Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Alchemist: Potion Brewing your way to spontaneous casting?


Rules Questions

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Let me see if this is legal or not. It seems like a loophole but, even so its hardly going to make the alchemist broken.

1) As I understand the item creation rules, for anything but wands (spell trigger) and scrolls (spell completion) items, you don't actually need to cast the spell to be able to make the item. You can just have the DC increased by 5. (which is a snap for alchemists making potions). This means an alchemist can make a potion of ANY potion legal spell, not just the ones on their list.

2) Alchemists have a second level spell that lets them drink a potion without consuming it.

Is there anything that would prevent an alchemist from making 1 of every potion (or at least a lot of potions), and using this spell to essentially have every potion legal spell on hand to cast?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:


Let me see if this is legal or not. It seems like a loophole but, even so its hardly going to make the alchemist broken.

1) As I understand the item creation rules, for anything but wands (spell trigger) and scrolls (spell completion) items, you don't actually need to cast the spell to be able to make the item. You can just have the DC increased by 5. (which is a snap for alchemists making potions). This means an alchemist can make a potion of ANY potion legal spell, not just the ones on their list.

2) Alchemists have a second level spell that lets them drink a potion without consuming it.

Is there anything that would prevent an alchemist from making 1 of every potion (or at least a lot of potions), and using this spell to essentially have every potion legal spell on hand to cast?

It's legal, and I plan to do it for my Alchemist. Remember it takes two rounds to do it though.

Shadow Lodge

Eeeexcelent...

I gave my elven Alchemist glass blowing. I'll have him keep the potions in hookah bottles that he smokes.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Eeeexcelent...

I gave my elven Alchemist glass blowing. I'll have him keep the potions in hookah bottles that he smokes.

I would like to know what makes both of you think that an alchemist can create any potion (up to 3rd level) without knowing the spell.

In Brew potion feat it says clearly that :

Brew Potion (Item Creation)
You can create magic potions.
Prerequisite: Caster level 3rd.
Benefit: You can create a potion of any 3rd-level or lower
spell that you know and that targets one or more creatures.
Brewing a potion takes 2 hours if its base price is 250 gp
or less, otherwise brewing a potion takes 1 day for each
1,000 gp in its base price. 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. To
brew a potion, you must use up raw materials costing one
half this base price. See the magic item creation rules in
Chapter 15 for more information.
When you create a potion, you make any choices that
you would normally make when casting the spell. Whoever
drinks the potion is the target of the spell.

You must know the spell in order to create a potion of that spell.


I think this part from the officail rules:

Quote:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.


We all know the rule you described. Actually BigNorseWolf also said it in the beginning of his post. I will say 2 things in order to explain why I said what I said in my post.

1) I believe that a potion is a spell trigger item. Why? Because a spell is already cast in a potion and the only thing you are doing while drinking it, is choosing its target. Remember that there is no clear definition anywhere in the book of which items are considered spell-trigger and which are not. In that way why a wand is clearly a spell-trigger item and a potion is not.

2) Even if you debate of whether it is a spell-trigger item or not keep in mind these:
a) All the crafting feats (ring, staff, weapon, ...) do not state anything about knowing the spell you use on the item. They just say that you must meet the prerequisites.

b) On the other hand the feat description of the brew potion and craft wand follow the same format. They both begin saying that you need to know the spells. To know the spell it is not just a prerequisite, instead it is clearly stated in the description of the feat. Even if there was no talk at all in the book about the terms of spell-trigger and spell-completion the fact that these two feats clearly state that they required to know the spell would surpass all the more general rules.


A potion is neither spell-trigger nor spell-completion but use-activated, so I'd say it's possible.


Aris Kosmopoulos wrote:
They both begin saying that you need to know the spells.

Ninja'd by Aris...

Specific rule beats general rule. The only problem here is, what is what? Is a feat description more specific than the item creation description?


Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
Specific rule beats general rule. The only problem here is, what is what? Is a feat description more specific than the item creation description?

I think that the rules considering brew potions are clearly more specific than the rules considering crafting.


Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
A potion is neither spell-trigger nor spell-completion but use-activated, so I'd say it's possible.

Yes you are right here, I found it in the book thanks for the point.


Ah yes, I hadn't read the OP carefully enough--you don't make them yourself for the non-Alchy potions, you buy those. End effect, still the same. I recommend a level 20 Greater Magic Fang potion if you have a Druid or Summoner or something in the group.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Aris Kosmopoulos wrote:
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
Specific rule beats general rule. The only problem here is, what is what? Is a feat description more specific than the item creation description?
I think that the rules considering brew potions are clearly more specific than the rules considering crafting.

I think that the brew potion feat is just a hold over from 3.5. Its a direct copy of the srd. That feat was written before paizo updated the magic item creation rules, so I'm inclined to allow the crafting without the spell.

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:


Let me see if this is legal or not. It seems like a loophole but, even so its hardly going to make the alchemist broken.

1) As I understand the item creation rules, for anything but wands (spell trigger) and scrolls (spell completion) items, you don't actually need to cast the spell to be able to make the item. You can just have the DC increased by 5. (which is a snap for alchemists making potions). This means an alchemist can make a potion of ANY potion legal spell, not just the ones on their list.

Incorrect. Pg 551 Core, under creating potions: '...The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion (or must know the spell in case of a sorcerer or bard)...'

And 'The act of brewing triggers the prepared spell, making it unavailable for casting until the character has rested and ragained spells."

Quote:


2) Alchemists have a second level spell that lets them drink a potion without consuming it.

Is there anything that would prevent an alchemist from making 1 of every potion (or at least a lot of potions), and using this spell to essentially have every potion legal spell on hand to cast?

It is a good combo. The hiccup is finding potions which will have decent benefits to make it worth while. If nothing else it means you can 'share' a cure potion... first you drink and spit it out, then you give it you your friend... :)


W. John Hare wrote:


It is a good combo. The hiccup is finding potions which will have decent benefits to make it worth while. If nothing else it means you can 'share' a cure potion... first you drink and spit it out, then you give it you your friend... :)

Ummm... that's OK, man, you keep it.

Shadow Lodge

Magic items are objectively, 100% , absolutely NOT spell trigger items. They are Use activated items..

Use Activated: This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.

If potions were spell tigger items, healing potions wouldn't work for fighters, rogues, and sorcerers.

trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell

The must quoted above looses all meaning, because the item creation rules use it for situations that clearly don't REQUIRE the spells.

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.

"musts" and "prerequisites" .. aren't. YOu can ignore most of them and take the + to the DC. The question here is does meeting the DC through another caster make item creation possible, or does it remove the +5 to the DC ?

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

With Potions, Scrolls & Wands there are no 'prerequisites' that you can replace.

If you look at Dust of Appearance
Prereq: Craft Wondrous Item, glitterdust

So if you had the feat Craft Wondrous Item, you could make Dust of Appearance with a +5 to the DC if you didn't have the spell glitterdust.

No idividual potions, scrolls or wands have individual descriptions/prerequisites, ergo there is 'nothing' that you can replace. You have to meet all the rules laid out under the individual crafting, with the specific rules trumping the generic rules.

To make a potion/scroll/wand of cure light, the creator must have:
1)Brew Potion; and
2)The spell memorized or available from some other source. So an alchemist cannot make potions unless it is on their formulae list and meets all the other requirements for making a potion (ie no personal spells, max 3rd lvl, etc).

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:


"musts" and "prerequisites" .. aren't. YOu can ignore most of them and take the + to the DC. The question here is does meeting the DC through another caster make item creation possible, or does it remove the +5 to the DC ?

I'll disagree, "musts" have to be there (ie the Crafting Feat), "prerequisistes" can be replaced with the +5 to the DC.

I'm not sure exactly what your 2nd question is...
Are you asking if Mr. Wizard who has Craft Wand and wants to make a Wand of Cure Light can borrow Mr. Cleric to fill that requirement? Then the answer is yes.
If you are asking if Mr. Wizard can do +5 to the DC to craft without the cleric then the answer is no.
(and this should apply to potions, scrolls and wands).

