|
| 7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The spell with a range of self or a target of you lack a Sawing throw line, but with the advent of alchemist it has become possible to make then into infusions and hit a enemy with them.
That mean that even the most powerful enemy, with the best protections against magic can be killed by a successful touch attack and a standard attack using skinsend. If done right the enemy has almost no hope to avoid this fate.
Even Panacea, a first level spell, will put you into a sleep state and allow for a Coup de grace.
For even more "fun" skinsed will work upon golems, undead and oozes.
Even without a alchemist in the party it would be possible to buy a skinsend infusion from a alchemist and put it in a syringe spear, so almost any group can have this handy combo.
Done the other way you can give your golem plenty of self buffs if you give it a few infusion in the form of oils.
I think that all (or almost all) spells with a target of you or a range of self need a saving throw line like this one:
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
substituting Reflex of Fortitude to will where appropriate.
If you agree please hit the FAQ button.
I think it would be better to errata so that infusions mimicing personal spells simply do not work on anyone but the alchemist. >.>
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The spell with a range of self or a target of you lack a Sawing throw line, but with the advent of alchemist it has become possible to make then into infusions and hit a enemy with them.
Nope.
An infused extract can be imbibed by a non-alchemist to gain its effects.
"Imbibed". Not "splashed", not "injected".
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It could still be possible to trick someone into imbibing an infusion, and this is an area where the developers intent needs to be made clear.
Is the lack of a save entry or SR entry for some personal formulae deliberate? In the sense of "Yes, we expect alchemists, or anyone with access to an alchemist, to be able to feed these spells to other people, and we're totally fine with that."?
Or were they simply omitted, because the author didn't forsee a way in which personal effects could be delivered to anyone else? And no-one is going to resist an effect they deliver to themself, so why have a save entry?
Potions don't have this problem, since they explicitly can't be made from personal spells. The Infusion discovery doesn't address the issue.
Is it even the intent, that infusions can be made from personal-only spells?
There are formulae on the alchemist list, which can theoretically target other people, but not using a normal elixir (a quick check just now shows this applies to three of the first six on the level one list, I could go on, but it's clear the list contains many targetable effects).
Is the design intent, that infusions are only supposed to release the default 'self-only' restriction for targetable elixir effects, like spider climb, not all the effects on the formulae list?
If so, one line in the discovery description could settle the matter.
Maybe this is a reasonable solution:
Identifying Potions: In addition to the standard methods of identification, PCs can sample from each container they find to attempt to determine the nature of the liquid inside with a Perception check. The DC of this check is equal to 15 + the spell level of the potion (although this DC might be higher for rare or unusual potions).
Give the target creature a perception check to notice something is wrong with their drink, and then they can just spit it out (this pretty much kills the tactic at high levels).
|
|
The spell with a range of self or a target of you lack a Sawing throw line, but with the advent of alchemist it has become possible to make then into infusions and hit a enemy with them.
Nope.
An infused extract can be imbibed by a non-alchemist to gain its effects."Imbibed". Not "splashed", not "injected".
Touch Injection
School transmutation; Level alchemist 2, sorcerer/wizard 3
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range personal
Duration 1 hour/level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
You must hold an elixir, infused extract, poison, or potion in hand as you cast this spell. The held substance drains from its container into a magical sac in your body. While the spell lasts, you can deliver the substance with a mere touch. To do so to an opponent, you must make a successful melee touch attack. If you hit, the substance takes effect immediately, despite any onset period, and that opponent receives the normal saving throw (if any) against the substance. If you miss, the substance remains in the magical sac for you to use later.
This spell protects you from poison in the sac, but unless you have the poison use class feature, you suffer a 5% chance of exposing yourself to the poison when you first cast the spell. If you roll a natural 1 while attempting to inject the poison into an enemy, you are exposed to it.
Built right into the class.
