| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
From the site http://elderwyrm.com/alchemist.html it states that an alchemist can use Polypurpose Panacea and Touch Injection for a no save sleep spell. Is this correct?
Polypurpose Panacea
Sleep: You enter a pleasant and restful sleep for at least 1 hour unless wakened. If you would normally begin sleeping at this time, when the panacea ends you continue sleeping normally.
Touch Injection
Infusion
I am unsure if this works because in PP "you" must refer to two different people to be effective. It would need to be "you alchemist" that decides which effect to use, but "you victim" that enters the sleep. Could the victim just decide to get a resistance bonus or one of the other effects of PP instead?
This same question really applies to all the uses of touch injection mentioned there.
|
It's spell that emulates few cantrip effects. Would a no save Sleep spell be a cantrip effect? I doubt so. Spell is supposed to be cast by a caster on himself.
It has also a range of personal, so it cant be potioned generally, but alchemist bypasses that for himself. The spell always target's you however, the alchemist, nobody else.
Infusion and touch injection seems to read like it would fix the self targeting only problem. But my issue is with who gets to decide the effects Pancea or the other spells listed on the site. It seems like "you" should mean the same person throughout the spell, but it sounds like the creator of the build is saying that once it goes into your body you make the decision and when it goes into the opponents body it takes effect.
Anyone else care to chime in on this?
I thought Alchemists CAN use self-only spells, if they're on the extract list, on other people if they get Infusion?
Like, that was supposed to be the lame, completely insufficient counterpoint to Alchemists having to pay a discovery/feat tax to buff other people like *any other spellcaster* can, and even then, multi-target spells like Haste STILL don't function properly.
I know I've seen it stated that with Infusion, an Alchemist can use personal extracts on other people stated on these boards before, as accepted RAW....
I thought Alchemists CAN use self-only spells, if they're on the extract list, on other people if they get Infusion?
Like, that was supposed to be the lame, completely insufficient counterpoint to Alchemists having to pay a discovery/feat tax to buff other people like *any other spellcaster* can, and even then, multi-target spells like Haste STILL don't function properly.
I know I've seen it stated that with Infusion, an Alchemist can use personal extracts on other people stated on these boards before, as accepted RAW....
This is my understanding also. My concern about the original combo is that if the person drinking effectively becomes the "you" effected shouldn't they also be able to make the decisions that "you" make, even if it passes your body to get to them?
Possibly. I really can't answer that one.
I prefer the idea of Touch Injection with Skinsend anyway. Costs higher level slots, but it *does* work, and oh man is it a nasty creepy awful thing to do to someone you really hate. :)
I have an alchemist right now, and am considering when to go for the combo. I had previously refused to ever take Infusion on principle, because I hate bs feat taxes for things that should have been included with the class to begin with (*glares at Raging Vitality and Shadow Strike*). But...you need Infusion to do the Skinsend combo, and I rather like the idea of having an awesome surekill attack. He's already designed to be as gross and freakshow-ish as possible, so I couldn't think of a better super move for him.
That is pretty cool, even if they immediately dismiss the spell it costs them a standard action (edit: and a move to stand) and half their hit points.
Or you just use it after the victim's turn, so all your allies get a crack before he even has a chance to do that.
|
Three Points...
1> Alchemist's Formulae restrict the target to 'you', but does not change the "Target" line of the Spell.
2> Polypurpose Panacea has a "Target" line of "You"
3> Infusion lifts the Alchemist's Formulae restriction, but does not change the "Target" line of the Spell.
Conclusion:
None of the above effects change the "Target" line, thus Polypurpose Panacea still only targets "You".
Interesting conclusion. It would remove some awkward effect as the infusion of Shield and similar spells. RAW it can be read this way, but I am not convinced of this interpretation.
Like, that was supposed to be the lame, completely insufficient counterpoint to Alchemists having to pay a discovery/feat tax to buff other people like *any other spellcaster* can, and even then, multi-target spells like Haste STILL don't function properly.
