Hi there!
There's been a bit of a discussion regarding the alchemist and investigator classes. As stated in the APG FAQ, alchemist are not regarded as spellcasters. So they cannot item create or take feats which involves them having a caster level.
Weirdly enough, I can't find anything about the investigator not being a spellcaster. The investigator is a hybrid between alchemist and rogue. So why isn't the investigator as widely discussed as the alchemist? This seems to me like the investigator is regarded as a spellcaster but that wouldn't be right.
So what's up with that?
The investigator isn't a spellcaster, just the same as the Alchemist. The Investigator class is relatively new, so there's not much directly about it. And since it's the same as the Alchemist, all the talk about them apply to investigators too.
The investigator isn't a spellcaster, just the same as the Alchemist. The Investigator class is relatively new, so there's not much directly about it. And since it's the same as the Alchemist, all the talk about them apply to investigators too.
Then why in posts about Investigator builds, why are people encouraging players to take Craft Wondrous Item?
You got a link for an example? Investigators can craft alchemical items no problems, but unless the investigator or alchemist has a spell-like ability put in their build they don't qualify as spellcasters and can't pick up Craft Wondrous Items. The Alchemy class feature isn't spellcasting.
The investigator isn't a spellcaster, just the same as the Alchemist. The Investigator class is relatively new, so there's not much directly about it. And since it's the same as the Alchemist, all the talk about them apply to investigators too.Then why in posts about Investigator builds, why are people encouraging players to take Craft Wondrous Item?
Builds aren't official, their builders can make mistakes, or maybe they have some other way they are qualifying for it. A link to the build would be nice to see why they recommend it and if it could work.
Yeah having a hard time finding it back again, but so you are saying that if they have a spell-like ability, they are allowed to have craft wondrous item feat?
If they got a spell-like ability that scales with level (in order to satisfy feat caster level requirements) then yes.
Check out this FAQ ruling
A spell-like ability gives one a caster level, which is what is required to take item creation feats.
The four FAQs immediately following this link are relevant: SLA FAQ
An alchemist or investigator with an SLA could take item creation feats, but it is important to note that extracts do not count as spells and cannot be used in the crafting of items. Therefore, if such a character took, say, Craft Wand, it would not be possible to craft wands of extracts.
Yea it's best to only pick up Craft Wondrous Items or Craft Magic Arms and Armor (and maybe Craft Construct if so inclined) when relying on a spell-like ability caster level to satisfy the prerequisite of the feat. You can skip spell requirements for non-spell-trigger and non-spell-completion items by increasing the Spellcraft DC by 5 (or whatever appropriate skill is being used for the magic item crafting).
Well, there's always Master Craftsman. I don't think they'd get their level as competence bonus to the skill checks, but that would allow them to take CWI and CMA&A.
Where is it established that an investigator cannot use a spell-trigger item?
The thing that ticks me off about the investigator more than anything else is how his studied strike ability works.
Studied combat is good for a nice, consistent attack and damage bonus, but if you want to actually get some use out of studied strike, you have to time it just right or else the extra damage is overkill.
And the talents that add conditions to studied strike are terrible and come way too late.
And the handful of points of precision damage from studied combat not being multiplied on a critical hit is pointless. I understand not multiplying studied strike, but seriously? 1 to 10 points of damage depending on level?
Where is it established that an investigator cannot use a spell-trigger item?
Alchemist's alchemy class feature specifically states alchemists can still use spell-trigger items. Investigators lack such wording.
|
Where is it established that an investigator cannot use a spell-trigger item?Alchemist's alchemy class feature specifically states alchemists can still use spell-trigger items. Investigators lack such wording.
Well, now...
I am not quite as happy now as I was before I read this thread. I had missed that difference.
|
| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I feel like there's some text in the Alchemist that accidentally got cut in the transition to the Investigator.
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.
Like an alchemist, an investigator prepares his spells by mixing ingredients and a tiny fraction of his own magical power into a number of extracts, and then effectively casts the spell by drinking the extract. These extracts have powerful effects, but they are also bound to their creator. Extracts behave like spells in potion form, and as such their effects can be dispelled by dispel magic and similar effects, using the investigator's level as the caster level.
Notice that some text got added to the Investigator in comparison to the Alchemist. Where did it come from?
Although the alchemist doesn't actually cast spells, he does have a formulae list that determines what extracts he can create. 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 level as the caster level to determine any effect based on caster level.
This entry is missing from the Investigator. My theory is that the last sentence was copied to the Investigator paragraph above. However, some important bits got lost in the process.
Not only don't we know for sure whether investigators can use wands; we don't even know for sure if using the extracts is still a standard action!
I also think investigators can still use spell-trigger items, even if it isn't specifically called out in their entry, because of the general definition of spell-triggers:
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
So do investigators cast spells? If they do, they can use spell trigger items.
Like an alchemist, an investigator prepares his spells by mixing ingredients and a tiny fraction of his own magical power into a number of extracts, and then effectively casts the spell by drinking the extract.
In effect, an alchemist prepares his spells by mixing ingredients into a number of extracts, and then “casts” his spells by drinking the extract.
...
