Aricks's page

Organized Play Member. 71 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deriven Firelion wrote:

Why do alchemist lag behind? Most of the bombs get an item bonus to attack rolls. I have been giving him burn it on splash damage. My bad. He has an 18 intel. His splash is about to go up with the splash increase feat to 10 feet.

Clustered enemies are pretty common in our game. At least until they get hit a time or two by the alchemist, then they spread out.

It's a few little things really. Bombs get item bonus to attack so they're roughly equivalent to a potency rune weapon of equal level, but that's not the issue.

They only ever get expert proficiency. That's like a wizard or sorcerer only ever getting expert spell casting. It affects class DC checks, what few their are, but it also effects bomb attacks. Dex is also not your primary stat, so that's a tick behind. Also, there are no feats or abilities that actually help you land your attacks, except maybe Uncanny bombs.

So, if my expected party role is a buffer/debuffer, then why does my class DC not keep up against monster saves and my debuff ability works better if I hand it to the fighter next to me?

Roonfizzle Garnackle wrote:

Disclaimer: Alchemist is not a rabbit hole I've pursued. All numbers suggested are for the sake of discussion, and not to be treated as anything else.


But: It sounds like a potential optional 'fix' is something on the order of:

Gain Focus Pool: 1

Replace: Each day during your daily preparations, you gain a number of batches of infused reagents equal to your level + your Intelligence modifier.

With: gain a number of batches of infused reagents equal to 5 + your Intelligence modifier.

Spend 1 Focus over 1 minute to refill your Infused Reagent Pool.

Refocus as per normal 10 minute refocus options.

When a class feat gives you more Reagents, increase your pool by the listed amount, in case of rounding, round up.


Would something like this help? It seems like the issue is the quantity of reagents available at any given level, particularly the low end of things, and Focus pools have gone a long way to 'fix' that issue. This may have wide sweeping ripple effects that I'm not familiar enough with the class to see.

So do away with daily prep of items? Tempting, but I do like how with the alchemist you have that economy choice of prepping being cheaper than Quick Alchemy. That said, this idea is interesting.

One variation would be keeping daily prep but you could have a choice when you focused you flushed all your existing pre-made stuff, or if you could choose to keep some of them "active". I can see interesting game play options either way.

One immediate problem would be that you could QA a whole stack of elixirs of life, hand em out as fast as you make em, and then refocus to top back up again for stupid amounts of healing. If it was on par with other focus spell types of healing like lay on hands or good berry then I think balance would be ok. QA'ing a single healing elixir and then a refocus-like activity to get the reagent back instead of spending a focus point? That seems pretty balanced to me. I think I've seen this suggestion made before on the forums. You'd have to have some limit otherwise it would be too good, and being based on your max cap and what was still active in the form of prepped stuff would be a pain for bookkeeping to be sure.

It would still make sense to daily prep stuff since it's fun to hand out presents at the beginning of an adventure, but it would make adventures that run longer than expected be much less painful.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Deriven Firelion wrote:

All I know is in play the alchemist is doing immense damage and putting massive pressure on enemies.

He'll toss out a bomb doing 5 fire splash damage. He'll occasionally crit. Two fire bombs in a round against a group of 3 targets which he usually throws out a fire bomb at each target to get persistent damage going.

He'll hit two of the guys for 2d8+5 fire plus 3 PF. Then 5 splash damage to the other guys.

First Bomb:

Target 1: 2d8+5 + 3 PF
Target 2: 5 splash
Target 3: 5 splash

Second Bomb:
Target 1: 5 splash +3 PF
Target 2: 2d8+5 splash +3 PF
Target 3: 5 splash

After two bombs:
Target 1: 19 fire damage +3 PF
Target 2: 19 fire damage +3 PF
Target 3: 10 fire damage

So for one round of actions and 2 bombs, you're looking at 54 fire damage. That seems very good to me. And that is without crit.

So, the goblin alchemist with the burn it ancestry feat in a fight where they're using fire bombs against clustered enemies? I'm not surprised they did well, that is the one of the few places where a bomber alchemist can shine. That and swarms.

I've only had one encounter where I both had high enough initiative and the monsters were clustered enough to hit more than 2 monsters. Either they were too spread out or some of the party got into melee before I could attack. Unfortunately selective splash isn't a thing anymore beyond the main target.

Also, your splash damage seems off. Either they're level 4-9 with calculated splash and 18-19 int so should do 4 splash, or they're level 10+ and didn't take expanded splash (int mod+bomb splash). 5 is an odd number to end up on. Burn it doesn't apply to splash damage, I'm betting that's the problem. Assuming level 4-9 with the feats it should be 2d8+1, plus 4 splash and 3 persistent.

That 2nd bomb attack is going to be tough to land consistently as well because alchemists lag behind the martial classes with their attacks as far as proficiency goes. The fact that Dex isn't their primary stat puts them behind another point as well. You're more likely to only do splash on the 2nd or third attacks. Still handy in the above example but no persistent or additional dice damage.

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Damien Goreface wrote:
graystone wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
Perpetual Infusions lets you create lots of bottled lightning, which you can use to make enemies flat-footed. If you combine that with Wizard MC for Electric Arc, you have an all-day contribution while you can expend resources to deliver spike damage.
It doesn't say a lot for the class when you're saying 'once you hit 7th level and multiclass, you can actually contribute...'.

Yeah, if you twist it like that.

Level 1: you throw the occasional bomb, especially against monsters whose weakness you can target. But you can also make ranged attacks because you have good Dex. In our local group the elven alchemist used the ancestry feat to get bow proficiency, and it's not difficult for her to have enough bombs for the whole scenario now.

Level 2: you can pick up the wizard MC if you like. Multiclassing is not dirty in Pathfinder 2. I did wizard MC with my fighter because there were no exciting L2 feats for sword and board.

