shroudb's page

So where do you store them? When you make them, what lvl of type are they?

When:

During your daily preparation you can create a number of versatile vials

Store:

Level:
Depending on your level, there are Lesser, Moderate, Greater, and Major, each with a specific item level.

Type:

Traits: Bomb, Acid, Consumable, Infused, Alchemical, Splash

shroudb wrote:

Those listed under Quick Tincture, which is what gives you the VV except the Statistics which you get from where it tells you to get them.

There isn't any rules for Versatile Vials under Quick Tincture!! By your reading the Investigators VVs don't have rules!

They have exactly what's written:

You make Int of them during daily prep.

The base statistics (bomb damage, bulk, item level, activation, traits, etc) are where it says they are.

And you can use them to make elixirs and tools. Which as opposed to Alchemist do not have the 10min limit.

If you get VVs from multiple sources you can use them for any ability that you have that uses them.

shroudb wrote:

Sagiam wrote:

Trip.H wrote:

Sagiam wrote:

I really hate to invoke the "too good to be true" aphorism, but in this case it seems necessary.

Do you think the same Stingy Paizo would intentionally give the Investigator recharging VVs?

I'm sorry to say, but they are rather consistent on the cross-class stuff granting a small number of per-day uses, not recharging ones.

Then what are the rules for Investigators Versatile Vials? Are the Investigators VVs infused items? Are they destroyed at end of day or can you stockpile them? What lvl and type of Vial do you craft? Where can you store your VVs and how much do they weigh? Are they actually physical objects, and if they are can you duplicate or preserve them?

And most importantly for this discussion, do you get any more back during the day?

All of these questions are answered in that paragraph that starts on p58 which the Investigator tells you look at. You have to ignore a sentence in the middle of that paragraph to say "no" to that last question.

They statistics for them are clearly separated than the Ability.

Investigator gets Quick Tincture, that works with his VV and Alchemist gets Quick Alchemy.

Nothing in Quick Tincture mentions you getting them back, so you don't.

The ONLY reference to Quick Alchemy is "use the statistics of the VVs" which are extremely clearly separated from the Quick Alchemy ability, even if they are structurally in the same section of the book.

If you want them tomorrow regenerate, you have to insert whole paragraphs of ability text that no one said to do (I can bold words too!).

Nobody here has mentioned the Quick Alchemy or Quick Tincture section but you. The rules for getting them back are listed under Versatile Vials which is a completely separate section. So I'll ask again, if you don't use that section for the rules for Investigators Versatile Vials, what are the rules on an Investigators VVs?

Those listed under Quick Tincture, which is what gives you the VV except the Statistics which you get from where it tells you to get them.

Trip.H wrote:

Sagiam wrote:

I really hate to invoke the "too good to be true" aphorism, but in this case it seems necessary.

Do you think the same Stingy Paizo would intentionally give the Investigator recharging VVs?

I'm sorry to say, but they are rather consistent on the cross-class stuff granting a small number of per-day uses, not recharging ones.

Then what are the rules for Investigators Versatile Vials? Are the Investigators VVs infused items? Are they destroyed at end of day or can you stockpile them? What lvl and type of Vial do you craft? Where can you store your VVs and how much do they weigh? Are they actually physical objects, and if they are can you duplicate or preserve them?

And most importantly for this discussion, do you get any more back during the day?

All of these questions are answered in that paragraph that starts on p58 which the Investigator tells you look at. You have to ignore a sentence in the middle of that paragraph to say "no" to that last question.

They statistics for them are clearly separated than the Ability.

Investigator gets Quick Tincture, that works with his VV and Alchemist gets Quick Alchemy.

Nothing in Quick Tincture mentions you getting them back, so you don't.

The ONLY reference to Quick Alchemy is "use the statistics of the VVs" which are extremely clearly separated from the Quick Alchemy ability, even if they are structurally in the same section of the book.

If you want them tomorrow regenerate, you have to insert whole paragraphs of ability text that no one said to do (I can bold words too!).

I'd much rather have unique alchemist feats rather than reprinted generic familiar feats that I can grab with an Archetype.

Here, I'll post the rules so you can be the judge yourself.

