At 4th level, if the Grenadier Alchemist selects the Explosive Missile Discovery does this mean that:
Move Action: Infuse an Arrow with an alchemical item (lets say Acid Flask)
Standard Action: Infuse same arrow with the power of his bomb
Results: Fire Arrow dealing: 1d8 + STR Bonus +1d6 Acid + 2d6+Splash to target on a hit.
Am I calculation this correctly?
|
Alchemical Weapon (Su): At 2nd level, a grenadier can infuse a weapon or piece of ammunition with a single harmful alchemical liquid or powder, such as alchemist’s fire or sneezing powder, as a move action. This action consumes the alchemical item, but transfers its effect to the weapon in question. The alchemical item takes full effect on the next creature struck by the weapon, but does not splash, spread, or otherwise affect additional targets. Any extra damage added is treated like bonus dice of damage, and is not doubled on a critical hit. The alchemical treatment causes no harm to the weapon treated, and wears off 1 minute after application if no blow is struck. At 6th level, a grenadier can use her alchemical weapon ability as a swift action. At 15th level, this ability becomes a free action. This ability replaces poison resistance.
When you hit level 6, you could move to draw and swift to infuse.
I feel like Alchemical Weapon should have the same intent as Explosive Missile almost, letting you draw and apply the item in the same action.
Alchemist class abilities take the time they say they take, with no additional time to ready components. Extracts are a standard action, not move+standard, or move or swift (with the right feats/traits), just standard actions. Similarly, bombs are standard actions (until they become "attacks" with Fast Bombs).
The Explosive Missile combo goes move action infuse, standard action load and fire explosive missile, for 1d8+Str+PBS+1d6+Int acid/fire + 2d6+Int bomb (splash 2+Int).
It's not entirely clear if Alchemical Weapon adds Int to damage; the Monster Codex version explicitly doesn't, which means A) the devs agree that the Field Guide version could reasonably be read to add Int to damage, and B) it's not intended to add Int to damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was actually looking up more about it and found an official answer from James Jacobs here.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The easy workaround is to be a tiefling alchemist with a prehensile tail. The tail grabs flasks as a swift action, move to click it on. I've been very successful with my alchemist that way.
In the longer run, using a bow also enables you to get Seeking, in case enemies use annoying Displacement, Mirror Image or Glitterdust. Pinpoint, then just close your eyes and think of Taldor.
And pick up a hybridizastion funnel for added silliness - you could combine alchemist fire & acid, sneezing powder or tangleburn bags.
It also brings up the question: if "the mixture has the effects of both component substances and creatures are affected as if hit by both" do you add your +Int for the splash weapons twice?
No, the easy workaround is using the ability right, and not nerfing it with rules that aren't there.
No, the easy workaround is using the ability right, and not nerfing it with rules that aren't there.Were you referring to me? ("easy workaround")
Nothing in the rules say that you have to draw the alchemical substance to transfer its power to a weapon. So the easy workaround is to not add that unstated step.
|
|
Nothing in the rules say that you have to draw the alchemical substance to transfer its power to a weapon. So the easy workaround is to not add that unstated step.No, the easy workaround is using the ability right, and not nerfing it with rules that aren't there.Were you referring to me? ("easy workaround")
Going by that logic, there's also nothing saying the substance needs to be on your person. Why not consume alchemical weapons straight from your opponents' backpacks? Or one that's sitting in a desk drawer in your lodge?
I think this is rather absurd. You're physically adding something to an arrow you're about to launch. Of course you need to have the substance at hand.
|
|
Nothing in the rules say that you have to draw the alchemical substance to transfer its power to a weapon. So the easy workaround is to not add that unstated step.No, the easy workaround is using the ability right, and not nerfing it with rules that aren't there.Were you referring to me? ("easy workaround")
Going by that logic, there's also nothing saying the substance needs to be on your person. Why not consume alchemical weapons straight from your opponents' backpacks? Or one that's sitting in a desk drawer in your lodge?