Shadow Lodge

W. John Hare wrote:
With Potions, Scrolls & Wands there are no 'prerequisites' that you can replace.

I don't think this is the case.

Quote:
So if you had the feat Craft Wondrous Item, you could make Dust of Appearance with a +5 to the DC if you didn't have the spell glitterdust.

So whats the difference between the potion and the Wondrous item?

Quote:
No idividual potions, scrolls or wands have individual descriptions/prerequisites, ergo there is 'nothing' that you can replace. You have to meet all the rules laid out under the individual crafting, with the specific rules trumping the generic rules.

Because it would be silly to repeat the same things over and over for all 300 or so potions.

Quote:

To make a potion/scroll/wand of cure light, the creator must have:

1)Brew Potion; and
2)The spell memorized or available from some other source. So an alchemist cannot make potions unless it is on their formulae list and meets all the other requirements for making a potion (ie no personal spells, max 3rd lvl, etc).

p 549 All magic items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites MUST be met ...

This is the same must, and the same wording, that you think applies to the potion but NOT to the Dust of appearance.

Most of the time, they take the form of spells that that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed) The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory

So what this says is that you can beat any prerequisite (the thing you "must have") except for having the feat by adding 5 to the DC.

in addition, you cannot complete spell trigger and spell completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites

This adds another exception to the "only" exception above...

Potions are not spell trigger or spell completion. They are use activated. Therefor you CAN complete a potion without the spell prerequisite.

Shadow Lodge

Quote:

Are you asking if Mr. Wizard who has Craft Wand and wants to make a Wand of Cure Light can borrow Mr. Cleric to fill that requirement? Then the answer is yes.

If you are asking if Mr. Wizard can do +5 to the DC to craft without the cleric then the answer is no.
(and this should apply to potions, scrolls and wands).

For a wand, yes, because wands move the "must" have spell prerequisite to a must have prerequisite. Potions do not have that clause.

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:

Are you asking if Mr. Wizard who has Craft Wand and wants to make a Wand of Cure Light can borrow Mr. Cleric to fill that requirement? Then the answer is yes.

If you are asking if Mr. Wizard can do +5 to the DC to craft without the cleric then the answer is no.
(and this should apply to potions, scrolls and wands).

For a wand, yes, because wands move the "must" have spell prerequisite to a must have prerequisite. Potions do not have that clause.

Actually they do. Core book, pg 551.


1) Look here for some further delving into use/abuse of this extract,
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/paizo/aPGSpellsMyFaves&page=2#52

using the summoner (and other compact, eg ranger, bard) spell lists to generate potions makes for some very punchy potions.

Also, further on in the thread, the question of can you put this in a wand (and extracts in general) is discussed in the thread. No conclusion was reached, except to send the issue to the FAQ, but any comment would be appreciated...

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
pad300 wrote:

1) Look here for some further delving into use/abuse of this extract,

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/paizo/aPGSpellsMyFaves&page=2#52

using the summoner (and other compact, eg ranger, bard) spell lists to generate potions makes for some very punchy potions.

Yeah there are some nice spells in the APG. Too bad you can't get potions of Gravity Bow or Lead Blades cause they are Range: Personal.

:(

Shadow Lodge

W. John Hare wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:

Are you asking if Mr. Wizard who has Craft Wand and wants to make a Wand of Cure Light can borrow Mr. Cleric to fill that requirement? Then the answer is yes.

If you are asking if Mr. Wizard can do +5 to the DC to craft without the cleric then the answer is no.
(and this should apply to potions, scrolls and wands).

For a wand, yes, because wands move the "must" have spell prerequisite to a must have prerequisite. Potions do not have that clause.

Actually they do. Core book, pg 551.

There is nothing there that says you can't evade the spell prerequisite by adding 5 to the dc. The clause that you cannot do so specifically applies to scrolls and wands and nothing else.

As you already demonstrated with the dust of appearance, "must" and a prerequisite do not make something an unavoidable requirement.

