greaterfiend00's page

So the crazy huge buff to thieves is... if they sink 2 feats into being a monk they gain the ability to enter a stance that does +2 damage on average over a rapier, factoring backstabber as a gimme? That's really cool but you might have oversold it a bit. Still the unarmed theif-monk seems like an excellent concept I want to try now.

Yamcha build here I come.

At this point unless the remaster really wows me I'm probably just going to have to embark on a full redesign myself fleshing out every research field while trying to stay in line with other class balance and if I think I've gotten something going posting for feedback. I'm just tired of the alchemist either being the general store or a bomber which does a great disservice to the many other outlets of alchemy and science revolving around it. I am obviously biased towards the mutagens side of things (Bane is my favorite DC character after all) but I do feel every itch should be scratched and a toolbox laid out for you to make your own choices on what you want to class to build into.

SuperBidi wrote:

I feel that the Alchemist shouldn't be the best Bomber, Mutagenist or Poisoner. It should be a Fighter/Ranger/Whatever with Alchemist Dedication.

The PF2 Alchemist is a support class in its core. Allowing specialized builds on top of the classical versatile support build seems like an impossible conundrum to solve. And I really think it'd be far easier and much more interesting to give at level Poisons, Bombs or Mutagens through the Dedication so it opens up proper alchemy-based martials while keeping the current Alchemist (with a refactor through the remaster, just similar role and abilities).

But it's certainly too late anyway.

I've mentioned this before, but I feel like the alchemist would have really benefited from being 2, maybe 3 classes instead of 1. One class on the caster chassis that's a vending machine, and gets progressively more efficient at handing out their items to the rest of the party. You could probably leave the bomber feat line on it. Basically, a lot like the class is now, but trading out its warpriest/frontline caster proficiencies in favor of lots of free items and low to no action costs to give them to someone else.

The second class would be a martial that gets a lot fewer free items, but is really great at using them. Like fewer penalties for mutagens, more damage and secondary effects for bombs, virulent and rapidly replenishing poison, and so on. Healing...maybe any overheal from their own potions they get as temporary hit points? Also, rather than being good at giving them to another character, this class would have very low action cost to use their own product.

Yep why I really feel class archetypes to move in the support or self sufficient roles would make a lotta sense though I still feel the research fields should reflect that more as well given 3 of the current 4 have martial implications with a horrid base to realize it. With Bombers the only slightly feasible one as they can weakness hunt even on misses. The mutagenist and Toxicologists just being poor at actually doing anything with their own cocktail of choice and as you said more encouraged to just give their life's work to their buddies. The latter two need a compelling reason to wade into battle. Mutagenists used to have some of the highest raw stats short of barbarians/bloodrager and decent armor from natural armor to boot when consuming mutagens that served to keep them on par with other martials but they have fallen well low of that mark in 2e.

So basically I'd structure things based on your field choice. Generalists getting access to feats and abilities from the other fields but in a dabbling sort of fashion. While the actual specialists would have feats and innate bonuses flavored towards their field of study.

For example the mutagenist would get innate bonuses that scale based on the tier of mutagen they imbibe at a base and their unique feats only accessible to them would allow them to add more innate bonuses to any mutagen use so as to not have your best in slot mutagens. Where you actually choose them based on the individual effect you want not because it won the stat lottery.

Apply this sort of scope to each field and they get to really relish what they are good at and be shown to be the best at what they do.

I have to agree. Being able to Quick Alchemy whatever I want from my formula book(s) whether it's in my Research Field or not is really important to my enjoyment of the Class. Same with Advanced Alchemy. I don't think we need to separate the Research Fields any more than they already are.

That's perfectly fine for a generalist alchemist and should be an option to stand beside the other fields but I'd prefer to specialize and be really good at one thing rather than mediocre at multiple ones. Currently every alchemist has to be a generalist to get any real value and that sours any sort of choice you made by choosing a particular field. I want depth to my alchemist builds not different flavors of bomber. Or choosing all the "right" items for general use. I'd like a given field to first and foremost do their thing better than anyone else. Then in build choice decide to further focus or broaden their horizons.

Well my ideal mutagenist needs some innate bonus to all mutagen use, I'd like mutagens to be put into categories, offensive, defensive, special or something like that and there be raw benefits the alchemist gets based on tier, offensive providing scaling weapon specialization or an overdrive esque damage rider, defensive providing a bonus to ac or hp, special doing some other effect. That based on the tier of mutagen the mutagenist is always getting the most benefit out of their mutagens. Instead of only a few mutagens being viable all would give innately built benefits and then their unique effects can be considered. Feats could focus on adding more potential effects to gain or choose to gain to further tailor your style while not being so niche as to effect only 1 mutagen. Honestly if they wished to go the old route of build your own benefits or the asi amps of the 1e alchemist that is a valid approach too as those raw stat buffs helped offset their low bab in that edition to do things in melee. If not the class as a whole but the mutagenist and toxicologist should be on par with martials without feeling like a secondary citizen in that world.

greaterfiend00 wrote:

I just want some more martial viability for the mutagenist and toxicologist. The former should have some innate bonus outside the effects of the mutagen to incentivize the alchemist to be the one using the mutagens to begin with. Metabolic might or something to actually give the class some damage riders or something to make their martial strikes outside bomb use not a joke, I'd even give up bombs all together as I'm focused on another field entirely.

