classes with a required arcane caster level, and gain extracts per day and known whenever there's a +1 spellcasting feature to the prestige class.
The Alchemist would not gain new discoveries, bomb damage, etc -- only Extracts per day and known.
This is an excellent topic. ...Hey!!! You don't get to read this!!!!
(He's my player :))
:)
I would allow an Alchemist to take prestige classes with a required arcane caster level, and gain extracts per day and known whenever there's a +1 spellcasting feature to the prestige class.
The Alchemist would not gain new discoveries, bomb damage, etc -- only Extracts per day and known.
I could see this, but something jut bugs me about them qualifying as "spell casters".
I would point out from a rule stand point -- no alchemist are not casters, they don't have/need spells, and all their abilities to make potions and use specific magical devices are specific exceptions to the rules instead of part of the rules normally.
That said I imagine that the APG will have a prestige class that can be accessed by the alchemist and I could see an alchemist taking either assassin or shadowdancer for at least a few levels.
Now having stated what RAW is I don't think that allowing alchemist access to the spell casting prestige classes would be overtly broken in and of itself but I wouldn't let the bombs or discoveries continue. Every time you gained a level in the prestige class you would only get new extracts per day, since that is all the prestige classes do for the spell casters. It is plain to see that the alchemist would lose a lot because of that but yeah I feel that's the intent of the rules, and a fair trade for access to something you normally can't have.
I would point out from a rule stand point -- no alchemist are not casters, they don't have/need spells, and all their abilities to make potions and use specific magical devices are specific exceptions to the rules instead of part of the rules normally.
How do they not have/need spells when it says in the description they can gain new formula from a studying a Wizard's Spellbook. They use magic, again explicitly stated in the description. Their extracts are subject to the same vulnerabilities of magic(i.e. can be dispelled). I just don't understand how you can draw such a conclusion. Sure it states their abilities are supernatural, but they are still using magic, just not in the traditional sense. Their abilities are not divorced from the normal rules.
How do they not have/need spells when it says in the description they can gain new formula from a studying a Wizard's Spellbook.
Because formulae aren't spells. If they were, wizards could gain new spells from studying and alchemist's spellbook, and they can't.
And, really, you answered your own question. How do they not have/need spells? Because...Sure it states their abilities are supernatural, but they are still using magic, just not in the traditional sense.
Yep. Using magic, but not casting spells.
Again, I'd let them into the prestige classes, but RAW, what Alchemists know are formulae, not spells.
I would point out from a rule stand point -- no alchemist are not casters, they don't have/need spells, and all their abilities to make potions and use specific magical devices are specific exceptions to the rules instead of part of the rules normally.They use magic, again explicitly stated in the description. Their extracts are subject to the same vulnerabilities of magic(i.e. can be dispelled). I just don't understand how you can draw such a conclusion. Sure it states their abilities are supernatural, but they are still using magic, just not in the traditional sense.
Neither is the Monk's -- they use magic just not in a traditional sense, or the druid's who also use magic but not in the same way -- same for a paladin.
Just because a class uses magic doesn't mean he can meet the requirements of "Must be able to cast a spell of x spell level" or that he is an arcane caster with access to second level spells or what not.
The ability to use magic =/= the ability to cast spells.
By the rules all classes that cast spells specifically state they do so. The classes that are arcane casters specifically state they are. The alchemist does neither of these, and has specific exceptions that give him his stuff. He specifically does not cast spells and therefore is not a spell caster.
I am not arguing definitively one way or the other. I just think there is enough ambiguity that making such a bold statement is overreaching. For example, Alchemist's have Caster Levels. They get the brew potion feat which states "When you create a potion, you set the caster level, which must be sufficient to cast the spell in question and no higher than your own level." which links their abilities to something akin to spell casting.
Ultimately, you can look at new classes two ways: a means to add flavor, or a means to add complexity. If you look at it as a means to add complexity then of course Alchemist's cannot cast spells because "they are NOT spellcasters"(This strictly reduces players choice, and possibly by extension fun ie.e no Arcane Strike, no possibility of Spell focus(bomb) if they really want to up their bomb DC, etc. etc.). If you look at it as a means to add flavor then the Alchemist is a new interpretation of a Transmuter (i.e Wizard), with Alchemicy as a medium, so you permit the Alchemist to use things a normal Wizard might within reason.
Actually they don't have caster levels. They are treated as if having a caster level when using stuff. It's specifically (again) and explicitly (again) different.
Rules quote:
"Extracts are the most varied of the three. In many ways, they behave like spells in potion form, and as such their effects can be dispelled by effects like dispel magic using the alchemist’s level as the caster level. Unlike potions, though, extracts can have powerful effects and duplicate spells that a potion normally could not. "
"Although alchemists don’t actually cast spells, they do have a formulae list that determines what extracts they can create. An alchemist can utilize spelltrigger items if the spell appears on his formulae list, but not spell-completion items (unless he uses Use Magic Device to do so). An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion—the effects of an extract exactly duplicate the spell upon which its formula is based, save that the spell always affects only the drinking alchemist. The alchemist uses his to determine any effect based on caster level."