The part about "Imbibed" when speaking of extracts and infusion clash with: Extracts are the most varied of the three. In many ways, they behave like spells in potion form, and the rules about making potions where they say A potion is a magic liquid that produces its effect when imbibed. Potions vary incredibly in appearance. Magic oils are similar to potions, except that oils are applied externally rather than imbibed. You can rule that the alchemist extracts work only like potions and not like oil, but I suspect that the text was written that way to keep it simple and that they work like potions or oils. YMMV.
I think it would be better to errata so that infusions mimicing personal spells simply do not work on anyone but the alchemist.
I think it is better to correct the spells adding a ST row where appropriate, so it will work independently from future abilities or spells.
that way it is possible to differentiate the spell that should work upon unwilling subjects and those that shouldn't.
It could still be possible to trick someone into imbibing an infusion, and this is an area where the developers intent needs to be made clear.
Easy to do:
Beguiling Gift
School enchantment (compulsion) [mind-affecting]; Level bard 1, witch 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, F (the object to be offered)
Range 5 ft.
Target one creature
Duration 1 round
Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance yes
You offer an object to an adjacent creature, and entice it into using or consuming the proffered item. If the target fails its Will save, it immediately takes the offered object, dropping an already held object if necessary. On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question. For example, an apple would be eaten, a potion consumed, a ring put on a finger, and a sword wielded in a free hand. If the target is physically unable to accept the object, the spell fails. The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell's duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.
and that is one of the reason why I think that we need a ST line. Some self spell can be meant to work on unwilling targets and some don't.
|
|
The spell with a range of self or a target of you lack a Sawing throw line, but with the advent of alchemist it has become possible to make then into infusions and hit a enemy with them.
Nope.
An infused extract can be imbibed by a non-alchemist to gain its effects."Imbibed". Not "splashed", not "injected".
Even more simple tha what I wrote above:
Any corporeal creature can imbibe a potion or use an oil.
So construct can imbibe a potion or an infusion that work like a potion.
|
|
I think it would be better to errata so that infusions mimicing personal spells simply do not work on anyone but the alchemist. >.>
About a year ago I asked JJ if it was meant for the alchemist infusions to allow to share personal spells and his reply was "Yes".
As the original creator of the alchemist he should know what his intention was and, as the rules development team didn't changed how infusion work I think we can reasonably assume that it is an intended mechanic in Pathfinder, not only in James games.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it would be better to errata so that infusions mimicing personal spells simply do not work on anyone but the alchemist. >.>About a year ago I asked JJ if it was meant for the alchemist infusions to allow to share personal spells and his reply was "Yes".
As the original creator of the alchemist he should know what his intention was and, as the rules development team didn't changed how infusion work I think we can reasonably assume that it is an intended mechanic in Pathfinder, not only in James games.
I wasn't commenting on the intent, I was commenting on what I think would be better for gameplay. I still think it was amazingly stupid to take a summoner and give it 2nd tier spellcasting with 1st tier spell progression. It was probably the intent to shoehorn lots of high level spells (which don't require save DCs or target creatures, making their level largely irrelevant) into low level slots. That doesn't make it a "good idea" even if "was intended".
(An example is that while this sometimes occurs in core with the bard, such as with Otto's irresistible dance being an 8th level spell in a bard's 6th level list, bards are casting it at -2 to the save DC compared to the other classes and it was clearly implemented for flavor. Meanwhile the summoner gets lots of spells that require no saving throws appearing early in their list and seemingly for no reason in some cases.
Summoners get summon monster as an improved spell-like ability that scales with their level. Yet for some reason the designers felt that they also needed haste a class level and spell level earlier, and spells like summon monster V a level earlier, and summon monster VIII as a 6th level spell. None of these spells requiring saving throws or even caring about the fact they are lower in level or that it disrupts the norms for item pricing.)