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

The part you are referring to is:
Pg 549 - under Magic Item Creation
..."Most of the time, they (the prerequisites) take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator. The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet."
and
"In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites."

So, that is the generic rule for increasing the DC for magic items.

This is the specific rule that deals with brewing potions.

Under Creating Potions (pg 551)
"The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion and must provide any material component or focus the spell requires."
and
"The act of brewing triggers the prepared spell, making it unavailable for casting until the character has rested and regained spells."

The catch is, no where under Creating Potions, does it indicate the spell that is being cast is a prerequisite. (unlike creating Magic Armor, Weapons, Rings, Rods, or Wondrous Items).

In fact when you compare the creating potions to creating wands they read the same way, as do creating scrolls.

So as the rule for creating potions doesn't mention prerequisites, you cannot increase the DC to replace something that isn't there.
The creator MUST have the spell to cast into the potion.

Otherwise you have wizards making potions of cure light wounds... which doesn't make any sense.

Could the RAW have been a little tighter and indicate that the DC couldn't be increased with regards to potions & oils. Sure.

Contributor

What you'd really need to get full bang for your buck is a sidekick or just contact with all 10 levels of the old Master Alchemist prestige class from the 3.0 Magic of Faerun. That lets you get any arcane spell you want as a potion, since it allows potions of up to 9th level spells.

There would likely be some trick with an Archivist and that class that could do the same thing with divine spells.

Shadow Lodge

This is the specific rule that deals with brewing potions.

Under Creating Potions (pg 551)
"The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion and must provide any material component or focus the spell requires."
and
"The act of brewing triggers the prepared spell, making it unavailable for casting until the character has rested and regained spells."

and "must" in pathfinder means you "must or take an increase in DC" unless specified otherwise, because that's what it means for wondrous items where it uses the exact same wording about spells being used.

a spell you must have prepared to cast into the item IS a prerequisite under the general item creation rules. That is not negated in the specific potion rules by saying "must" because "must" is used in place of "must or increase the dc" in every other usage of the word must.

550

If spells are involved in the prerequisites for making the armor the creator must have prepared the spells to be cast (or must know the spells, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) ... the act of working on the item trigers the spells, making them unavailable for casting...

Quote:
In fact when you compare the creating potions to creating wands they read the same way, as do creating scrolls. p

And you WOULD be able to make scrolls and wands for spells you didn't know IF it hadn't been specifically excluded from doing this under the rules. Potions were not included on the list of exceptions.

Quote:

So as the rule for creating potions doesn't mention prerequisites, you cannot increase the DC to replace something that isn't there.

The creator MUST have the spell to cast into the potion.

Except that the must is specifically called out as not being a must under the general creation rules.

Quote:
Otherwise you have wizards making potions of cure light wounds... which doesn't make any sense.

It seems to be what they were going for.

Quote:

Could the RAW have been a little tighter and indicate that the DC couldn't be increased with regards to potions & oils. Sure.[/quote ]

If what you're saying is true its BEYOND unclear its downright equivocation


The language in the rules is rather unambiguous. Here's the whole text on prerequisites rather than just out-of-context snippets.

"Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites."

Note that the Brew Potion feat refers here. A potion is neither spell-trigger nor spell-completion, thus all prerequisites for a potion save the Brew Potion feat (save for the spell itself) can be skipped by adding +5 to the creation DC.

And again, Brew Potion refers you directly to the above clause, which quite clearly allows you to forgo the spell. Yes, the Brew Potion feat says you must have the spell, but you are explicitly allowed to forgo "must-have" prerequisites.

Beyond that, there are two interpretations at work here. One that makes the Alchemist the best alchemist in the game- which is precisely what they're supposed to be- and one that makes them one of the worst- in other words, a godawful interpretation that diminishes the game. I'd go with the interpretation that actually makes sense with regards to the class and doesn't suck. It ain't remotely broken, after all.

W. John Hare wrote:
Otherwise you have wizards making potions of cure light wounds... which doesn't make any sense.

Yes it does. It makes perfect sense. Any manner of learned mages making healing poultices and salves are as ingrained into genre convention as anything.