Level 3: oh hey you can get better bombs now. And it doesn't cost you any WBL, so you can also think about picking up a magical ranged weapon or finesse weapon.

Level 4: Calculated Splash looks nice.

Level 5: 50% more bombs.

Level 6: Debilitating Bombs are a nice setup for a mean twist on Perpetual Infusion, especially since it works at Class DC.

Level 7: Okay, now you just have unlimited lesser ammo.


I'm not saying the alchemist is as strong a class as the others, but I think it's not so bad as people claim. I do think that it's a class that requires more system mastery and some luck with the campaign (tendency towards enemies that have weaknesses).

Wen I sign up for class named "bomber alchemist", and read the description in the rulebook, I don't expect to be using a sling or crossbow for 50% or more of my attacks.

"During Combat Encounters...
You lob bombs at your foes, harry your enemies, and support the rest of your party with potent elixirs. At higher levels, your mutagens warp your body into a resilient and powerful weapon."

Replace that with

"Lob a bomb at a foe once during combat with hopefully the right kind of bomb, and the mobs are in the exactly right spot. You made your Recall Knowledge check right? Tough luck that it's a Religous or Nature check.

Shoot a crossbow/sling to harry your enemies, they probably won't notice you're there though.

Hand out the one or two elixirs you have at low level who's benefits outweigh the side effects.

Also just forget this mutagen part."

To me multi-classing, like an elven alchemist using a bow, is a trap pick that you'll have to retrain out of down the line, since they don't really improve and muti-classing as an alchemist is tough with all the mandatory feats you have to take to keep relevant.

It doesn't help either that the class feat choices feel so bland. Oh, I can throw my bombs 10 more feet now. I could take ranger multi-class to do the same thing but that extend range feat is a pre-req down the line so no can do.

Besides, if you have to pick certain ancestry feats or give up class feats for a dedication to be viable instead of going with what your class gives you, there's something fundamentally broken with the options available for you for the class.

Deriven Firelion wrote:

So far the alchemist has been highly effective and useful. Splash and persistent damage is big for the alchemist. It adds up over the course of battles. Then elixirs like mist form and cheetah provide useful group combat effects.

Cantrips on paper may look more effective. In place the alchemist is a nightmare to deal with usually deals the most damage in a combat.

An alchemist can brew endless 1st level bombs. A 1st lvl fire bomb does 1d8+6 and 3 PF damage on a hit with intelligence splash damage to all adjacent targets endlessly.

The alchemist in our group tries to stack acid and fire persistent damage in single target fights. That damage adds up when you're doing 2d6 PA and 3 or more PF.

I think the alchemist is another one of those classes that on paper is not impressive, but once you put it all together with feats is incredibly effective.

1d8 + 6, 3 persistent, and int mod splash at first level? Yeah, no, your math is really off. I wish alchemist fire were that impressive at level 1. Alch fire does 1d8 damage on direct hit, plus 1 splash. You can bump that up to 1d8 + 1 with 2 persistent if you take a goblin ancestry feat.

Unless you're talking perpetual fire bombs, which you also can't brew until level 7, and even then you can only pick 2 types, and you can't change it without retraining. Even then, a perpetual fire bomb thrown at level 7 will do....1d8 damage, 1 persistent, with 4 splash if you take the almost mandatory feat, and the same bump up if you take the goblin feat. Sticky bombs would do 1d8 with 5 persistent. You also can only get off at most 2 bombs that way per round as well.

All that being said, I agree with the sentiments made after this post. I'd love it if I could hand out a useful elixir/mutagen to my party members at the beginning of the adventure and then throw a few bombs in combat for useful debuffs and damage, falling back on a sling or crossbow as last resort, but until level 7 you can't really do that. You just don't have the reagents, even assuming your party even wants the mutagens, so far I haven't had any takers and I'm up to level 4 now.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vlorax wrote:

In one paragraph you argue that you'd run out of bombs doing 3 bombs a round for 5 rounds, and in the next you say persistent damage is useless because it doesn't last more than a turn or two because things die too fast.

What is the first bomber throwing bombs at for 5 rounds if they're all dead after 2?

5 rounds and then you're a crossbow peasant for the rest of the day. That also assumes you make nothing but bombs, so no toolkit elixirs, no healing elixirs, no mostly-useless mutagens. Persistent damage might be more useful at higher levels with sticky bombs and higher health monsters but it's going to be a slog to get there.

I think people are forgetting that critically missing with a bomb does zero damage, so you're only going to splash with that 3rd bomb a bit more than half the time.

Throwing limited inventory bombs for 2 to 4 points of splash damage each also feels asinine. Couple that with when a cantrip like electric arc, balance issues aside, does more damage to some monsters than your limited inventory fire bomb, it feels really lousy.

Given it's been a month with zero news it's looking more like there are no further alchemist fixes incoming, so it might be time to re-roll something useful while Season 1 of PFS is still going.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cyouni wrote:
Xethik wrote:
Cyouni wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Even discounting electric arc, optimized bomb builds just don't seem to keep up with the bottom baseline abilities of other classes. Poisons kind of do, if you have Powerful Alchemy to keep the DCs high and your target isn't immune, but the action economy prevents you from creating the poison, applying it, and making a Strike with it before it becomes inert. You either suck up the lower DCs (which make poison useless) or you need haste, or you need to pick up Enduring Alchemy.

Daily reminder that optimized bomb builds do more damage than optimized fighter archery builds pre-13th, before we talk about splash damage being dealt to everything in 10ft.

And then we can talk about debuffs and such.

Can you link a thread that further discusses this? Don't want to derail too much.

Here you are. I break down the numbers here, and then on request compare it to a triple shot fighter.