I agree, but I'm quite worried about the execution of that. Right now, there's Alch Feats that do nothing but add a single niche bonus to a single mutagen, only when drunk by you.

You want to spend a L18 Class Feat so that when you drink a Serene mutagen, it blocks scrying magic?

-----------

For all the non-Alchemists out there, I swear I'm not making this up, the class really is so bad, it thinks that is a valid use of an endgame class feat.

---------

Quote:

Mindblank Mutagen

Feat 18
Alchemist
Source Core Rulebook pg. 81 4.0
With a minor adjustment of ratios in the formula for your serene mutagen, you gain mental protections. When you’re affected by a serene mutagen, detection, revelation, and scrying effects of 9th level or lower detect nothing from you or your possessions and auras. For instance, detect magic would still detect other magic in the area, but not any magic on you.

------------

Even if such Feats were "upgraded" to be useful, I don't like the idea of spending Feats for single item upgrades like that at all.

Mutagenicist is certainly the tricky one to improve. I think the items themselves need to be re-written first. As far as Feats go, that's a tough one. Alchemist as a concept/fantasy does not easily mesh with Mutagenicist IMO.

The best I can think of atm is something like:

Quote:

Consumptive Integration:

When you create an Infused Mutagen, you can choose to spend an extra Infused Reagent

...

Well something more along the lines of baseline ramping buff system based on the tier of mutagens you imbibe. A lingering potency sorta thing if you will so that every mutagen is viable and most effective when the mutagenist itself is the one consuming it. Rather than as you said features that go from pretty good but very niche as to only effect one mutagen to head scratchingly subpar at high level still effecting only one mutagen.

Master weapon proficiency and free-action alchemical-item drawing may be enough for me to want to play the class again.

If I could:

Move up
Heal ally
Attack once

As a turn, then that makes what the alchemist is doing more appealing. Because the current turn of

Move up
Draw elixir
Heal ally a little bit

Is just not a great turn.

I just want some more martial viability for the mutagenist and toxicologist. The former should have some innate bonus outside the effects of the mutagen to incentivize the alchemist to be the one using the mutagens to begin with. Metabolic might or something to actually give the class some damage riders or something to make their martial strikes outside bomb use not a joke, I'd even give up bombs all together as I'm focused on another field entirely.

dangadget69 wrote:

Serious question.

Is it too late, at least for the Alchemist?
They're in Core 2.
Are we quite sure that it's pencils-down on Core 2 at this point?

I'm not absolutely sure it's pencils down, but there's a lot of stages between "rules freeze" and "no more changes of any kind ever" They have to do things like formatting, editing passes, test print, looking over the test print for any last-minute errors, and so forth. On this one in particular, it's near-guaranteed that they'll have their legal department read through the thing as well.

I would be severely surprised if we were still at the stage where "what changes should we make to the alchemist" was anything other than utterly set in stone.

On the bright side... well, the remaster is based on a lot of feedback they've been getting from various sources, and especially where feedback is concerned, quantity has a quality of its own. It's not like people haven't been saying stuff about alchemists for the past couple of years. My expectation...? The thing that comes out the other end may not have the specific changes that any one person may feel that it needs, but it'll be a pretty solid class regardless. Based on what we've seen from the remaster previews, I'd expect that the weaker options in particular will see some real improvements, the options that were potentially strong but required more twisty ways to get there will find themselves less twisted, and some of the newbie pitfalls will be filled in.

I just really want to actually feel like I have options. Atm your research field feels pretty bland compared to other classes having their entire identity bound to a choice like that. The generalist Alchemist is fine for those that want that grocery store vibe but by no means is the end all be all of alchemist. We need simply turn to other fiction to see the many other examples of alchemy at work, be it classics like Jekyll and Hyde, and the Reanimator, or in comics with Bane, Green Goblin, etc or video games and books with Geralt of Rivia, Styx, and more. So many other avenues of focus than the guy/gal that just gives out buffs to the party.

greaterfiend00 wrote:

keftiu wrote:

Not much sense worrying until we see what the Remaster does for them, if anything.

