The Vivisectionist: Need an Official Ruling

I posed this question in the Ultimate Magic PFS thread, but got no official answer to it.

The Vivisectionist alchemist archtype from UM replaces bombs with sneak attack, counting alchemist levels as rouge levels for purposes of sneak die. In PFS, the Alchemist gets Extra Bomb instead of Brew Potion as a first level feat. In PFS, does the Vivisectionist get a different feat, or is he stuck with one that modifies a class ability he no longer has?

I posed this question in the Ultimate Magic PFS thread, but got no official answer to it.

The Vivisectionist alchemist archtype from UM replaces bombs with sneak attack, counting alchemist levels as rouge levels for purposes of sneak die. In PFS, the Alchemist gets Extra Bomb instead of Brew Potion as a first level feat. In PFS, does the Vivisectionist get a different feat, or is he stuck with one that modifies a class ability he no longer has?

We're digging out of the PaizoCon hole but I wanted to jump in and say that we're working on this and that Alchemists with archetypes that don't get bombs will replace Extra Bombs with Expanded Arcana, which grants an additional 1st-level extract.

This will appear in Additional Resources in July since the June update has already been submitted to the web team.

Awesome! I didn't mean to be impatient, I do realize that PaizoCon kinda tied up the crew. It was just a question that has been bugging me since I got UM, and it's great to have an official answer.

We're digging out of the PaizoCon hole but I wanted to jump in and say that we're working on this and that Alchemists with archetypes that don't get bombs will replace Extra Bombs with Expanded Arcana, which grants an additional 1st-level extract.

This will appear in Additional Resources in July since the June update has already been submitted to the web team.

Alchemists don't qualify Expanded Arcana do they? The wording on the feat is "You can only take this feat if you possess levels in a class whose spellcasting relies on a limited list of spells known, such as the bard, oracle, and sorcerer."

The alchemist being a prepared caster that can learn all the spells on his class list seems to fall on the opposite end of the spectrum and be banned from taking this feat.

Any more word on this?
turn it into skill focus or maybe even weapon focus given the vivisectionists combat focus perhaps?

See my answer above. :)

Any more word on this?

turn it into skill focus or maybe even weapon focus given the vivisectionists combat focus perhaps?

Hyrum's answer above is pretty clear.

You get expanded arcana which grants an extra extract.

I think people's main point is that, by the rules, the feat doesn't do what Hyrum says it does normally. I wouldn't even try to reference it in the official post, just say that they get the extra 1st level extract instead of a bonus feat.

This will appear in Additional Resources in July since the June update has already been submitted to the web team.

Since some folks failed their perception checks.

Okay, fine, here's the obvious follow-up question:

Does the Expanded Arcana feat allow Alchemists to get an additional extract in PFS?

Or, put another way, are you changing the rules to allow this feat to do a number of things it says it doesn't do?

The obvious follow up answer is to wait until it gets put in the additional resources section so you can ask informed questions rather than making shots in the dark.

Except that right now this isn't a shot in the dark. And even if it is, the general shape of what we've been told is a pretty bad deal.

Expanded Arcana is a pretty good feat for the classes it was intended for, and its' wording pretty explicitly limits it to those classes.

Even leaving aside the spells/extracts thing, an extra formula in the spellbook is about equivalent to 25 GP.

I'm pretty sure Hyrum is still thinking of the playtest alchemist, back when they were prepared casters with a limited spell list. They're now prepared casters with unlimited spell lists - they can put any number of formulae into their book just like a wizard can.

This is just one of those times when the answer given flies in the face of common sense if you know what's going on. Obviously, we're stuck with it for a month (at least those of us with vivisectionists, I don't plan to play one) and asking questions about what we already know isn't out of line.

Everything you say was pointed out immediately after Hyrum's comment. Right now Hyrum and Mark are the only ones who know how it's going to be worded on the resources page. It's kind of hard to discuss something which we can only conjecture about based on a casual forum post.

And FWIW no-one is 'stuck' with it because it's not in the guide yet so it's not legal for play.

I think people's main point is that, by the rules, the feat doesn't do what Hyrum says it does normally. I wouldn't even try to reference it in the official post, just say that they get the extra 1st level extract instead of a bonus feat.

So? His explanation clearly defines how the feat should be applied to an Alchemist in this situation. What more explanation is needed?

I posted that Expanded Arcana is where we were leaning but that the July update would have the final ruling and it still will. Until the July update goes live you're stuck with Extra Bombs.

Hyrum.

I posted that Expanded Arcana is where we were leaning but that the July update would have the final ruling and it still will. Until the July update goes live you're stuck with Extra Bombs.

Hyrum.

Umm Hyrum, the point others are making is that they have no idea what Expanded Arcana is supposed to do for an Alchemist.

Special: You can only take this feat if you possess levels in a class whose spellcasting relies on a limited list of spells known, such as the bard, oracle, and sorcerer. You can gain Expanded Arcana multiple times.

Did you mean it to be a feat to give an extra extract per day? Akin to giving an extra spell slot?

Or are you in essence giving a wizard type caster a spell known?

-James

I posted that Expanded Arcana is where we were leaning but that the July update would have the final ruling and it still will. Until the July update goes live you're stuck with Extra Bombs.

Uh, I would like the Extra Bombs feat to be replaced with Dodge. Just sayin'. Please?

