Sarsaparilla's page

Well, the game designers are probably busy with other things, and the rest of us are working from the same information as you.

Swift Alchemy (Ex): At 3rd level, an alchemist can
create alchemical items with astounding speed. It takes
an alchemist half the normal amount of time to create
alchemical items, and he can apply poison to a weapon as
a move-equivalent action.

Since there's no such thing as half a move action this clearly doesn't apply to bombs. As for the rest, your guess is as good as mine.

I get the feeling that extracts and mutagens aren't meant to be officially alchemical items, but I have to admit that it's a bit weird to have and "alchemist" mixing up a bunch of stuff in vials that aren't "alchemicals".

I thought of the same thing: you use a formula of invisibility by drinking it yourself, and you use a formula of phantasmal killer by throwing it at someone.

Throwing formulae would be fun, to be sure! But I'd like it even better if we could add them to our weapons like poisons, and get both the weapon damage and the formula effect at the same time. (provided the alchemist makes his attack roll, of course.)

How about allowing the formulae work through entering the bloodstream, like injury poisons? It could reduce the need for infusions, since you could heal or buff your allies by attacking or injecting them. (I'd say the extract stays "in your possession" if it's on a weapon or in a syringe)

And then if you add a couple of damage-dealing "spells" to the formula list, it would add some synergy between the poison-use aspect and the extract-making aspect.

Deadly Aim can't be used with splash weapons like bombs. While Vital Strike seems rather powerful, there is no rule against it at the moment.

Throwing two bombs at once should be possible with the delayed bomb discovery but seems rather pointless.

That's the problem. The base damage is too low, as I see it. But Deadly Aim, which would have been a reasonable, non-cheesy way to increase damage, is not permitted. On the other hand, with Vital Strike it's a bit over-powered, yet completely legal as far as I can tell. And then it becomes ludicrously over-powered when you start considering Improved Vital Strike and so on.

I think what I'd like to see is for Vital Strike to be disallowed, but also have the base damage for the bombs improved.

It would also be nice to have the splash weapon rules repeated in the Alchemist description, and a clear answer on how feats interact with splash damage specifically.

I just found an earlier thread with a very similar subject, so if you have any thoughts, please add them here:

Bomb Feats

I'm sorry I didn't find this thread before I started mine. Besides the feats you mention, I've also been wondering about Deadly Aim. As far as I can tell, it seems legitimate, but should it also apply to the splash damage?

When I see a spell or class ability that looks a little underpowered (Bomb) but has a touch attack, I start thinking about the options for increasing damage that only come into play when attack rolls are involved. The obvious example is sneak attack, but as explained on pg. 202, splash weapons can't get precision-based damage. But what about these:

Deadly Aim: Seems the least cheesy and the most likely to be allowed, since it's easy to reason that you could do more damage by being reckless with the bomb (and also more likely to miss and scatter back to the party). As I see it, the only real question here is whether the bonus damage should also apply to the splash damage. I say yes, because it's "equal to the bomb’s minimum damage." Any thoughts?

Improved Critical, and Criticals in general: Can you crit with a splash weapon? I've always associated crits with precision damage, but I don't see them described that way in my copy of the PF Core Rulebook. Even if it's allowed, I'm not sure it's worth the feat, but someone might find it fun...

Vital Strike: This feat really feels to me like it ought to be precision damage, but again, I don't see it described that way anywhere. Maybe someone more familiar with the books can clue me in? If it is allowed then...wow. And again, what about the splash damage?

The more I think about it, the more I think that it would make sense to not list every spell on the alchemist's extract list and to instead say something like:

"Alchemists can make extracts of any spell that targets one or more creatures or with target = 'You' from the following schools: transmutation, divination, illusion, conjuration (healing), necromancy, or abjuration."

I like this idea too. It also solves the question of what to do with spells from 3.5 and/or unofficial sourcebooks. As it stands now, there's a block of text on page 3 that states: "These new formulae can be common spells chosen from the alchemist’s formulae list, or they can be unusual spells that the alchemist has gained some understanding of through study."

...which offers the tantalizing promise of learning spells from other classes, but doesn't provide any guidelines for which spells are eligible.