Well I hope by putting thoughts out there and backed with some sound reasoning those at Paizo may look at and see some of the concerns people have and take it into mind. I personally would like to see the further use of Class Archetypes to mostly solve the issues I've outlined, since I understand a full class reimagining in the scope of the Kineticist is a bit too far out there to realistically expect.

It is waaaay too late to affect what's actually in the remaster, though. Way too late. Whatever's in the remaster is set in stone already and has been for some time. Whatever might come after that will be in context of how people react to those changes.

So... this sort of comment at the beginning of the year might have been helpful. This sort of comment might be useful again later, if you can wait for remastered Alchemist to come out and then adjust position based on the results of that. For right now, though, we're in that dead zone after the gun has been fired, but before the bullet slams home. It's not the right time to do anything about any of these topics.

Unfortunate as I've only recently made the shift to 2e and really wanted to delve into a formerly favorite class in my early days but as you say if the remaster isn't to my liking it'll be a long time coming :/

Not much sense worrying until we see what the Remaster does for them, if anything.

Well I hope by putting thoughts out there and backed with some sound reasoning those at Paizo may look at and see some of the concerns people have and take it into mind. I personally would like to see the further use of Class Archetypes to mostly solve the issues I've outlined, since I understand a full class reimagining in the scope of the Kineticist is a bit too far out there to realistically expect.

As the title suggests this is another attempt to try and assess what's wrong with the Alchemist class and what Paizo could potentially do with a rework/revision to bring it more in line with the expectations I and many others have for the class. Some background I've been playing D&D and Pathfinder from 3.5 and 1e respectively, with my most recent ventures being mostly 5e until now jumping ship to Pathfinder 2e to which I'm absolutely loving the system so far. So immediately I looked into recreating an old OC from 1e in my grappling alchemist. In those days while the alchemist had a weak BAB I was able to circumvent and even thrive in combat via mutagens providing hefty Str increases and natural armor to help offset the innate squishiness of the class. Combined with choice discoveries to further bolster my tankiness I was able to obtain something akin to Jekyll and Hyde or for any DC fans more like Bane. A very intelligent but combat capable PC. Their prevailing goal being the turning of their science onto themselves to reach peak human thresholds and overcoming them to become their own step of evolution after a point with near 24 hour uptime of their mutagens with the Master Chymist prestige class in the mix. A very flavorful and fun build to theorycraft and put together and play.

Then we come to Pf2e's alchemist that falls well short of the mark from my previously favorite class. In 2e we have a class that honestly feels more like an NPC than a PC imo in that they fall squarely into support to the detriment of doing much themselves. Where to be competitive with the other classes you have to give out your items near constantly which is fine for a few concepts not so much a scientist devoted to turn themselves into the ultimate weapon. Even with fields of research considered the mutagenist is a very shoddy martial at best. Made all the more poor with the inability to stack mutagens with the very core concept of runes. Further invalidating that playstyle. Add to that the pretty harsh drawbacks and lack of any damage riders like sneak attack, rage, overdrive, etc and going the martial route with an alchemist is a fool's errand. Even with the aforementioned fields of research that would heavily imply a leaning into the martial scope with Mutagenist and Toxicologist as they both focus on substances that do something to either augment or hinder the body.

Made all the more unfortunate is just how amazing the Kineticist is as a toolbox class where you pick your playstyle and are met with a plethora of flavorful options to capture it. We had this to an albeit lesser degree in the discovery system but the replacement field research feels far inferior. By no means do I think the good guy alchemist preparing things for the party should go entirely as a generalist alchemist that makes perfect sense to me. What I propose is to allow those like myself to give up some of that general use to be able to hone in on a particular field of study and allow the alchemist to have the versatility to be built towards the role in the party you wish. Let me be a competent martial at the cost of a bit of utility, or a bit of a blaster/battlefield controller in the bomber, a debuffer in the toxicologist, etc. I ask for more choice in my progression in the class. There's a lot more I could go into but this post is long enough as it is so any thoughts on the matter and a civil discussion would be greatly appreciated.

greaterfiend00 wrote:

1: We are level 11 now, flight has been becoming a thing for far longer than the 1 min in dragonform be it the spell, ancestries, or otherwise

2: Given my prompt was a draconic sorcerer you'd be limited to the type you chose though again level 11 you've had means to get resistance to things long before be it magic, items, ancestries, etc
3: The former is easily done better by a 2 level spell as well as again easily obtained long before level 11 be it ancestry, feats, items, etc
4: The only contention point and it is a decent blasting option...every other round on average and again only in the one element if a draconic sorcer. You know what else are decent blasting options every round, your spells 6th and lower.
5:Again so-so melee that while on par to hit of a barbarian or the like, still less than fighter but who isn't you only get a measly +6 to damage so anything worth its salt will have more riders to their attacks than the measly 6.
6:Once again a weak amount of temp hp, comparable to what barb has had since level 1. On that note you can have a dragon instinct barb that could cast spells with the proper feat or even do a lot of what this form does, all the time every rage.
7:Really skill feats or in the case of barbarian a single class feat? This is a 6th level spell you are level 11 at this point and that's a major boon?