Personally I appreciate that there's something a little bit sacred about personal-range spells. They are traditionally pretty difficult to attain without being that class baring the GM okaying certain custom magic items, and rightfully so. Most personal range spells tend to be very powerful for their level. Shield for example is a flat +4 force shield bonus to your AC which likely lasts all fight. A +4 shield bonus is equivalent to a +2 heavy shield or a +3 light shield except this one is also ghost touch and happens to function as an infinite brooch of shielding. Most any character wielding a 2 handed weapon would just love potions of these things. But the rules in core is no personal range spells as potions.
As much as I myself really enjoy the magic item creation rules, there are a few ways I'd touch them up. I'd like to see more emphasis on things like swift-actions or 1/round conditions (particularly when it comes to use-activated type things), and I'd probably like it if personal range spells were given a price modifier (such as x1.5 or x2) that was higher than normal spells if the spell can be passed around. However, even without these considerations I think that the item creation rules are amazingly good for how much they give you. It is truly rare that you see a system so open to creating new things that is as balanced as 3.x item creation.
But yes. From a designer standpoint and from a GMing standpoint, if the choice was:
A) Go through every personal range spell published and apply new saving throw and SR entries to respond to potential problems or concerns with a class in the Advanced Player's Guide that creates a situation that is unprecedented in the core rules.
or
B) Add a note to the class in the advanced players guide that says something like "Infusion: When the alchemist creates an extract, he can infuse it with an extra bit of his own magical power. The extract created now persists even after the alchemist sets it down. As long as the extract exists, it continues to occupy one of the alchemist's daily extract slots. An infused extract can be imbibed by a non-alchemist to gain its effects. Infusions that function as personal range spells still only affect the alchemist who created them.".
I know which one I would be more inclined to do.
|
|
Ashiel, you are mostly preaching to the choir this time. I agree at least with 99% of your post.
In my games I have implemented a higher cost for magic items mimicking self only spells and flatly refuse to allow the crafting of some item based on them.
My only doubt it that I am half convinced that there is some obscure archetype that allow this kind of trick even if you aren't a alchemist.
Even if I am wrong in that, nothing assure us that this kind of ability will not come up in future products, and as i said, it is possible to make elixirs of those spells and give them out to other characters or force the target to imbibe them thanks to Beguiling Gift.
That said your solution B) would be way easier to implement and require a lot less work.
@Ascalaphus: sure, house rules work perfectly in home games, but there is PFS, convention games outside of PFS and groups that like to play strictly RAW.
Even worse from my point of view as a GM, I could get blindsided by the use of this combo and react saying that it will not work as the self only spell lacking a ST line is a oversight. That could result in a discussion with the player feeling that one of his abilities has been nerfed unjustly and long lasting resentments.
I have discovered this idea [touch injection and skinsend/panacea] in the forum and preempted it in my home game, but plenty of people don't read regularly the forum.
|
Yeah, it would've been better if this had never been possible in the first place.
I just don't like the idea of applying the wide-angle laser to self-spells in infusions and such; there are some self-range spells that strike me as fair for the purpose (Alter Self and so on seem like things that would fit in a potion).
These combos are the return for the horrific nerf that extracts are. having to pay a feat tax just to use them on other people at all. Even then, getting gipped out of multi-target properties of spells like haste.
I'm ALL for doing away with the whole "our extracts are different!" crap and making them spells. Then Alchemist can finally have cantrips. And concentration checks to avoid AoOs for "casting." And a wider spell list since there's no longer a thematic hurdle limiting what "makes sense" to be there. And no-doubt access to all item creation feats, metamagic, and all the other awesome things spellcasters have as options.
That would seriously be awesome. That would be my own preferred way to fix things.
But it's not going to happen, and if it's not... quit complaining about one of the few perks the extract system actually grants.
It's not the Alchemist's fault Magus came out after it.
I never was sure why Magus was int-based prepared, instead of cha-based spontaneous, other than a) a homage to the 3E int-based Duskblade it's clearly based upon and b) because of how litered the game is w/ cha-based spont. casters.