I mean, I'm not going to say no to a Remaster of Guns & Gears, but I really hope that among the changes/updates, they fix Reverse Engineer so it's actually possible for a 2nd level Inventor to take it at 2nd level without optional rules.
I wouldn't mind seeing the low level weapon innovation options get some tweaking. Some of the current options aren't bad, but there's a distinct lack of ranged-specific choices. Most of them are melee, and there's a couple that are agnostic with regard to weapon choice, but given that it's in the same book as the firearms, the lack of support for ranged weapons is very noticeable.
I think one of the big problems with the current Alchemist is the "Well, Quick Alchemy can make anything the Alchemist knows, and that's very powerful, so we have to weaken them to maintain balance!" And uh.... okay, it's not very powerful. Or at least, not as powerful as Paizo contends. That is far and away an overstatement. Yes, if they have any reagents available AND they know the applicable formula (which isn't a given) they can solve a lot of niche or edge case problems. And Paizo realized that, what with all of the "Okay, sure, Alchemists can use Medium armor. And uh, we're making this ability baseline, because holy crap, otherwise, everyone's just going to take that feat anyway because it's just that good, and.... and.... and...." I mean, it is the most patched class. So, yeah, I hope Paizo considers that the Alchemist (especially the Mutagenist which is my favorite) really needs a complete rewrite and a way for each of the subclasses to shine.
Uh.... the only point for an Alchemist to take that Gunslinger feat is to make ammunition more efficiently. Per the APG (pg. 150, Alchemical Archetypes subsection) "If you gain Infused Reagents from more than one source, you use the highest number of reagents to determine your pool rather than adding them together." An Alchemist doesn't get extra Infused Reagents by dipping into that feat. And your Advanced Alchemy level always depends on which ability you're using. If you're an Alchemist with that Munitions Crafter feat from dipping into Gunslinger, your Advanced Alchemy level for making ammo is 1, and for making anything through your Alchemist class is your level. Alchemists who aren't bombers can already make bombs (not as efficiently as a Bomber Alch) with their Advanced Alchemy, without the need for the Gunslinger Archetype and Munitions Crafter Gunslinger feat, and they automatically get training in Crafting and Alchemical Crafting at 1st level from their class.
Leveling up. Your Spell DC is currently (maybe in Remastered as well, not sure): 10 + your training in your spell DC + your level (if you're at least trained in that DC) + your stat mod. So, if you're a 1st level wizard with an 18 int, it's 17. 10 + 2 (trained) + 1 (level) + 4 (stat mod) When you go to 2nd level, it's 18. 10 + 2 (trained) + 2 (level) + 4 (stat mod)
Perhaps I'm treading old ground here, but.... Given Paizo's involvement with organized play, it is simply not credible to believe that, over the entire time, that Paizo saw zero Alchemists being played, using Quick Alchemy to create Elixirs/Mutagens/Tools/Poisons, have their durations last more than the one turn, even if consumed, and not say something if that were the incorrect way to use them. Especially given the amount of errata published concerning the Alchemist class that is already in existence.
I completely agree that the rules for Alchemists and Quick Alchemy could be much more clearly written. Frankly, I'm hoping that Alchemists get to where they needed to be the whole time when they're updated in the Remastered edition. But my point is that, to the best of my knowledge, the interpretation of "things made with Quick Alchemy fade at the start of your next turn/end of your next turn (if you have the Enduring Alchemy feat) regardless of whether activated or not" is not an interpretation that anyone else seems to use. And given that there's years of organized play with the P2E rules, if that were the case, that, for example, a Quick Alchemy made mutagen faded the round after it was created, even if consumed, someone would have brought it up before. Because then, literally, there is no point to Quick Alchemy other than to make things that are not intended to have a greater than one turn duration, like healing elixirs, or bombs, because they're intended to be used as quickly as possible.
Simply put, if Quick Alchemy elixir, and thus -ALL- mutagen durations expired the round after they were created, even if they had been consumed, then there is even less point in playing a Mutagenist then there already is. If Quick Alchemy poisons expired the round after they were created, even if they had already been applied to a weapon, then there is literally no point in playing a Toxicologist. Yes, Alchemists, as currently written, are not in a stellar position, even with the lengthy rewrites and errata applied to the class. (The possible exception being Chirurgeon and maybe Bomber.) The fact of the matter is that anything made with alchemical reagents goes away the next time the Alchemist does daily preparations, whether it was made during daily prep, or somehow lasted through Quick Alchemy to that point. Most GMs are probably going to run with the "you activated it by putting it on the weapon, consuming it, whatever, the normal duration applies", rather than going "haha, I'm going to screw you over even more." Likewise, most GMs are going to go "those poisons you created through alchemical reagants or Quick Alchemy and then applied to the crossbow bolts that you didn't fire will expire when you do your daily prep."
I would assume Diabolic is the language of devils (or possibly a broader spectrum of fiends.) Sakvroth is a secret sign language employed in the Darklands by creatures who wish to communicate without being overheard. (text taken directly from a wiki) If they're only Uncommon or Common (at the very least, Sakvroth is probably not common), then you could pick them up through the Multilingual feat.