The quick summary is that alchemist damage is incredibly deceptive, due to how splash damage is also dealt on a failure.

Arrows are practically free, and much longer ranged. Bombs cost reagents. At level 13 you could do this for 18 rounds, if you made nothing but bombs. Make anything else, like quicksilver mutagen or any utility elixir, and that number goes down one round per item type.

Compare to the level 4 alchemist who is doing 2d8 + 4 splash with fire per attack, and if you do 3 a round you're out of bombs after the 5th round. Fighter is doing that much damage with each arrow and is much more likely to hit. Even worse if you try this before you get calculated splash.

Perpetual bombs get buffed a little if you have goggles, so they can stay current-ish, and combined with sticky bombs are tempting, except that I've hardly ever seen persistent damage work for more than a turn or two. Granted this is lower levels but do monsters really last that much longer at higher levels? Quick alchemy starts eating into actions as well until you get double batch.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Watery Soup wrote:

Just because the alchemist is weak doesn't mean you can't have fun.

Unless you're super attached to the concept of an alchemist, it's way easier to find something else than to try "fixing" the class.

My alchemist played in one adventure when she was pretty useless outside of a few key Society checks. And then in another adventure where she decimated foes with energy damage. I had fun in both adventures, and I'll keep playing the class even though I suspect the combat problems only get worse with level.

I'm all about having fun with a class. Alchemists have good out of combat skills, are fun to role play, and quick alchemy is a great means to have a out of combat toolkit to creatively solve problems. That toolkit will only grow as more material is published.

If you were doing a custom campaign with a regular group and GM it wouldn't be an issue.

However, if you're playing a bomber alchemist in PFS scenarios (I can't speak for muties or chirros) you have to be able to pull your weight in a fight or your party suffers for it. Every additional player adds to the difficulty of the fights, and if half your party dies because you couldn't do enough damage, or de-buff, or whatever it is the design of a bomber alchemist is supposed to do well in a fight, you're a liability.

And that feeling sucks, and it's what I see every time I play anymore as I gain levels.

I honestly wonder if the people who write the PFS scenarios feel bad for alchemists because I've seen a lot of swarms pop up recently and it's the one thing we can stomp without a sweat.

Alchemist goggles help with bombs too. +1 at level 4, for 100gp.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Starting at level 6 is actually better than it could be, early levels as an alchemist are painful. Shroudb's suggested changes also really help things much more than core rules.

That said, here's my suggestions:

Have her buy Alchemist Goggles, it gives a +1 to hit with bombs. She should have 16+ dex and int for attributes. Make sure she's figuring in the fact that the level 3 bombs are +1 to hit. Touch AC isn't a thing anymore so go for the lowest AC targets if possible.

The bad news is she'll never do as much damage as a Martial class.No one is supposed to anymore apparently. You can come close but only with a long rest in between every encounter and making almost nothing but bombs. Best bet is to daily prep an inventory of bombs as well as elixirs that are useful to yourself or party members (mistform for the fighter, eagle eye for trap finding, healing, etc.)

An assortment of pre-made bombs lets you target elemental weaknesses, but I've found most critters don't tend to have any, so you can't really count on it. Acid bombs look good in theory but in practice I've rarely had them do much damage since the rest of my party killed things before the persistent damage kicked in more than once. So, throw fire or electrical bombs if no resistances or weaknesses. Splash damage is a trivial amount of damage but it can help on the rare times when you can hit more than once critter at once. Plus, she'll be the death of any swarm that shows up, so that's nice.

Mutagens are mostly useless below level 11, I've never successfully had a teammate want one despite trying to hand them out every adventure. The drawbacks are worse than the buffs mostly, but quicksilver might be useful to the ranger and herself as long as they can healing kit the damage it does after it wears off.

Basically, the best they can do is use their perpetual bombs to apply status de-buffs on the enemies. Dazzled is a good option, as well as flat-footed. Perpetual electrical bombs are a good pick, since it can apply both of those if it hits. Deafening enemy casters can cause their spell casts to fail as well.

Pre-poisoning melee and thrown weapons is also an attractive option, since with your house rules the poison DC will be high enough to maybe actually affect things. Don't poison ammo though since it's destroyed on use, whereas you don't use up melee poison until you hit.

There's a balance between what an alchemist makes for their daily prep and what they make using quick alchemy, and that takes trial and error to find what matches their play-style unfortunately. It also varies a lot depending on level as well as the nature of a particular adventure (several encounters in one day or over several days with long rests in between). Makes it hard to make any recommendations but 2/3 daily 1/3 quick isn't a bad starting place.

To correct some information, smoke sticks can't be thrown, but smoke bombs plus cat's eye's elixirs can be a nice combo. It'll annoy and affect your teammates unless you can afford to hand out elixirs to everyone though.

Throwing 3 bombs to do splash damage is a waste of ordinance, unless they're perpetual bombs. Fun fact: all levels of bombs do the same damage for splash if you take Calculated Splash, only if you take expanded splash at 10 can you actually add your int mod to the splash damage. So, with 20 int, at level 10, your regular bombs will do 7 splash the perpetuals will do 6. Unfortunately your bombs also become radius 10 instead of 5 so it becomes even less likely you'll be able to throw them without hitting a teammate, but the 1 or 2 point damage buff might be worth it?

Beyond that, hopefully the folks at Paizo come out with some alchemist fixes soon.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Miy2Cents wrote:
...When you use Knockdown...

Still the most important part. You're still using Knockdown, and Knockdown is 2 actions.

I think the confusion here is that regular Knockdown acts like those other multi-attack feats where you make 2 strikes, rolled separately, but MAP doesn't apply until after both, so you get your second attack with no penalty, and a third regular strike would be -10 or whatever. So with Knockdown you get to do your Trip action at the same time as the strike and you don't take MAP on it.

