PFS Clarification on extracts for formulae using a focus component

[N N 959]

The PRD says this,

PRD wrote:

Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements (alchemist extracts that duplicate divine spells never have a divine focus requirement).

However, two of the spells listed for Alchemists in the APG, have a Focus requirement: Crafter's Fortune and True Strike.

1. Is it then true that extracts for True Strike and Crafter's Fortune cannot be made?

2. Since the Alchemist was constructed with the ability to create potions from its Formulae list, the removal of Brew Potions means that True Strike and CF are no longer usable by Alchemist. Is this interpretation correct?

I'm hoping there was some PFS update that removed the Focus restriction on Extracts in PFS...yes, no?

[N N 959]

Are there any GMs/Players who have picked up on this problem? I did a search, but could not find this. But alas, my search-fu is weak.

[Dave Setty]

N N 959 wrote:

Are there any GMs/Players who have picked up on this problem? I did a search, but could not find this. But alas, my search-fu is weak.

Your quote above is from the text of the Alchemy class feature, but the introduction to the alchemist formula list lower down says:

Advanced Player's Guide, Pg 32 wrote:

Alchemists gain access to a variety of formulae, allowing them to make extracts of the following spells:

(emphasis mine), followed by the spell list which includes true strike and crafter's fortune, so the rules are actually contradictory. My guess is that it's intended that you can't make an extract of a spell with an expensive focus - neither spell has a price listed for its focus.

I also found this FAQ answer for a different question, which mentions that making an infusion of true strike is, in fact, possible. So there's that.

[Coraith]

Specific trumps general.

[N N 959]

Dave Setty wrote:

My guess is that it's intended that you can't make an extract of a spell with an expensive focus - neither spell has a price listed for its focus.

Yes, the rules are contradictory, hence my post.

Actually the rules say...

PRD wrote:

If a spell normally has a costly material component, that component is expended during the consumption of that particular extract.

So I read that as accommodating costly foci.

Quote:

I also found this FAQ answer for a different question, which mentions that making an infusion of true strike is, in fact, possible. So there's that.

Yeah, except that I feel like the response was more about the fact that one could make an infusion for a spell that normally you can't cast on someone else. I'm also of the opinion that the author may have simply forgotten about the restriction on extracts and/or not remembered that True Strike requires a focus.

Even if it's an oversight, the FAQ is unambiguous about True Strike being a valid extract. Logically we can extend that to other extracts. So, I'll go with it. Thanks.

[N N 959]

Steven Huffstutler wrote:

Specific trumps general.

The problem with that approach is that there is no "general" in this case. The only time the prohibition on spells that use foci comes up would be for the specific spells on the Alchemist's list. In other words, if doesn't apply to the spells on the Formulae, I'm hard pressed to figure out where it does apply?

The fact is that if we ignore the FAQ, which may have overlooked the restriction on extractions, the intent may be that the Alchemist can brew potions of those spells...just not extracts.

[Belafon]

This isn't a PFS specific question, I'm flagging for movement to the rules forum.

To give my answer: I'm usually a "RAW" person, but sometimes common sense trumps a few letters on a page. Especially when it comes to spell descriptions (take a look at any of the v1-v2 errata documents for the hardbacks and you will see a large chunk of the errata are for spell descriptions).

I see no way it can be clearer that the designers intended for a spell (or extract) to be usable by a class than for them to put the spell on the class's spell list.

[nosig]

N N 959 wrote:

Steven Huffstutler wrote:

Specific trumps general.

The problem with that approach is that there is no "general" in this case. The only time the prohibition on spells that use foci comes up would be for the specific spells on the Alchemist's list. In other words, if doesn't apply to the spells on the Formulae, I'm hard pressed to figure out where it does apply?

The fact is that if we ignore the FAQ, which may have overlooked the restriction on extractions, the intent may be that the Alchemist can brew potions of those spells...just not extracts.

General = Alchemists can't create extracts of spells with foci.

Specific = Alchemists CAN create an extract of Truestrike (which has a foci).

hope that helps...

[N N 959]

I think you're missing the point, nosig.

The specific isn't "True Strike," it's spells "such as True Strike."

The question is referring to a category of spells, by example, not attempting to ask a question just about True Strike.

Again, there is no general rule if it doesn't apply to the specific spells. It's like saying the alchemist can't eat apples. But then listing apples as one of the foods an Alchemist can eat. It's a contradiction. If the text said Alchemist can't eat "fruit" and then listed apples, then your explanation would be accurate. But the specific exceptions encompass the entire set of spells that the "general" rule would apply to.

To put it another way,

Specific (the spells on the alchemist's formulae list with foci) trumps general (the spells on the alchemist's formulae list with foci).

Those two are the same because the only spells an alchemist can make extracts from are the spells on their list. There are no other spell to which this rule would apply.

Hope that helps....

[Belafon]

NN 959:

Might I suggest you post on the product page for the Advanced Player Guide? If I'm reading your posts correctly you are in agreement with everyone else in this thread that the intention is for alchemists to be able to create extracts of those spells. Posting on the product page will hopefully bring the issue to the attention of the developers.

You will not get a ruling for such a question in the PFS forums. Campaign leadership has stressed multiple times that they do not wish to create specific rulings for issues that affect the Pathfinder RPG line as a whole.

[N N 959]

Thanks for the recommendation.

I'm not really sure what Paizo's intention is. The idea that one cannot make an extract for any spell that requires a focus seems reasonable. However, it's also possible that they wanted the spells on formulae list to be exceptions, but then I don't know why you'd even have a statement about prohibiting extracts for spells with formulae: what spells could an alchemist otherwise have access to? None, as far as I can tell.

The reason why I was asking for a PFS recommendation is that PFS is the one disallowing Brew Potions. So, if Brew Potions were the method by which an Alchemist could still use True Strike, then Paizo might say it's working as intended. However, there are spells above 3rd level on the formulae list which require a focus, so that makes it more likely that there is a contradiction at work.

[Dragnmoon]

I asked this question with a similar problem spell Aram Zey’s Focus.

The offical response was..

James Jacobs wrote:

Grr.

[N N 959]

Pretty much.