He specifically does not cast spells. It's stated explicitly right there in the bolded part. He specifically does not have a caster level -- he simply uses his alchemist level as a caster level but only for the purposes of effects based on caster level.
That is not the same as actually having a caster level, and he specifically, explicitly is not a caster.
|
|
yeah, it's kinda ambiguous, BUT I am also relying on Extracts being classified as Supernatural, which means they work in Anti-magic fields, and are there fore NOT spells, but I'm open to schooling :)Supernatural abilities don't work in Antimagic Fields.
So here is the weird thing about bombs. It's an Su but the bombs themselves aren't affected by spell resistance. Obviously you can't use an Su in the Anti Magic Field but it seems like if you lobbed bombs into an Anti Magic Field they work.
So here is the weird thing about bombs. It's an Su but the bombs themselves aren't affected by spell resistance. Obviously you can't use an Su in the Anti Magic Field but it seems like if you lobbed bombs into an Anti Magic Field they work.
Hm? (Su) abilities are never affected by spell resistance, and they never work in an Antimagic Field.* So that's not weird at all.
*For small values of "never".
|
|
I hear people saying that it would be awful if the Alchemist can't take spellcasting prestige classes. I could understand that attitude if this were D&D 3.5, but isn't the Alchemist base class quite workable on its own? Do people really believe the prestige classes are needed to make it viable?That, and you know, there are plenty of *non*-spellcasting prestige classes out there. The extracts are only part of the alchemist class, I could easily see a mutagen specialist going into a melee themed prestige or something.
An Alchemist/ Assassin would be a nice combo I think. I don't think you could use bombs for the death attack but you could certainly use the poisoning abilities.
|
|
So here is the weird thing about bombs. It's an Su but the bombs themselves aren't affected by spell resistance. Obviously you can't use an Su in the Anti Magic Field but it seems like if you lobbed bombs into an Anti Magic Field they work.Hm? (Su) abilities are never affected by spell resistance, and they never work in an Antimagic Field.* So that's not weird at all.
*For small values of "never".
Gah... :(
I can never keep track of that stuff. I guess I don't use AMF enough.
|
|
According to Josh Frost, the answer --at least as far as PFS is concerned-- is "no".
I kind of think PFS is by nature a 'no' first ask questions later sort of atmosphere. He has to be really cautious because if he makes a mistake on something like that it will affect a lot of games.
Edit: Kind of a funny comment after James' post above but still true ;)
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As for alchemists... they use arcane magic, but they don't actually cast spells. They're sort of experimental in that regard, and we're still finessing out what all of that means in the final incarnation of the class... but for now, an alchemist probably shouldn't be able to use things like Arcane Strike or qualify for spellcasting classes. But if I had a player who wanted to take this route, I'd invent alchemist versions of those feats or prestige classes. ESPECIALLY in the case of it being a new class that doesn't have any real support. The APG will have a fair amount of alchemist support in it, and we'll continue supporting ALL of those six new base classes in future products, but they'll never be as well supported as the 11 base classes, really, by simple virtue of the fact that those 11 base classes have just been around longer.
|
Creative Director
|
According to Josh Frost, the answer --at least as far as PFS is concerned-- is "no".I kind of think PFS is by nature a 'no' first ask questions later sort of atmosphere. He has to be really cautious because if he makes a mistake on something like that it will affect a lot of games.
Edit: Kind of a funny comment after James' post above but still true ;)
Yup!
It's worth noting that the requirements and restrictions that exist in an organized play environment are a LOT different than those in home play. In most every case, they're more restrictive. And since I have VERY little experience in org play stuff, and mostly think of things in a more casual, home-play environment, that's just the way I tend to think.
Just a quickie to make sure my point is understood:
No I don't think it would break the game, and if this was in the homebrew section I could be all for it, however the question is one of rules, and is in the rule section. For the sake of clarity and not presenting options that are not built into the rules I point out that this isn't possible with RAW or RAI.
That's because if I stated "oh yeah this is ok by the rules" someone might run to their DM with my false information and try to make him do it because "it's in the rules so and so said so." Granted the DM has the right to still say no, but he shouldn't have to -- I shouldn't have given the player false information.
Now just because RAW states it can't be done doesn't mean the DM can't rule otherwise easily to make the player happy (indeed in most cases at my table I probably would) but that's not RAW and the player shouldn't expect that character to translate over into someone else's game with no problems.
I see the RAW and the rules forum as something like the English language. We all have different dialects but if we dont' do something to preserve the initial point that we all learned from then eventually we end up in an area where the dialects have evolved to the point of not being understandable to each other any more. The purpose (in my mind) of RAW and the rules forum is to help ensure that we are still speaking dialects and not new languages.
|
|
As for alchemists... they use arcane magic, but they don't actually cast spells. They're sort of experimental in that regard, and we're still finessing out what all of that means in the final incarnation of the class... but for now, an alchemist probably shouldn't be able to use things like Arcane Strike or qualify for spellcasting classes. But if I had a player who wanted to take this route, I'd invent alchemist versions of those feats or prestige classes. ESPECIALLY in the case of it being a new class that doesn't have any real support. The APG will have a fair amount of alchemist support in it, and we'll continue supporting ALL of those six new base classes in future products, but they'll never be as well supported as the 11 base classes, really, by simple virtue of the fact that those 11 base classes have just been around longer.