Hyrum Savage wrote:

I posted that Expanded Arcana is where we were leaning but that the July update would have the final ruling and it still will. Until the July update goes live you're stuck with Extra Bombs.

Hyrum.

Umm Hyrum, the point others are making is that they have no idea what Expanded Arcana is supposed to do for an Alchemist.

d20pfsrd on Expanded Arcana wrote:

Special: You can only take this feat if you possess levels in a class whose spellcasting relies on a limited list of spells known, such as the bard, oracle, and sorcerer. You can gain Expanded Arcana multiple times.

Did you mean it to be a feat to give an extra extract per day? Akin to giving an extra spell slot?

Or are you in essence giving a wizard type caster a spell known?

-James

Umm James, Hyrum said we won't know exactly what is planned until the new guide comes out.

Also, why would this suddenly change the way the feat works for other classes?

The feat would remain as written, except for the lone exception made for the Alchemist.

Why does everyone have to read things into statements that aren't there to be read?

I want to add my voce to those who want something other than an extra extract known. That would be negligible considering any alchemist can add more just as easy as a wizard.

Also, why would this suddenly change the way the feat works for other classes?

What are you talking about?? Who mentioned other classes?

Imagine if he said we're giving Quicken Spell to Fighters, or a quick memorization feat to oracles... it doesn't make any sense.

If you're going to make something out of whole cloth, why tie it to a feat for spontaneous casters?

-James

Can't we just ban the vivisectionist?

It breaks one of the rules and takes one of the most important aspects of the rogue class and gets away with it.

A vivisectionist can be a better rogue than a rogue.

I was thinking of making a vivisectionist for Pathfinder Society, but by the looks of it there are too many of them already...

Can't we just ban the vivisectionist?

It breaks one of the rules and takes one of the most important aspects of the rogue class and gets away with it.

A vivisectionist can be a better rogue than a rogue.

I was thinking of making a vivisectionist for Pathfinder Society, but by the looks of it there are too many of them already...

Heh... I made one and came to the conclusion that it really does just fine with no bonus feats. Getting an extra extract is a booby prize at best but it doesn't need anything. Of course the same could be said of the alchemist and Extra Bombs... but I don't think Extra Bombs is an amazing feat either. My alchemist character who bombs a lot rarely runs out.

Umm Hyrum, the point others are making is that they have no idea what Expanded Arcana is supposed to do for an Alchemist.

d20pfsrd on Expanded Arcana wrote:

Special: You can only take this feat if you possess levels in a class whose spellcasting relies on a limited list of spells known, such as the bard, oracle, and sorcerer. You can gain Expanded Arcana multiple times.

The limited list for the alchemist is one issue. The fact that alchemists are not spellcasters at all is another issue. Alchemists get alchemy, which results in the effect of spells, but they do not have the class ability "spells." They have no CL, but use their class level for effects that depend on CL. Some might see this as a pedantic distinction. Others might see it as a big deal. Intentionally stating that a feat is substituted, when it doesn't apply, is just moving the problem to another type of problem.

If Hyrum and Mark disagree regarding my observation that Alchemists are not spellcasters, maybe the work around would be for them to campaign with the designers to get the matter clarified through FAQ/Errata. It may merely be moot, given the limited list issue.

Andrew Christian wrote:

Also, why would this suddenly change the way the feat works for other classes?

What are you talking about?? Who mentioned other classes?

Imagine if he said we're giving Quicken Spell to Fighters, or a quick memorization feat to oracles... it doesn't make any sense.

If you're going to make something out of whole cloth, why tie it to a feat for spontaneous casters?

-James

What are you talking about? Seriously man. You post up some query about not understanding how this feat works for an alchemist (when Hyrum clearly stated what they were thinking about, which clearly explained what the feat would do for an alchemist) and then say something about a Wizard or some such.

It isn't rocket science. Should they go with what Hyrum originally posted, it is quite clear what the Alchemist will get, and it is also quite clear that will not change what anyone else who can take the feat will get.

So why are we generating questions that don't make any sense in relation to what was originally stated?

What are you talking about? Seriously man. You post up some query about not understanding how this feat works for an alchemist (when Hyrum clearly stated what they were thinking about, which clearly explained what the feat would do for an alchemist) and then say something about a Wizard or some such.

It isn't rocket science. Should they go with what Hyrum originally posted, it is quite clear what the Alchemist will get, and it is also quite clear that will not change what anyone else who can take the feat will get.

So why are we generating questions that don't make any sense in relation to what was originally stated?

I think you might be better served by actually reading my posts rather than skimming them and misunderstanding them by leaping to conclusions.

The feat in question doesn't work for Alchemists, and Hyrum's explanation isn't complete in what sense he means it. All of this can be found in my prior posts that you didn't really read for comprehension.

-James

Enough with the sniping back and forth, folks. We will have this cleared up in the next iteration of the Additional Resources. If anyone feels that further discussion on the topic is necessary, keep it civil. Thanks.

Skill Focus (Craft Alchemy) or Skill Focus (Knowledge [nature])

Not amazing but solid and IMO significantly better that a bonus extract.

Skill Focus (Craft Alchemy) or Skill Focus (Knowledge [nature])

Not amazing but solid and IMO significantly better that a bonus extract.

I agree, much better use for the extra feat. Good job guys!