Shadow Lodge

Eh, this really isn't that exciting. The number of spells that you are able to turn into potions that are worth taking is fairly small. All you are talking about is a 50% discount on perhaps a dozen decent potions. If you did every spell you could turn into a potion you wind up wasting more money than saving.

Edit: It is really nice that they can use Alchemical Allocation, it's just the whole money saving thing that's a bit over-rated.


W. John Hare wrote:


Otherwise you have wizards making potions of cure light wounds... which doesn't make any sense.

Yeah, I mean you could have Fighters creating Flaming Longswords! Oh wait...

Isn't what you stated the very point of the "increase DC to avoid pre-reqs" change?


0gre wrote:

Eh, this really isn't that exciting. The number of spells that you are able to turn into potions that are worth taking is fairly small. All you are talking about is a 50% discount on perhaps a dozen decent potions. If you did every spell you could turn into a potion you wind up wasting more money than saving.

Edit: It is really nice that they can use Alchemical Allocation, it's just the whole money saving thing that's a bit over-rated.

Yup, the money-saving is low but the utility is high. Actually, if you have a Summoner making potions, Alchemical Allocation might even be too powerful (Stoneskin potion and a few other 4th-level spells but mainly Stoneskin to ignore the expensive component cost and because of the long duration could be purchased and AAed). It makes me think that the houserule I read on the boards where spells had an absolute level (for crafting purchases and for grabbing spells off other lists with Prestige Classes) was a good idea.


0gre wrote:
Eh, this really isn't that exciting. The number of spells that you are able to turn into potions that are worth taking is fairly small. All you are talking about is a 50% discount on perhaps a dozen decent potions.

I think having guaranteed access to the potion is more important than the discount, especially if you're making potions out of ranger spells or paladin spells or summoner spells, etc.

Shadow Lodge

Yeah, some of the new classes (Summoner in particular) open up a good number of early entry spells. Being able to reuse a stoneskin potion without a material component as a second level spell being particularly good.

@Rogue Eidolon I was considering of classifying spells based on character level rather than spell level myself. Saves a lot of headaches.

Spoiler:
If you changed the formula to something like 25+25*Casterlevel^2 You would get 1st level potions the same price and 2nd and third level potions a bit cheaper. Make it so you could only make potions from spells with a caster level of 6 or lower (so sorcerers/ oracles could craft).

There would be some weirdness but overall I think it would work... Hmm.

@Hogarth I seem to recall you argued quite a bit about early entry spells and exactly this thing during the beta.

Regardless, my PFS alchemist can buy any of these potions as long as he has enough gold.

The alchemists creed -> Regurgitate, reuse, recycle


0gre wrote:
@Hogarth I seem to recall you argued quite a bit about early entry spells and exactly this thing during the beta.

Specifically, I argued about the Summoner's spell list. Cramming 9 levels' worth of spells into 6 levels is a poor idea. Similarly, in 3.5 there was a class called the Trapsmith in the book Dungeonscape (by Jason Bulmahn and Rich Burlew) that had Haste as a level 1 spell and Dimension Door as a level 2 spell; that was also a poor idea. (I'll give Jason the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was Rich's idea.)

For other classes like the bard, ranger, paladin, etc. where one or two spells per level are a single level lower, I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it if I thought that Pathfinder totally embraced the concept (i.e. "It's intentional that potions of Lesser Restoration cost 50 gp, and that's a good thing."). But it doesn't seem to be the case; you can't buy a 50 gp potion of Lesser Restoration in Pathfinder Society organized play, for instance.

Shadow Lodge

I love that the summoner casts level appropriate spells. I'm not very keen on the side effects with regards to magic items.


0gre wrote:

Yeah, some of the new classes (Summoner in particular) open up a good number of early entry spells. Being able to reuse a stoneskin potion without a material component as a second level spell being particularly good.

@Rogue Eidolon I was considering of classifying spells based on character level rather than spell level myself. Saves a lot of headaches.