Improved Knockdown just states that, when you use Knockdown, instead of rolling a Strike and then rolling a Trip, you just roll a Strike, and if it hits you apply the critical Trip automatically.

No where does it state that it reduces the Action cost of Knockdown. The Strike performed is part of Knockdown, not a separate action.

What is the current status of the "These aren't all the fixes we're working on" that were mentioned after the first release of errata? I'm hoping alchemist fixes are in there and that they get released sometime before the new classes get released.

Miy2Cents wrote:
...When you use Knockdown...

This is the part that matters.

I think you're reading too much into the description. Knockdown is two actions. Improved knockdown just makes Knockdown better, but you're still using the 2 action Knockdown ability whether it's regular or improved.

Yeah, I figured the die damage doubled, the splash doesn't, but wasn't 100% sure about the extra point the acid bomb does.

That's a faq candidate right there, what damage is doubled upon a critical hit with a alchemical bomb? Specifically, is it only the die damage or is it everything besides splash? Would a crit with lesser alchemical fire thrown by a goblin with burn it feat do (1d8 +1) * 2 damage plus 4 persistent or 1d8 *2 + 1 and 3 persistent damage? Or something else?

Reading the crit hit rule again makes me think everything doubles except splash.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's how it's in the book, and a PFS GM and I both agreed that seems like a correct interpretation when that scenario happened to me, so I'd say yes.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for starting this thread. I was going to do so myself but I had to take the kiddos trick or treating :)

I'm going to paste here part of what I put in the advice fourm in a post about mutagenists, mainly regarding reagent improvements:

"One thing I can think of that might help is modify how infused reagents work. You get twice what you have now but each is only good for one elixir/bomb/mutagen, and it takes 2 to do quick alchemy. That way you could have a wider selection of pre-prepped elixirs on hand, especially for ones that you only really need one per day of. Also, you could get a small number of free reagents that only apply for your research field. So, for example, a bomber could hand out goodies to the team without reducing themselves to a crossbow peasant."

I really like the idea Zwordsman had regarding the ability to refocus and get at least a few infused reagents back to be able to whip up something for the party. As it is now I'd never, ever use infused reagents on something like a sunrod or worse, a tindertwig. One of the things I really liked about the PF1 alchemist was the "bag of tricks" feel. Party falling into a pit? Throw an impact foam. Need to buy time to retreat in a dungeon? Coral boulder and a create water orison from the cleric.

That was fun for me. I could hand out infusions to help the party, throw bombs for damage or status effects, and in downtime craft a few odds and ends for emergencies.

If you look at the "Roleplaying the Alchemist" section of the core rules it doesn't feel like you can really do any of that. You can throw bombs, or make elixirs, or make mutagens that hurt you more than they help you. That might improve with time as more items are added but do people have to wait a year for a class to be viable and fun?

Cyouni wrote:
Aricks wrote:

Can you link that damage line? I'm curious as to the exact scenario where that happens, because it seems unlikely to me.

Also, a longbow fighter can carry many, many more arrows than an alchemist can carry bombs. Throwing all your bombs in one fight doesn't seem like a reasonable comparison. Range is also a thing to consider.

The exact point I was checking was level 12, versus 34 AC. Assuming a longbow fighter uses Point-Blank Shot, they have +25 to hit, 3d8+5 damage (18.5 on hit, 48 on crit). This averages 14.05 damage on the first shot, assuming 20 Dex, 18 Str.

The bomber alchemist has +22 to hit with 18 Dex and expert, and alchemist's fire does 3d8 damage...but a bomber alchemist has 8 splash, and that's where a lot of the damage sneaks in. This averages 21.5 damage on hit, 35 on crit, and 8 on fail. Overall averages 14.35 damage - and it should be noted that it also has a 10 ft splash of 8 damage.

At level 15, it's a lot worse for the bomber unless it can start catching good numbers of enemies in the splash. I didn't bother checking against other similar martial-types, but I suspect it probably wouldn't be too good for the bomber, again due to the fact that it's running off caster weapon proficiency at that point.

Why not have the fighter use Triple Shot? That seems like more of an equal comparison since both classes need two class feats to get their respective abilities. That gives the fighter 3 attacks at +21 instead of +25, and I'd be surprised if it wasn't tilted back to the fighter again. Also, a fighter can carry hundreds of arrows, a bomber alch can carry 48 at level 12 if they make nothing but bombs.

Cyouni wrote:
HeHateMe wrote:
Faenor wrote:
It's kind of crazy that the majority of the community agreed that Mutagenist alchemists were clearly underpowered and when Paizo had one chance to at least fix it a bit with the errata, they added such an underwhelming and situational ability as Mutagenic Flashback. Looking at the reactions on the forum, it's already one of the most discussed and disliked changes. So disappointing.

I'm not even sure why the developers hate on the Alchemist so much. Going back to 1e, Alchemist was a very popular class. The two most popular builds were the Mad Bomber and the Mr. Hyde builds. Paizo effectively killed both those builds in 2e because a) Bombs are trash, and b) Mutagen is even worse.

The only viable build these days is to go Chirurgeon and be a healbot. At this point there are no fixes for the Alchemist. It's so bad they need to just go back to the drawing board and come up with "Unchained Alchemist".

There are literally points in the damage line where alchemist bombs outdamage a longbow fighter, on a single target. If alchemist needs any help, it's really just getting master proficiency in attacks somewhere after 13th (though that actually might send bomber alchemists into the overpowered zone, so I'm unsure that's actually a decent solution).

Can you link that damage line? I'm curious as to the exact scenario where that happens, because it seems unlikely to me.

Also, a longbow fighter can carry many, many more arrows than an alchemist can carry bombs. Throwing all your bombs in one fight doesn't seem like a reasonable comparison. Range is also a thing to consider.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Not to derail or anything, but I've had a similar experience with my bomber alchemist.