Player Core 2 Pg 58 to 59 wrote:

Versatile Vials

You know how to prepare fast-acting chemicals into
versatile vials, special items that can be used as bombs
and be turned into other alchemical items by introducing
special reagents. During your daily preparations, you
can create a number of versatile vials up to 2 + your
Intelligence modifier, which is also your maximum
number of vials. If you’re below your maximum number,
you can gather reagents from the environment around
you. For every 10 minutes you spend in exploration
mode, you regain 2 vials; this doesn’t prevent you from
participating in other exploration activities.
Versatile vials are infused items, and are destroyed
if not used by the next time you make your daily
preparations. A vial you create is always the highest type
you could Craft. See the sidebar for statistics on using a
versatile vial as a bomb. You can also use vials for Quick
Alchemy (see below) and your research field can add to
the ways you can use a vial.
You can store all your versatile vials within your
alchemist’s toolkit, with no increase to its Bulk. Though
versatile vials are physical objects, they can’t be
duplicated or preserved in any way.

The VV Sidebar that contains the bomb statistics isn't on pg 58, it's on pg 59 but these rules texts start on pg 58 so that's what I'm assuming their referencing.

Player core 2 pg 103 wrote:

During your daily preparations, you can create a

number of versatile vials equal to your Intelligence
modifier. Statistics for versatile vials appear on page 58
of the alchemist class.

And for completeness sake the Quick Alchemy Benefits(which the Investigator does not have) from the archetypes

Player core 2 pg 174 wrote:

Quick Alchemy Benefits: You gain the Alchemical Crafting feat (Player Core 252) if you don’t already have it.

In addition, you gain the Quick Alchemy action (page 59),
which lets you create short-lived alchemical

...

The statistics of the VVs are in the section that also describes the VV ability for the Alchemist.

So the page reference uses where the section begins (p 58) but it specifically says to use the Statistics from said section, not the ability described there.

It being real time back and forth link means you can also do things like having the familiar do stuff and you on the other turn react according to said information and the familiar in turn reacting to that.

As a simple example, not only you know what the familiar sees while it's scouting, but you can real time change his orders based on what it sees. ("Now, go left", "follow the elf you just saw", "this book seems useless, go to the next one. Oh this one is good, pick it up and bring it to me", and etc)

With Speech, you can actually hold a conversation with someone from 1500ft away if you'd wish.

I have to ask:

IF the enemy uses the action and succesfully Lies, would you then, as the "character Investigator" simply sheathe your weapon and leavve, after all, by your reasoning, you know know, as a fact, that you have the wrong target.

Will you actively try to stop your own group from murdering said "innocent" person?
Grapple them, trip them, straight up attack them to stop them from becoming plain "murderers"?

---

that's why social encounters and combat do not mix. Trying to use what's flimsy writing to justify Pointed Question as being a 1 round Stun at will, if I were the GM, I would enforce your character to also behave exactly the same as the enemies while in combat: i.e. use social rolls as defacto truths that you MUST follow.

I think Medic still has appeal for a Chirurgeon. Robust Health is taken by the patient, not the healer for example. And Doctor's Visitation is still a decent Action compression Feat.

I definitely agree that Alchemists are better off investing in Invigorating Elixir and its follow-ups than Treat Condition (if healing is what you want to invest in.)

On the topic of investing in Archetype Feats in general... I do think there's more appealing Alchemist Feats now than there were previously. I've enjoyed the three Martial Artist Feats I took on my Mutagenist, but now I'm wondering if I should drop one to grab Combine Elixirs, which is definitely greatly improved over its original version.

Oh, it's still decent, for sure. Just not a must have.

You can easily skip it for something else was the point, not that you must skip it.

Medic bonus hp is now a circumstance bonus.

The new general feat that gives +level Hp on successful Battle medicine/treat wounds and cuts down the cooldown of battle medicine to 1 hour is also a circumstance bonus.

And alchemist has better condition removal than treat condition.

So Medic is in fact very skippable now.

Well, it references the alchemist ability: "Statistics for versatile vials appear on page 58 of the alchemist class." You could argue they just mean the bomb statistics on page 59, though. It doesn't say to reference the versatile vial ability on page 58.

it says to reference the statistics, not reference the ability.

same place where the ability is there's a distinct table with the statistics.

So what do we like as free archetypes now? Medic for chirgueon, monk for bestial, and familiar master for any field are jumping out at me. Fighter dedication is bad but the reactive strike is good on a bestial build, as are some of the feats. Not sure if the AC penalty and action cost are worth raging for but +4 damage to melee is nice. (I'll assume raging thrower won't apply to bombs.)