....huh...

1: Fly gives flight for 2 actions and a speed of....? The answer is not 100 ft in case you were curious. Fly, or other similar flight spells, also don't give you an AC that is comparable to a martial. Also doesn't give you melee attacks with a bonus to attacks comparable to a martial. Also doesn't give you damage with the attacks it doesn't give you comparable to a martial.
2: So..how many actions before you can fly, have resistance, get melee attacks, have a decent aoe, get a decent AC...oh, and how many spell slots did you use up?
3: refer back to 2
4: refer back to 2
5: If you want to play a martial, then play a martial
6: If...

1: 5m vs 1m, not to mention again the various ancestries that come online at level 7. It is useful but not unique.

2: You do not have weapon specialization or any other riders to your attacks that all martials get, not to mention the many tactical options. Also your AC is set martials have stances, shields, maneuvers etc to boost there's and lower the enemy's AC. One resistance and a locked one at that isn't what I'd call good. If you are using acid damage odds are the thing you are fighting is not attacking you with it as well.
3: See point 2
4: See point 2
5: If I become a dragon I want to have the capacity of a dragon, not some gimped version of it that can't speak for some moronic reason.
6: Point of comparison that casting while having stats comparable to dragon form is already possible and you can even talk while doing so.
7: Again skill feats anyone can access, ancestries, magic items, and barbarian has a feat that gives them all of them while raging at what level 4. Sure love getting a weaker version of a level 4 feat with my level 6 spell to become a dragon....

greaterfiend00 wrote:

you get a laughable amount of temp hp and a soso melee attack set. Casting in this form is far from OP.

Well, lets see. You get

1) A speed of 40 and a fly speed of 100
2) Resistance 10 against the energy of your choice (essentially)
3) Darkvision and imprecise scent
4) A quite decent breath weapon
5) A fairly decent (not great but definitely better than so-so) melee attack with reach
6) Some temp hit points
7) Often some other cool ability that you get to pick when you need it (eg, swim speed, burrow speed, climb speed, ability to see through smoke, etc).

All for the low cost of either a spell slot OR a focus spell together with some quite affordable class feats.

I've played a druid who used dragon form a lot and it is quite useful and powerful withOUT being able to cast spells. It is perfectly good as it is. Being able to cast spells would definitely have made it overpowered. Probably not game breakingly over powered but definitely overpowered.

1: We are level 11 now, flight has been becoming a thing for far longer than the 1 min in dragonform be it the spell, ancestries, or otherwise

2: Given my prompt was a draconic sorcerer you'd be limited to the type you chose though again level 11 you've had means to get resistance to things long before be it magic, items, ancestries, etc
3: The former is easily done better by a 2 level spell as well as again easily obtained long before level 11 be it ancestry, feats, items, etc
4: The only contention point and it is a decent blasting option...every other round on average and again only in the one element if a draconic sorcer. You know what else are decent blasting options every round, your spells 6th and lower.
5:Again so-so melee that while on par to hit of a barbarian or the like, still less than fighter but who isn't you only get a measly +6 to damage so anything worth its salt will have more riders to their attacks than the measly 6.
6:Once again a weak amount of temp hp, comparable to what barb has had since level 1. On that note you can have a dragon instinct barb that could cast spells with the proper feat or even do a lot of what this form does, all the time every rage.
7:Really skill feats or in the case of barbarian a single class feat? This is a 6th level spell you are level 11 at this point and that's a major boon?

So no I don't agree that spellcasting would in anyway make this form OP as it is lacking in nearly every way and taken only because it's given or because it is thematically appropriate to the character.

*Insert Patrick and Manta Ray meme*

So a Sorcerer casts spells right?

Yes

A dragon can cast spells?

Yes

So a sorcerer that turns into a dragon can cast spells?

You lost me.

Point is an aspiring draconic sorcerer losing the ability to cast spells when attaining their dragon form is just blatantly stupid RAW or not and I'd definitely never run it that way. I'd understand in 5e where a polymorph effect gave you an entire character's worth of hp you had to knock out before touching the squishy caster but as it stands you get a laughable amount of temp hp and a soso melee attack set. Casting in this form is far from OP.

Hello, sorry for the bit of necro but was wondering how the Impale Infusion interacts with Vampiric Infusion if I were to be a Blood Kineticist? Would I heal from each target? Would I have to pay the burn for each target for the heal or just once for the cast of the ability?.