For the most part the mutagens aren't worth using, with the whole "2e tight math" paradigm nobody wants to take a big hit on a save for a minor buff. Some of the elixirs are neat (Eagle Eye, Cat's Eye, Comprehension, Bravo's Brew) but are pretty situational, and the rest are either too short duration or even more situational, or aren't worth the reagent cost (Cheetah). Antidotes and Anti-plagues are nice, if you took them before you were diseased or poisoned, but limited reagents at low level means you can't just have them lying around.

I've heard the argument that Alchemists are a buffer class first and shouldn't be trying to do damage, but what do you do when no-one wants your buffs because the penalty is too high and the rest of your buffs are situational at best?

I guess I hand two Eagle Eyes to the rogue, two Elixirs of life each to the fighter and barbarian, 4 bombs on the off chance I run into a swarm or 3 mooks happen to be in just the right spot where I won't hit my teammates (for a whopping 1 extra splash damage,woo!), and one quick alchemy for emergencies.

And spend every combat round shooting a crossbow shot or two. Maybe toss in a distraction or intimidate check to shake things up. I mean, useful, maybe, but not really fun.

One thing I can think of that might help is modify how infused reagents work. You get twice what you have now but each is only good for one elixir/bomb/mutagen, and it takes 2 to do quick alchemy. That way you could have a wider selection of pre-prepped elixirs on hand, especially for ones that you only really need one per day of. Also, you could get a small number of free reagents that only apply for your research field. So, for example, a bomber could hand out goodies to the team without reducing themselves to a crossbow peasant.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
Aricks wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:


let's assume we have seen other things not in this document for the purpose of this thread and talk about what is in the document. At least it would make it easier for us from a standpoint of hearing feedback on the document's content to keep it to that, the better to hear from you about what you think on the changes we did include for this first document...

Fair enough!

The backpack changes are nice, a useful change.

It seems unfair that alchemical crafting needs a 6 bulk item when other crafting only needs a 2 bulk item.

So I think there's some confusion over this. Alchemist tools are all you need for your daily preparations or anything outside of downtime mode. The lab is specifically for crafting during downtime mode. As written, you need a whole work space to do downtime mode for anything else. If you want to craft metal objects you need a Smith workshop complete with a forge. By contrast, your 2 bulk repair kit is only for repairs, not downtime crafting.

The lack of a blacksmith kit you can buy with set bulk doesn't mean you can craft without one. It means you can't actually carry an entire forge and such. The lab let's you Craft while in the field, which is something no other Crafter can do. (Barring very simple stuff like carving wooden stakes or whatever.)

The only exception is Snares, but those are specifically meant to be built in the field. You can also use them to craft during downtime, but you probably won't actually do that anyway. Still, that makes Snare and Alchemy Crafters the only Crafters who can feasibly carry everything they need for proper crafting into the field.

I see what you mean, I didn't see the bit before in the Craft item section that says you may need a workshop. So, actually a buff to alchemists since theoretically we can be out in the field and be able to craft stuff, assuming you can stuff your 6 bulk lab into a bag of holding or have a pack animal of some sort.

I see they also lowered the price of Alchemy Tools to 3gp. So only 1/5 of your starting gold instead of 1/3, which is progress of a sort. Still seems kinda pricey since you still need to buy armor and weapons. Maybe get a free set along with your formula book?

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:


let's assume we have seen other things not in this document for the purpose of this thread and talk about what is in the document. At least it would make it easier for us from a standpoint of hearing feedback on the document's content to keep it to that, the better to hear from you about what you think on the changes we did include for this first document...

Fair enough!

The backpack changes are nice, a useful change.

It seems unfair that alchemical crafting needs a 6 bulk item when other crafting only needs a 2 bulk item.

The mutagenist change seems underwhelming for a core research bonus, once per 10 minutes, maybe focus based, seems like good idea.

Ammo destroyed on use changes item values a bit (can't recover poisoned arrows, can you recover poisoned darts or daggers?). Also, no more poisoning bows. I didn't see anything on how long an item is poisoned after application, so I'm assuming it doesn't expire.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
shroudb wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
shroudb wrote:
i dont find a playstyle of 9/10 you miss 1/10 you hit and insta-win to be particulary "fun".

I think it is fine if that is just one part of the class's kit, especially given that it is 7/20ths and you can adjust that through tactics.

Also, Maxastro makes a point and I will also not that you can catch up your second stat at level 5.

and be down again at level 10.

everyone can increase his success rates with the same tactics, only alchemist has literally 2/3rds the accuracy of ALL other classes (including warpriest)


the erratta was an utter disappointment as well.

"once/day" that is a joke at best, they could save some face and simply remove the ability altogether, that's about how useful it is.

So it's worth half an infused reagent and maybe saves you an action. Yeah.

Apparently future fixes are forthcoming. I won't hold my breath.

Mark Seifter wrote:

Hope you guys find the errata helpful in your games!

As a reminder from Lyz in the blog post: "We should note that not every problem has been addressed in this document. Some are a bit complicated, and the solution is going to take more time to fully test before releasing it to all of you. Just because you don’t see an answer here doesn’t mean that we aren’t aware of and considering the issue—we’re likely just trying to figure out the best way to handle it."

Thanks, my first edit got eaten by the forum monsters, otherwise it would have been there sooner. Don't think we don't appreciate the hard work, we do, we just get passionate about beloved classes and mechanics.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, the Bulk fixes are nice. I'm underwhelmed otherwise.

Are there any plans for any of the class issues brought up for Alchemists? I was hoping we'd see them here, and that doesn't seem to be the case.

Also, it appears shields that do things when you block with them are still apparently one use items, since at their appropriate level they'll get destroyed with one block.