Investigator is another stand out to me. Purse a Lead and Clue In stack with the now omnipresent item bonuses out of combat. Also, I noticed they changed the trigger of Clue in from "attempts a check to investigate" to "attempts a check which could help get you closer to answering the question." That would include checks to attack an enemy. Clue Them All In now lets a proper investigator hand the entire party +2 circumstance on strikes as a reaction, yeesh.

DaS also seems great with the action economy improvements to both classes. Free action DaS tells you if you should use a consumable bomb with a good hit rider, or a good crit rider like dread ampoule, or just use a free vial bomb for splash damage. You also have more alternatives to striking at all than the investigator does. Known weakness can also help you target weaknesses and such. This is feeling like my favorite for bomber right now.

I'd say monk is pretty bad for bestial actually. Now that archetype FoB has a cooldown, and you don't want stances, not many things to pick up from there. Martial Artist probably better for stuff like powder punch feat line, follow-up strike, and path of Iron.

Wrestler is also pretty good for Bestial since it also increases your athletics and it has some pretty good attack actions for Unarmed that are using your heightened dices.

Bastion is also good since you have the hands to use that shield.

And Wild Mimic has some interesting stuff to poach as well.

Remastered Investigator and Inventor (if the setting has stacian technology in it) are looking good for Tox, and as always, Ranger is always good if you are going for thrown weapons, which is also good for Tox.

Investigator now has a much easier time to get 0 action DaS which means you can pretty reliably know when you're going to hit, and so you can use your poisoned attacks on Strikes you know they'll hit (no wasting poisoned ammunition on misses)

*sidenote here: Clue In only affects Perceptions and Skill checks, since it gives your Pursue a Lead bonus which is for Perception and Skills. You're not Aiding everyone for free for a +2 on their attacks.

Medic is a staple for any kind of character, has some synergy with Chirurgeon for sure.

Familiar Master is good for Chirurgeon and for Tox.

Rogue is also pretty good all around, as it is always, be it the sneak attack extra damage, off-guard alongside a party member bard using dirge of doom, mobility, quick draw, skill mastery, and all those nice things.

There's no way to guarantee a new mutagen successfully counteracts an old one, right? At least without having a level disparity.

Does the extra versatile vial granted by the familiar ability replenish for an alchemist, effectively giving them 3+Int vials? Might be too good to be true, but I don't see anything preventing it except maybe the max number clause on versatile vials.

At this point, Kholos make the best mutaginist and hobgoblins the best bombers, right? Only competition I see are goblins with burn it, but you can Adopted Ancestry that and it becomes superfluous past level 10 anyway. And runt sage lets you not even waste a general feat on it. Smoke bombs seem like a solid choice for a hob, especially if you delay to go just before the enemy.

So, there are 2 abilities for the familiars:

one give them an Advanced Alchemy Vial.

the other one is "interact to replenish a VV 1/day"

shroudb wrote:

There is a massive opportunity cost.

You won't be picking Bestial on a Tox because you can't apply poisons to your claws.
You won't be picking Bestial on a Bomber because you won't be attacking with your claws.

The thing you gain from a Bomber, early on is comparable to what you gain from a Chirurgeon: +3 damage on bombs vs +4 Temp hp for every elixir.

You forget that on one sub you are incentivised to spend most of your VVs and actions for Elixirs, which will also maximise the effect of you giving basically free "health" to everyone and on the other sub you're using the same actions on blasting.

There's no reason for you to build a healer or a mutagenist "bomber" overall.

You compare a tiny tiny difference in overall class differences and magnify it to such ridiculous degree like this tiny speck makes one very bad and the other very good.

In reality, the difference doesn't matter because different subs will not only be picking different feats, but also spent their AA differently, and more importantly, their actions differently.

For each playstyle, the vast majority of the time you will be better keeping it "in sub".

This is exactly why I am so harsh about all non-Bombers having their Q-Alchemy economy held hostage behind throwing a bomb.

Dude, come on. I had that whole thing about using a throwing spear, and how now I'm stuck throwing a crappy d6 QV bomb as a Chiurgeon.

This is what I meant by saying the Bomber-first design causes problems.

Without a "Quick Item" or "Quicker Alchemy" Feat to offer alternatives to Quick Bomber, ALL Alchemists are pushed to throwing bombs. And the Double Brew combo makes this even worse.

That multiples the balance disparity between the RFs.

Why?

You're the only one pigeonholing yourself to throw Field Vials instead of a returning spear.

The damage a returning weapon will do for a non bomber is higher than the Field bomb.

There is no "bomber first" mentality except in your head.