The alchemist is a weird class, lots of fun and it's going to be interesting to see where people take this class. In a way it's sort of a prestige class in itself but it would be fun to see some prestige class options for the class as you level up.
|
The alchemist is a weird class, lots of fun and it's going to be interesting to see where people take this class. In a way it's sort of a prestige class in itself but it would be fun to see some prestige class options for the class as you level up.
There were a lot of interesting Prestige Class concepts in the 3.5 era, but I never played a character to high enough level to qualify for them, or I never had the foresight to aspire (plan/build) toward a particular PRC. I think the Alchemist and the other new APG classes are great examples of expanding PRC concepts to a place within easy reach of all players, not just an elite few.
The APG will have a fair amount of alchemist support in it, and we'll continue supporting ALL of those six new base classes in future products ...
I think this is the right approach. I think the new classes are going to be very succesful, and eventually it might be interesting to see more innovation with new base classes. But it's important to support these new classes into the future, rather than flood the market with new base classes and neglect support. I think in this regard, Paizo are forecasting responsibly.
Well, after our first session last night, when the Alchemit was doing 30-40 DRP after a feral mutagen, I think he's just fine as is :)
(Keeping in mind he is also a Common Giant (Homebrew race based off Arcana Unearthed's Giant race- take 3 racial HD, get large and some other benes), so he's 3HD Giant and Alchemist 3, and all bad ass :)
I have no idea who to deal with this..... Muwhahahahaha
|
|
Well, after our first session last night, when the Alchemit was doing 30-40 DRP after a feral mutagen, I think he's just fine as is :)
(Keeping in mind he is also a Common Giant (Homebrew race based off Arcana Unearthed's Giant race- take 3 racial HD, get large and some other benes), so he's 3HD Giant and Alchemist 3, and all bad ass :)
I have no idea who to deal with this..... Muwhahahahaha
Not much different from a druid who bashed. Throw some natural werewolves at him; DR 10/ silver will make him cry.
Well, after our first session last night, when the Alchemit was doing 30-40 DRP after a feral mutagen, I think he's just fine as is :)
(Keeping in mind he is also a Common Giant (Homebrew race based off Arcana Unearthed's Giant race- take 3 racial HD, get large and some other benes), so he's 3HD Giant and Alchemist 3, and all bad ass :)
I have no idea who to deal with this..... Muwhahahahaha
So basically he's a level 6 character doing 40 DPR? I don't see a problem with that. The fighter in my group does that kind of damage too. And the paladin can easily surpass that against the evil stuff, which, let's face it, is just about all the important stuff you fight in a typical campaign.
I kinda see the alchemist as a Batman-style class, like the rogue. They typically bring skill and utility (belts) to the party rather than pure combat ability. Of course, Batman himself brings utility and combat skills, but PCs have to strive towards something, don't they?
I'd allow the Eldrich Knight though I'd modify the Prestige Class to do so. Not sure what I'd do but I think spell critical would have to changer for sure. That's about the only thing I could see a not working as written.
|
On the argument of using magic, it does specifically say they put some of their magical aura into the extracts and such. Meaning they do have a unique magic ability that they could use. On that, I personally would not tell a player he couldn't take a caster prestige class as long as the alchemist rules were followed within that class.
@ Ogre and DM_Blake- The evil laugh was meant to show that I knew exactly what I am gonna do with him :) Poor lad....
in the description of alchemist he makes the extract than ingests it which gives him the power to cast the spell so he still casts it but only because the extract gives him the ability to its a weird subject
Hey look, a necromancer! Thread was from 2010.
Anyways, yeah its a weird subject. Lots of it is, but it isn't involved. Its unique to itself, but house ruling it is pretty easy. Here's a cool suggestion from the rules forum for example.
Okay, this may be an old thread, but has it ever been decided if the alchemist (and related classes) is a caster?
And does the answer differ depending on the following situations?
Access to caster prestige classes?
Access to crafting feats?
Yes, there is a FAQ on the subject. They are NOT considered to be casters, so can not take crafting feats and the like (outside of craft potions).
EDIT: FAQ Link
|
But can their levels count toward arcane caster levels if they take a level of wizard for the purposes of the improved familiar feat?
Example: a 6th level Alchemist dips into Wizard for their 7th level and takes the Improved Familiar feat. Can they select a Fairy Dragon that requires a 7th level arcane caster by the chart? I could understand for creation feats, as that would infer levels of experience and practice. But for improved familiar, it's more a matter of the potential familiar being drawn to the magical power of the character in question.