[sarcasm]Oh yes, giving shield and other self only spells to all the party members is lame and insufficient. [/sarcasm]
I am just starting my first PC alchemist, but I think I have to sympathize with SotS on this one. The alchemist feels very starved for feats and spells. Granted he has other options that make the class very viable, but that doesn't change the fact that you will always have lots of great options you won't have the slots for. If given the option to have spells that normally can affect others do so without costing a feat/discovery or spend a feat/discovery to allow all your single party member buff spells (including those normally self only) affect others, I would take the former.
|
|
Before the characteristic bonus and excluding cantrips:
Level 1: specialist wizard = 2 spells Alchemist 1
level 2: 3/2
level 3: 5/3
level 4: 7/4
level 5: 9/6
level 6: 11/7
level 7: 14/8
level 9: 19/12
level 10: 21/13
level 11: 24/15
level 12: 26/17
level 13: 29/18
level 14: 31/20
level 15: 34/22
level 16: 37/23
level 17: 39/25
level 18: 41/27
level 19: 43/29
level 20: 45/30
At worst it has about 55% of a wizard spells, a better to hit, better saves, bombs and a discovery every 2 levels against a feat every 5.
Where is that "a level 3 wizard has access to more spells than a level 20 alchemist"?
Or you mean the spell on the spell lists? What is in the spell list isn't so important, it is what you can learn while playing, what it cost you in time and money and his actual utility. Having access to Dancing lights or Restore corpse rarely has a great impact on how you play. Both classes have a core group of spells that they will use 90% of the time so having a few extra options for the remaining 10% hasn't this great impact on the game.
polypurpose panecea would be a good self-treatment for confusion.
RAW:
Yes it seems valid to exploit polypurpose panacea (with infusion) with touch injection.RAI:
It's definitely intended to be "save: will negates (harmless)" for polypurpose panacea, just an omission due to lack of foresight due to it being a self-spell. I'd recommend that the GM does not allow it because it's cheesy and unrealistic in my opinion.Yeah alchemists don't have many spells (a level 3 wizard has access to more spells than a level 20 alchemist), but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to use exploits that are obviously kinda broken or unrealistic.
Personally I recommend players and GMs work together to give alchemist more spells (which are suitable to alchemist; not just any spell. There's not a huge lot that were missed IMO) to help diversify play and maybe improve alchemist a bit.
There are a few other tricks that can make alchemists really strong fighters though, since that's generally what they're about (be it throwing bombs, or melee, or rarely ranged attack), which generally all focuses around alchemical allocation.
Possibly. I really can't answer that one.
I prefer the idea of Touch Injection with Skinsend anyway. Costs higher level slots, but it *does* work
It's the same situation. They're both self spells without saves. If you say skinsend does work, you should also say that polypurpose panacea should work.
Personally I'd give an identical ruling to skinsend with touch injection and infusion abuse. I'd speculate that it certainly wasn't intended for it to be done, and I wouldn't allow it to go saveless in my game.
RAW, would the enemy get to choose which version of Poly Pan is used on him or you? I guess I could have phrased that question more directly from the get go.
I think for Poly Pan, the enemy would in fact get to choose by strict RAW.
That is kind of what I thought too. If a normal person at the table brought this up I would have come to that conclusion immediately. I don't know if it was having it's own devotional section on a webpage or maybe that I wanted to believe it that I even wanted to question it.
Poly Pan may work after all. I just read this.
From Alchy
An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion.
From Potion
Potions are like spells cast upon the imbiber. The character taking the potion doesn't get to make any decisions about the effect—the caster who brewed the potion has already done so.
This would seem that you would set the decision at the time of brewing and then it would take effect on the person touched. If I am reading this right, ouch. Not as much flavor as the skinsend but pretty brutal.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
What about making an infusion of Polypurpose Panacea with the "Sleep" effect already selected and handing it to my witch friend, who casts Beguiling Gift to get an enemy to drink it. Would that work?
|
|
What about making an infusion of Polypurpose Panacea with the "Sleep" effect already selected and handing it to my witch friend, who casts Beguiling Gift to get an enemy to drink it. Would that work?
RAW? Yes.
Almost certainly it is not an intended effect of the absence of the Saving Throw ans SR row in the spell description, but as long as it is not corrected, it is a valid tactic, if you GM allow you to use it.
Yep this recent FAQ definitely negates this combo. I actually sent the FAQ to the only GM I ever used this combo on when I saw it a few days ago.
So you inject somebody with skinsend and for one round, their skin separates from them? (The user of Skinsend can end the spell as a standard action)