Edit: Missed the "not every problem has been addressed in this document" bit. Hopefully future fixes are incoming not too long in the future. I think it'd be appreciated if there was a "we've noticed concerns about _____ and we're working on it"

That way we can be more selective about what we debate and what may still need to be reported.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So alchemists get a kit bulk fix and a mutagenist fix.

Apparently nothing else? I personally don't think it was funny that the review was skipped over.

Themetricsystem wrote:

The tradeoff for having less accuracy is that accuracy doesn't really matter because... well they never fail to actually damage the target unless you choose a bomb which the target is resistant to.

In this way, they're significantly better than spells, esp since as I mentioned, you can easily hoard up to 10-20x as many of them on your person as any spellcaster has slots to cast with.

They don't need an accuracy buff IMO. If anything they need better critical specialization benefits but nothing in terms of to-hit.

How much damage do you think bombs do when they miss? They do 1. Not 1 persistent or 1 plus effects, just one. At level 3 they do 2. At level 11(!) they do 3.

Also, spend money to craft bombs in Downtime? That seems like an immense waste of money. You're looking at 1.5 gold per bomb minimum, plus bulk issues. It'd be no different than a wizard crafting scrolls for 2g each, except better because 1st level spells exceed bombs in almost every way.

Staffan Johansson wrote:

The thing is that feats in PF2 generally don't affect your math all that much - what they do is add additional options or improve your action economy. You could essentially play a ranger with 0 class feats and you'd still do OK. The character would be mechanically boring, but the numbers would work out fine (though Hunted Shot is pretty sweet).

What I'd do for a rounded ranger with an animal companion is identify what the main feats for having a companion are: 1 Animal Companion, 6 Mature Animal Companion, 10 Incredible Companion, and 16 Specialized Companion. That's 4 out of 11 feats, leaving 7 for diversification and/or taking some of the less essential companion feats.

This might be the case for Rangers, and I think it's great if that's the case. I haven't read that much on the other classes, is it most people's experience that class feats are set up the same way?

I would have liked it for Alchemists to get the same treatment with their class feats. Alchemist feat choices are "extend your range 10 feet" or "increase your damage by 2 points" and you have to take them to get better feats down the road.

The problem is that you have to weigh being Legendary in Crafting vs being Legendary in Stealth or Athletics, and on that front it really doesn't cut it.

Being able to quick repair something in 1 action sounds nice in theory, but you can't actually do it in practice, just with the logistics of equipped items. Plus, you can't do it while flying or in water or anything like that.

Crafting theoretically saves you some money, maybe, in some cases. You might get an edge case where you can fix something quickly in combat, assuming you have both hands free, are on solid ground, and have your kit in a bandolier.

Legendary Stealth can be used almost constantly both in and out of combat and will save your character's life.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Any information on the nature and schedule of release of alchemist class and equipment fixes/errata would be greatly appreciated. See numerous already created and commented threads, including the homebrew section, for details.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I can't get anyone in my parties to use mutagens due to the side effects. The elixirs are nice but until you get a few levels they don't last long enough. Plus, if you're a bomber you can't do much buffing as it eats into your bomb supply.

The "you can tailor your attacks to weaknesses" argument isn't bad, but the big issue I have with it are 1: not that many things have weaknesses at low levels and 2: if you're saving reagents to tailor your bomb attacks then you're throwing half as many bombs, specifically int mod plus level. You'd better hope that you're going to run into things with weakness otherwise you've made yourself even less effective.

I'm hoping my alchemist gets fun later because at level 2 it's really not. It doesn't help that many of the class feats are either boring math fixes or just so situational or clumsy as to be useless.

To list a few...

Alchemical savant
Smoke bomb
Efficient alchemy
Combine elixirs
Elastic mutagen
Extend elixir

Zwordsman wrote:

Alchemist Crossbow is what you're thinking of But it does not launch the bombs. It just lets you plug it into the crossbow, and then apply to 3 arrows (all 3 must be used within 1min of the first shot), it only adds elemental damage. It does not give any bomb's effect.

Its nice for targeting elemental weakness. But its not great for a bomb a lchemist--because its 2 handed weapon, which means you can't draw items very easily. So it really bad for a Bomber. But can be decent for churri or mutis.

this weapon, unless another new xbow has come out I missed anyway

Also it's uncommon so practically unless you run that AP you'll never be able to get it.

If you want to increase range have them take far lobber at lvl 1 and uncanny bombs at lvl 12. Could also take a dedication in ranger as that lets you extend your range on your hunted target.

So from reading the Boon section of the Organized Play guide, do I have it correct that Boons purchased as well as obtained from Chronicle sheets can be maintained like an inventory, and slotted and used as needed on a per adventure basis?

Or, once a boon in slotted it remains there until you sell it or use it up (in the case of limited use boons).

From the rules reading I'm 90% sure it's the former but that 10% remaining prompting this post.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Apophenia wrote:
From my look over of this feat (Efficient Alchemy) it does look bad if you are just considering money made and saved. However if you are making things that you can not purchase and are willing to pay full price for them it literally doubles the speed you make them at.

It doesn't though, unless you're making things way below your level.

If you are making 8 of something it takes you 4 less days, that's all, because the total cost is the same.

I'd be hard pressed to find a worse class feat but I can't say so definitively because I haven't read them all. Maybe another alchemist feat.

Edit: I misread your post, you are correct, it does double your craft speed if you pay full price. So all we need are consumables that are worth the cost and we're set. That's another thread though :)

inshal chenet wrote:
So I have noticed that Charisma is still stuck as the only "true dump stat." What if instead of having a Focus Pool limit of 3 it was 1 + Cha mod? Would that be balanced?