Although the alchemist doesn't actually cast spells, he does have a formulae list that determines what extracts he can create. An alchemist can utilize spell-trigger items if the spell appears on his formulae list, but not spell-completion items...
It looks to me like investigators and alchemists cast in the same way, so since alchemists can use spell-trigger items, so should investigators. The lack of language explicitly allowing it looks to me like an error in editing, not an intentional rule.
|
|
Well, they copy-pasted some paragraphs and cut apart some and combined some others. I can imagine errors are made.
I'm actually pretty sure errors were made; the part of text explaining that drawing and drinking an extract is together one standard action also got lost. I don't think that's intentional either - I don't think there was a plan to make the investigator's casting action economy different from the alchemist.
But as it is right now, you could conclude that you would first have to draw (Move action) an extract before you can drink it (Standard action), and that both these things provoke, so that's two AoOs instead of one.
I'm really quite sure that's an oversight, and evidence that the text got "damaged" in copying to the Investigator.
Well, they copy-pasted some paragraphs and cut apart some and combined some others. I can imagine errors are made.
I'm actually pretty sure errors were made; the part of text explaining that drawing and drinking an extract is together one standard action also got lost. I don't think that's intentional either - I don't think there was a plan to make the investigator's casting action economy different from the alchemist.
But as it is right now, you could conclude that you would first have to draw (Move action) an extract before you can drink it (Standard action), and that both these things provoke, so that's two AoOs instead of one.
I'm really quite sure that's an oversight, and evidence that the text got "damaged" in copying to the Investigator.
Actually, the alchemist's alchemy feature doesn't specifically state that drawing+drinking an extract or mutagen is only 1 standard action instead of move + standard; that ruling got clarified at this FAQ entry:
Alchemist: What kind of action is it to use an extract, mutagen, or throw a bomb?
It is a standard action to use an extract, mutagen, or throw a bomb. This action includes retrieving the necessary materials from the alchemist's supplies, in the same manner as retrieving a material component is included in the act of spellcasting.
So applying that to investigators (as we should we since the FAQ only addressed general use of extracts and mutagens for everybody), they'd provoke an AoO only once when using an extract or mutagen.
|
|
Actually, the alchemist's alchemy feature doesn't specifically state that drawing+drinking an extract or mutagen is only 1 standard action instead of move + standard; that ruling got clarified at this FAQ entry:
So applying that to investigators (as we should we since the FAQ only addressed general use of extracts and mutagens for everybody), they'd provoke an AoO only once when using an extract or mutagen.Alchemist: What kind of action is it to use an extract, mutagen, or throw a bomb?
It is a standard action to use an extract, mutagen, or throw a bomb. This action includes retrieving the necessary materials from the alchemist's supplies, in the same manner as retrieving a material component is included in the act of spellcasting.
Yes it does:
An alchemist can draw and drink an extract as a standard action.
...
Drawing the components of, creating, and throwing a bomb requires a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
...
It's a standard action to drink a mutagen.
Actually, the alchemist's alchemy feature doesn't specifically state that drawing+drinking an extract or mutagen is only 1 standard action instead of move + standard; that ruling got clarified at this FAQ entry:
So applying that to investigators (as we should we since the FAQ only addressed general use of extracts and mutagens for everybody), they'd provoke an AoO only once when using an extract or mutagen.Alchemist: What kind of action is it to use an extract, mutagen, or throw a bomb?
It is a standard action to use an extract, mutagen, or throw a bomb. This action includes retrieving the necessary materials from the alchemist's supplies, in the same manner as retrieving a material component is included in the act of spellcasting.Yes it does:
An alchemist can draw and drink an extract as a standard action.
...
Drawing the components of, creating, and throwing a bomb requires a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
...
It's a standard action to drink a mutagen.
D'oh you're right. My physical copy of the APG doesn't have that errata.
|
|
Yeah, it's from the second edition. I don't think the mixup on the investigator can be blamed on re-use of first edition APG material though. I think it was caused because they trimmed the (huge) Alchemy section from the alchemist for the investigator. Along the way some more text got cut than should have.
Here's a post by James Jacobs that states alchemist's (and by extension investigators) can take item creation feats
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mz2b?How-does-the-alchemist-use-discoveries-th at#4
He's going against every RAW and most of the fluff. Alchemists don't have a caster level and are minimally magical - they use extracts by infusing them with a small bit of magic - but the implication is that they don't have enough for actual casting.
If you want to allow it, sure, but JJ isn't part of the crunch side of the PDT, and that isn't an FAQ. You're still going against RAW and probably the dev's RAI.
Here's a post by James Jacobs that states alchemist's (and by extension investigators) can take item creation feats
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mz2b?How-does-the-alchemist-use-discoveries-th at#4
He's going against every RAW and most of the fluff. Alchemists don't have a caster level and are minimally magical - they use extracts by infusing them with a small bit of magic - but the implication is that they don't have enough for actual casting.
If you want to allow it, sure, but JJ isn't part of the crunch side of the PDT, and that isn't an FAQ. You're still going against RAW and probably the dev's RAI.
Definitely against RAW and FAQ as stated here.