** spoiler omitted **

@Hogarth I seem to recall you argued quite a bit about early entry spells and exactly this thing during the beta.

Regardless, my PFS alchemist can buy any of these potions as long as he has enough gold.

The alchemists creed -> Regurgitate, reuse, recycle

You could also try 50 * (minimum caster level + 1)/2 * actual caster level if you wanted to allow potions that rise in caster level.

This would help a lot with Alchemical Allocation, but what about PrCs like Pathfinder Chronicler that let you use the Summoner Spell List to get Gate or Summoner Monster IX as a 6th/7th level spell with a full caster (so way early)?

Making the spells have an absolute level but then giving early access to some classes will fix that issue as well. As it turns out, it also buffs the slower casters who aren't abusing it a bit--

The way it works is, for example, Hideous Laughter is just a 2nd-level spell, period, but Bards can load it in a 1st-level slot (this does not count as "The ability to cast 2nd level spells" for the purpose of PrCs, but the spell retains all properties of the higher level--DC is higher, whether it can get through a Globe of Invulnerability is standardised, etc.

A similar fix that is less favourable--mark all early-access spells in their respective lists as "Diminished 1" or "Diminished 2" or "Diminished 3". They are considered to be "Diminished" (or anti-Heightened) which has no adverse effect except that it counts as a spell of the lower level, thus allowing the character to cast it as such completely as normal. Then you make a note that a Diminished spell cannot be made into a magic item--it must be Heightened by at least as many levels as the Diminished number before you can do so, and it cannot be taken from your spell list by a Prestige Class ability for any reason.


0gre wrote:
I love that the summoner casts level appropriate spells.

Then give him 9 levels of spellcasting (but with fewer slots than a sorcerer). Problem solved.

Shadow Lodge

hogarth wrote:
0gre wrote:
I love that the summoner casts level appropriate spells.
Then give him 9 levels of spellcasting (but with fewer slots than a sorcerer). Problem solved.

Hmm, do you have this done? That requires rewriting a bunch of spells and class charts. It would certainly work for summoner and alchemist I'm not sure it works across the board though.

Also, how do you deal with rangers and paladins?


hogarth wrote:
0gre wrote:
I love that the summoner casts level appropriate spells.
Then give him 9 levels of spellcasting (but with fewer slots than a sorcerer). Problem solved.

Solve that "problem"? Sure.

Create more problems than it solves? Yep:

  • Summoner is now required to invest more heavily in Charisma; where before it was valid and viable to stop at 16, now they have to go to 19 if they want to use the exact same class feature.
  • Now you have to re-write their spell list, because there won't be anywhere close to enough spells at certain levels.
  • The more spell levels you have available, the more bonus spells you get from higher stats. A caster that only has 4 spell levels available can get at most 1 more spell from raising his casting stat by 2; a caster with 9 spell levels can get 3 more spells by raising his casting stat by 2.
  • Now you've increased the DCs of Summoner spells, tilting the balance of their offensive options.

    You can't just write it off as "problem solved". That's extremely lazy design.


  • 0gre wrote:
    hogarth wrote:
    0gre wrote:
    I love that the summoner casts level appropriate spells.
    Then give him 9 levels of spellcasting (but with fewer slots than a sorcerer). Problem solved.

    Hmm, do you have this done? That requires rewriting a bunch of spells and class charts. It would certainly work for summoner and alchemist I'm not sure it works across the board though.

    Also, how do you deal with rangers and paladins?

    Like I said, I don't really care too much about rangers/paladins/bards/etc. getting a small minority of spells one level early. It's just the summoner that I think is screwed up and could be easily fixed.


    Regardless of how the rules work for crafting potions,, the 'have one of every useful potion of any class list on hand and use alchemical allocation a bunch' trick still works just fine...
    Being able to craft the potions yourself is not a prerequisite to having fun with this, if there's any you can't craft (depending on how the crafting rules actually work) just find someone who CAN make them ad buy them. It will be more expensive, obviously, but it's basically a one time investment.
    :)

    Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Alchemist: Potion Brewing your way to spontaneous casting? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.

    ©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.