IMO cha isn't a dump stat anymore. Consider the utility of deception and intimidate with the current action economy with MAP. Being able to do anything useful with that 2nd or third action is really good.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Aricks wrote:
So is there a sticky post? A blog post? An offhand comment in a thread or stream does not effective community feedback make.
It was in a thread where people specifically asked the question. And I certainly wouldn't object to a stickied message, but it's still better to have information than not have it.

Fair enough on that point. Maybe their community relations person could have a running sticky post with all official comments so they're easy to see?

To get back to the subject of the thread, I think they could take a page from some software and game development companies and post out their planned changes and content, so that reasonable debate and discussion regarding it could be made. Granted you will always have opinions that can be ignored for a variety of reasons but community feedback on beta test versions of systems be enormously useful. See Stellaris by Paradox Interactive and their dev diary blog posts for example.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Aricks wrote:
And not a peep from the developers on the nature or timeline of a fix in any way?

This part isn't true. Jason Bulmahn has stated that some errata-type stuff will be out before the October APG Classes playtest. So we do have a timeline.

Personally, I don't think PF2 has had more errors than most RPG books I've seen. Or not too many more anyway.

And even if it does, that seems to be less true going forward. I think I've noticed one whole error in the LOWG (the Aldori Dueling Sword should be 2 GP rather than 20 GP). One error is not a big deal, IMO.

So is there a sticky post? A blog post? An offhand comment in a thread or stream does not effective community feedback make.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Watery Soup wrote:

There's always going to be a baseline error rate, even if they're so slow it infuriates the players and even if they hire an army of proofreaders.

I don't think there are any egregious examples of them making huge mistakes that could have been caught with minimal effort. All of the ones I know of seem to be minor errors that took a lot of work to find.

That seems acceptable to me.

So it's a minor problem for a specialization of a class to have two defining features literally not do anything? And not a peep from the developers on the nature or timeline of a fix in any way?

Because that seems like more than a minor error, it seems like something rushed out the door to meet a deadline.

Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Do we have a math wizard that can put up a comparison between getting items via Crafting and getting them via gold Earned with Downtime?

It all depends on the cost of the item and what level of job is available to you in a town versus your level. If 4 days of jobs is more than half the cost of the item then you're losing money crafting.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quintessentially Me wrote:

I suspect you will have better luck asking the devs about specific design decisions (e.g. why do the mutagens provide the negative modifiers they provide when that also negates much of the survivability a mutagenist would need in combat?) than about class roles.

It appears to me that the intent was for each class to be able to operate in almost any role depending on focus, from melee to ranged, from damage dealing to condition application.

Moreover, if the devs were to weigh in and state what they expected a character to be doing if they are a particular class or build (i.e. role), it would lend social weight to the expectations placed on anyone running such a class/build, and that flies in the face of the build freedom they appear to be striving for.

Oh, I'm all for flexibility on choosing how to build a character, a fighter with a healing kit, a wizard practicing trap finding, etc. But you also expect a fighter to be good with weapons, a wizard to cast damage and utility spells, that's the kind of class role I meant, since alchemist isn't one of the classic classes that's been around since the 70's.

Edit: class description from the crd:
You lob bombs at your foes, harry your enemies, and support the rest of your party with potent elixirs. At higher levels, your mutagens warp your body into a resilient and powerful weapon.

As it is, if I'm throwing bombs I'm not going to have reagents to buff the party, and mutagens are available at first level and not exactly anything to write home about. Neither are bombs for that matter but that's a whole other thread.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Joey Cote wrote:

I was looking at the 11th level bombs and just not understanding the design here. Needing an attack roll they basically do 3 dice of damage, do 3 persistent damage, and get a +2 to hit. But an 11th wizard using their electrical cantrip does 5d4 on up to two targets with a reflex save. The damage seems pretty much the same. And the cantrip damage actually goes up far faster then the bomb damage. The bomb's splash damage is pretty insignificant, even with feat that using their int modifier instead of the normal splash damage. At 11th level that is probably only +2 more damage then the base, +3 if the GM is generous and gave the player a +2 int modifying magic item. The bombs do have secondary effects, but only the lightning bomb's causing the target to become flat footed seems very significant.

Nothing about the alchemist makes me even vaguely want to play one. The extracts are basically weak spells and there isn't enough variety. Moderate healers so long as whatever your fighting doesn't have attacks of opportunity or your people aren't weapon and shield fighters. Mutagens .... are not impressive and have drawbacks which I just don't understand the need for. Poisons could be good but as others have said, monster fortitude saves are probably going to be their best save and if you go that route you're going to want to poison your buddy's weapons since they are going to be more likely to hit then you are. And they need to run for multiple rounds to do much.

It would be nice if we could hear from anyone vaguely official what the class role for the alchemist is supposed to be. Theoretically it seems like the alchemist is a buffer class, with debuffer/ranged damage, healer, and melee damage sub-classes. In practice it seems the alchemist can't really buff for any amount of useful time, and the buffs compete resource wise with your research focus. I liked in pf1 as an alchemist at 4th level I could hand out infusions to the party to help them and then throw bombs to help out.

I kinda like the "research focus gets a tier higher" idea, so the mutagenist not only buffs themself but the party too, the bomber is stronger at range and the focus I can't spell heals better for more action cost.

None of these seem overwhelmingly overpowered, but then I'm looking through the eyes of another fan of the class so I may potentially be biased.

Maybe for bomber and Mutagenist, have the option to use Int instead of Dex/Strength for attack rolls? Dex and Strength are still strong but Int stays your primary. Mutagenist still seems to need Strength, Dex, Con, and Int in the current rules and your version in either case, which isn't great. Not quite sure what I would do with that. Maybe Int bonus to attack damage, kinda like knowing exactly where to land a hit?