I think this is rather absurd. You're physically adding something to an arrow you're about to launch. Of course you need to have the substance at hand.
Well, by RAW, it doesn't specify that you have to have both items in hand. It says that as a Move Action, you can infuse the alchemal weapon to the ammunition.
Alchemal Extracts, Bombs, and Explosive Missiles are each drawn, blended, mixed, stirred, primed, and used all in 1 Standard Action. It's not a far leap that the alchemal weapon can be drawn and infused with the ammunition all in 1 Move Action.
Drawing the arrow is a Free Action. Coneptually, the flask of Lamp Oil could easily be still on the Alchemist's bandolier, perhaps with a little quick-pour faucet or one of those belt-mounted change dispensers.
It's quite a leap. Extracts, bombs and explosive missiles specifically call out that they deviate from the normal situation, where to manipulate that object you need to have it at hand.
Now, if you disagree with that, fine. Not my problem.
However, you should check if the GM agrees with that interpretation before you make a character dependent on it to function well. And if the character is intended for PFS, I would shy away from this because I think it won't fly at many tables.
No, the easy workaround is using the ability right, and not nerfing it with rules that aren't there.Going by that logic, there's also nothing saying the substance needs to be on your person. Why not consume alchemical weapons straight from your opponents' backpacks? Or one that's sitting in a desk drawer in your lodge?
I think this is rather absurd. You're physically adding something to an arrow you're about to launch. Of course you need to have the substance at hand.
.......
It's quite a leap. Extracts, bombs and explosive missiles specifically call out that they deviate from the normal situation, where to manipulate that object you need to have it at hand.
"going by that logic".
What, the absurd notion that actions, in particular supernatural actions, take the listed time?Or, you mean the context of the alchemist, who is already absurdly deft at manipulating substances in combat time?
Or, the absurd notion that abilities, taken in the most straightforward way, are meant to be usable (not necessarily good, but at least usable).
Furthermore, you claim that extracts are called out as not needing to be drawn. Are you sure about that? Could you quote me the relevant section?
Nice strawman, too.
|
|
What, the absurd notion that actions, in particular supernatural actions, take the listed time?
Or, you mean the context of the alchemist, who is already absurdly deft at manipulating substances in combat time?
Or, the absurd notion that abilities, taken in the most straightforward way, are meant to be usable (not necessarily good, but at least usable).Furthermore, you claim that extracts are called out as not needing to be drawn. Are you sure about that? Could you quote me the relevant section?
Nice strawman, too.
An alchemist can draw and drink an extract as a standard action.
Normally, drinking a potion requires a Move to retrieve and a Standard to drink it.
Drawing the components of, creating, and throwing a bomb requires a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
Normally, throwing a splash weapon requires a Move to retrieve and a Standard to throw it.
These abilities have specific text to change that. The Grenadier's alchemical weapon ability does not.
That doesn't make it unusable as you claim, just not as good. You can still draw and apply in a single round, or apply an already-drawn substance and then attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
These abilities have specific text to change that. The Grenadier's alchemical weapon ability does not.
Furthermore, you claim that extracts are called out as not needing to be drawn. Are you sure about that? Could you quote me the relevant section?An alchemist can draw and drink an extract as a standard action.
Okay, that was added in the late 2010 second printing. The first printing didn't mention that; apparently the writer in question thought it was sufficiently clear. Field Guide was written about the same time. So I'm still not convinced on this point.
That doesn't make it unusable as you claim, just not as good. You can still draw and apply in a single round, or apply an already-drawn substance and then attack.
I disagree, because the ability isn't just "move action to infuse". It's like this: At 2. level, where you only have one attack per round, you spend your move action. At level 6 (should probably have been level 8, TBH) it becomes a swift action, so you can do it once per turn and still full attack. At level 15, when you have 3 attacks, you can do it on every attack. It's not like level 15 suddenly adds the need to use swift actions for something else.
So, I maintain that "must spend a separate action to draw the item" is neither written nor obviously intended, and conflicts with how the ability seems to be intended to work.