Well, the first thing I'd do is put their casting modifier back on damaging cantrips. It's not like removing it is going to make Wizards less likely to have a +3 or +4 Int modifier, because it's still used for their casting DC. That's probably not going to happen, but I could still hope, you know? Furthermore, at least in the Remaster preview, the idea of school curriculum, in my opinion, needs work. Wizards (well, non-universalists) are going from "your extra spell slot can contain any spell from this school for that spell level" to "here's a list of 1-3 spells that can go in there". Yes, it's more flavorful, but it's a rather extreme limitation. Plus, if Wizards are losing that much versatility for that extra slot, they honestly should get something for it. Their defenses, over all, are terrible. Yes, I get it, squishy wizard. But the fact remains that they have one of the worst save progressions in the game, never get legendary in any save, and never get higher in unarmored defenses or perception than expert. Yes, they get a number of skills at first level due to being an Int heavy class, but most of them never go past Trained. Okay, that's true for a fair number of classes, but would it really break things if they got free automatic improves to Arcana? A fair number of the Wizard feats need to be looked at and revamped. Okay, most of the metamagic feats are fine as-is, but the Wizard really needs some feats that say "This is a good feat to take instead of a dedication." For example, most of the 4th level Wizard feats are just terrible.
If, after new new Starfinder 2e comes out, they are separate canons according to Paizo (which the differing versions of Nocticula suggests), then technically, no god is safe from one of them being killed off in Pathfinder Remastered. Also, I am having strong flashbacks to City of Heroes (before it officially closed) where they did "One will die" for a major hero in their canon. They killed two.... because they never said "Only one will die". Now, that being said, killing multiple deities in a setting potentially sets up other problems.... As to my particular vile speculation..... (I'm going to leave out deities that I don't have an opinion on.) Asmodeus could be on the chopping block simply to continue the move away from D&D similarities, but it's not like Asmodeus is specific to D&D, like, say Zariel is. (Note, I am not aware of Zariel appearing anywhere else.) Caydean Cailean is probably too much of a fan favorite to be offed, but they could tie it into something like the power of the Starstone fading. Gorum could have bit off more than he could chew, so he's a possibility. Iomedae is probably safe, unless Paizo wants to do the continued kicking anything related to Aroden in the nuts, or they're doing something with the Starstone. Irori is probably safe, because.... why? I mean, if you're going to kill a deity in the PF2e setting, there's more interesting choices. Norgorber.... honestly, if they kill him, the rest of the gods would probably think it's some kind of twisted trick/plan of his. Pharasma is a little too important to the cosmology of the setting to just kill. Rovagug is probably safe. If, canonically, a coalition of good and evil gods could only imprison him, not kill him, then it's unlikely that {insert plot device} is going to kill him.
I had a thought about something that could be added to Mutagenist Alchemists. So, as we are all aware, the drawbacks on Mutagens, to put it mildly, suck. It's like "Hey, what if they could Rage, but we make it much worse?" (Okay, that's sort of just Bestial Mutagen.) So, give them (that is Mutagenist Alchemists) this ability. Suppress Drawback - one action, concentrate Temporarily suppress the drawback of your active mutagen. This lasts until the start of your next turn. You can do this a number of times per day equal to your Intelligence modifier (minimum 1).
I don't see them getting legendary in any sort of weapons, simply because bombs (well, of sufficient level) give item bonuses to hit. I wouldn't mind bombers getting Master proficiency in bombs, though. But yeah, something like "Bombers get Quick Bomber as a bonus 1st level feat", and maybe something like it for Mutagenists and mutagens. (Collar of the Shifting Spider helps, but no class should be dependent on "must have this specific item" to be effective.)
Honestly, Enduring Alchemy should be baseline, rather than a feat. However, I'd say the biggest problem is that their Key Ability Score (Intelligence) ends up not helping most of their build options, especially when it comes to combat. If you're throwing bombs (regardless of research field), you need Dexterity, and the same if making ranged attacks. If you're doing melee attacks you need Strength (or Dexterity). Sure, if you're using poisons, it helps increase the DC (once you're fifth level), but for most poisons, you still need to hit, and we're back to Strength or Dexterity. Combined with their generally poor weapon proficiencies, it ends up being really frustrating. As a correction for that, give them something like the Investigator's ability to substitute Intelligence for Strength or Dexterity once a round for a strike.
I want mutagens to lose the penalty to saves. That won't happen, but that's what I want.
*crosses fingers for Guns & Gears errata*
Blasting Beams are more spell-like than anything. They're even on a weird form of an n-per-day limit. Good catch on the automaton, though. That's the easiest d6 ranged unarmed yet.There isn't any n-per-day limit unless I missed it. Its unique that it uses your attack role (not class DC or spell casting DC), is one action, and scales better than typical ranged weapons. Now you have to roll a DC5 flat check per use and can have scaling self damage to yourself, which is why I'd strap it to a front liner that needs a ranged back-up. Actually, for the Deviant abilities, it's sort of like the Oracle's focus spells, in that there's backlashes. Now those backlashes will eventually prevent you from using the power in a given day. The first time in a day that you use it, make a DC 5 flat check. If you you succeed, you use the ability and the DC flat check goes up by 5 (to a maximum of 20). If you fail, you use the ability, and then you suffer a backlash, and the DC resets to 5. The first time you suffer a backlash in a given day (that is, fail the flat check), you take the mild backlash. The second time in a day that you fail, you take the moderate backlash, and the third time in a day that you fail, you take the severe backlash. Once you've taken the severe backlash in a given day, you can't use the deviant ability again until you do your daily preparations. So, realistically, you're probably only getting between 5-8 uses a day, tops. |