Having everything infused use Class DC might be overpowered, but honestly I think not. Letting you use lower level poisons and bombs but still be able to land effects with them for a trade off for damage is fair I think. Especially if alchemists are to be a buffer/debuffer class.

I think if you made Arcane Alacrity additive 2 or 3 instead of 4 would be fair too, it is a more improved version of the previous feat, and I think there are similar feats running around.

Now all it needs is to be officially accepted by Paizo so I can use it in PFS and it'd be perfect.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
So in your game NPCs are just rolling around in enough gold that everyone and their dog can throw hundreds of gold away on something they might on,y use a handful of times in their life? What a strange setting you’ve chosen to play in. I hope it’s fun for you.

Again, you're not addressing the point. The crafting rules are in the book. The item prices are in the book. There are several examples, and I bet we could find more, where the price of a consumable is not significantly less than that of a wand or other permanent item, and e think that's a problem. Some of us who play PFS only work with gold and not what we find in a dungeon, so it matters to us.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:

It only makes less sense if you pretend it does.

As for your prices: please show me where in the rules it says how much an NPC, who has trained all their life, has to pay in materials and labour to create a potion. And then show me the costs they have to pay for permanent magic items.

You can buy a wand of longstrider for 160 gp. 10 speed for 8 hours once per day. You can buy a greater cheetah elixir for 110gp, 10 speed for an hour, once.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
vagabond_666 wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:

Most people in the world don't need to gain the effects of a consumable multiple times in a year and instead keep the items on hand for rare situations. Those who do need the effect of a consumable on a regular basis and aren't so wealthy as to be able to throw money away, buy the permanent magic item version and learn how to activate it.

John, I'm not sure why Shroud has wandered off into this area of discussion with you.

The in setting justifications and what the NPCs are doing and all that jazz are secondary to the main point.

This is a game about the player characters. The player characters have the resources they have and the requirements that they have.

Based on those factors and the price of consumables, no player in their right mind will buy consumables, or do anything with consumables they find except sell them and buy permanent items instead.

As a result the entire consumables section of the core rule book, and most likely any future published materials regarding consumbles, are just wasted ink.

It doesn't matter how you try and explain the existence of something if the players are going to deliberately avoid having anything to do with it, because it isn't worth their while.

That is a completely valid point. I don’t have an answer for that. I’m just point out that shroudb’s hysterical screaming about the in game reality is only true because he chooses to make it true.

Of course, how often is a local town going to want to buy a potion of acid resistance?

It seems like he's trying to reinforce the point made above, that consumables aren't worth crafting, buying or really anything besides vendor fodder, and I'd agree with him.

I think this has been shown with the original post about the longstrider wand. Maybe we should come up with a list of additional examples for the developers. Either it gets ignored, or wands nerfed, or consumables buffed, and we can voice how we want it to go.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Let's do the math. Assuming no crit successes, a greater cheetah elixir takes 17.75 days to craft at level 9 with master crafting. A wand of longstrider takes 24 with the same skill.

For that cost I could craft the proverbial barrel of them and just apply them to my teammates as needed once every 8 hours.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
Bastress wrote:

That's extremely handy to know of if you're in a party that's complaining about you holding them back.

and it's really nice that you can pass that item around on a daily basis to make sure that the party isn't slowed down by someone when you're doing long treks through the wilderness, then hand it back to the superfast one when you expect a fight against whatever you're tracking.

Now the alchemist can keep up when carrying his basic gear! :P

This makes me laugh, and that's good because laughing helps me cover up the crying.

I say that because for an item only 7 levels higher (level 9) and 50 gp less (110 gp) you can have that same speed buff in the form of an elixir that only works once and only lasts an hour! Crafting costs being what they are that means that an alchemist would probably be better off picking up the craft magic item feat and cranking out wands than they would making alchemical items in their downtime.

Yet another example of alchemical awesomeness.

Zwordsman wrote:

erm possibly stupid question.

You're allowed to craft in PFS for P2E? Last I knew for PFS (and P1E) was that you weren't allowed to craft at all. So the Society allows for it in 2nd edition? d-play-basics/

You have to do it right after a session which is tough since sometimes you're down to the wire on time but it appears so yes.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ed Reppert wrote:
IIRC, an alchemist can make infused bombs and elixirs essentially for free.

They can, in a limited number and they work for that day before they evaporate or whatever, but my concern is more for viability of the skill Crafting in general and for PFS. I'd love it if an alchemist I was going to play could crank out a few extra elixirs of whatnot during downtime, it would mean I could carry more bombs or other tool items whipped up using the alchemist infused reagents, but if I start on 4 minor elixirs of life at 1st level and don't finish them until after I'm 2nd I'm not sure if that's viable.

Fallyna wrote:
Aricks wrote:

Let's say you make a batch of 4 minors and you are level 4 with expert in crafting.

If you critically succeed it would take you 10 days. A PFS character gets 8 to 12 days of downtime between adventures.

Its not quite that bad, because alchemical elixirs, bombs etc normally have the consumable trait, so you can craft them in batches of 4 with a single check. That lets you churn them out at 1/day with normal success rolls, starting at 1st level if I'm reading it correctly?

Buying them upfront will usually be quicker and easier if they're available, but the option is there for hard to find items.

I don't think so, because they still cost 3gp each, that's where most of the time comes from.

4 minor @ 3gp each = 12 gp, so 6gp up front for total cost, and 4 days of setup, plus 6 gp of additional crafting. A crit success with a level 4 expert crafter is 1gp per day, so 6 days of crafting, for a total of 10 days.

Lets say you start working on alchemical goggles as soon as you can after hitting level 4. Unless you crit you'll be halfway to level 6 before you're done.

Granted this could be a PFS issue and not a crafting issue but it's what it is with the current rules.

1 to 50 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>