If anything, again, the sub that got the most significant buffs is Tox, not Bomber.

shroudb wrote:

Which is why I said that mutagenist is the sub least buffed.

I concur to that.

But the overall buff to his AC, plus the free Striking runes are a big boost regardless.

That said, since he's also the one that needs the least VVs in combat he's also one that can focus on Combine Elixir to absolutely buff himself in combat round 1 and go to town.

I'd probably still prefer Collar on him as well rather than mutagen via VV for combat in order to capitalize on his temp hp.

There's no Muta-only lock to the buff to the Bestial item, nor to Combine Elixirs.

Quote:

Feels like you'd gain more utility from bomber or chrirugeon even those paths aren't your focus. But there's no shortage of good mutagen feats, at least.

You keep ignoring the core of what's trying to be explained to you. A buff to an item does not give reason to pick the Mutagenist's set of Features.

As I have said before, my PCs would be significantly improved if I made them Bombers "under the hood" while I kept the Doctor / healer theming the exact same, and performed the same combat routines.

This is the issue that's trying to be conveyed.

Play-changing Features like Tox bypassing immunity, the Bomber's ally-safe splash, or even Chi's Craft-Medicine do not exist for the Mutagenist.

The few pros of the Muta must be greater than the pros offered by the other choices even in the context of a PC "doing Muta things."

You're the one "not getting it". You compare stuff like you have infinite resources and actions.

There is a massive opportunity cost.

You won't be picking Bestial on a Tox because you can't apply poisons to your claws.
You won't be picking Bestial on a Bomber because you won't be attacking with your claws.

The thing you gain from a Bomber, early on is comparable to what you gain from a Chirurgeon: +3 damage on bombs vs +4 Temp hp for every elixir.
It's extremely worse than what Tox gets, bypassing immunities.

You forget that on one sub you are incentivised to spend most of your VVs and actions for Elixirs, which will also maximise the effect of you giving basically free "health" to everyone and on the other sub you're using the same actions on blasting.

There's no reason for you to build a healer or a mutagenist "bomber" overall.

You compare a tiny tiny difference in overall class differences (Field Vials) and magnify it to such ridiculous degree like this tiny speck makes one very bad and the other very good.

In reality, the difference doesn't matter because different subs will not only be picking different feats, but also spent their AA differently, and more importantly, their actions differently.

For each playstyle, the vast majority of the time you will be better keeping it "in sub".

Mutagenist seems good at 17th when the quickend VV comes on line and it can have two mutagens up and for one action supress the drawbacks of one and get half level physical resistance.

That, uh, seems a long time to wait.

I'd argue that lvl 13, with being able to run both bestial and energy is the shifting point.

I'm not sure the mutagenist research field is worth it even if you have a mutagen focus. Until level 13 all the advantages are defensive. The field vial ability seems fairly useless. The initial field ability looks good at first, but you since you may be refreshing your mutagens out of combat once per 10 minutes having temp hp only last a minute is rough. So pretty likely to cost you an action unless you have enough warning to pre buff. A collar of the shifting spider can help, but you can't use it with quick alchemy so you're spending your advanced alchemy on it.

Feels like you'd gain more utility from bomber or chrirugeon even those paths aren't your focus. But there's no shortage of good mutagen feats, at least.

Which is why I said that mutagenist is the sub least buffed.

I concur to that.

But the overall buff to his AC, plus the free Striking runes are a big boost regardless.

That said, since he's also the one that needs the least VVs in combat he's also one that can focus on Combine Elixir to absolutely buff himself in combat round 1 and go to town.

I'd probably still prefer Collar on him as well rather than mutagen via VV for combat in order to capitalize on his temp hp.

shroudb wrote:

I'm "pigeonholing" myself by being as narrow as possible, talking about the issue of the 4 different Research Fields in comparison to each other and how they shake out in the Remaster's new context.

Meaning, I can only point to those specific R-Fld Features and genuinely exclusive Feats.

If a Bomber can take Feats and be 95% as effective as the Muta or Chi or Tox in those jobs, while also gaining Bomber benefits, that's a design fail. That outcome removes reason to select those R-Flds outside of roleplaying.

Getting into the causes and whys is a much more nuanced and tricky prospect than simply trying to demonstrate there is an imbalance/issue in the first place. But some is simple enough to explain.

One cause/why is that weak inherent Features and strong Class Feats can make those few exclusive Feature irrelevant. And Alchemist certainly suffers from this one, which is why I've locked in on the abysmal FVial mechanics.

So many of the few RF-Exclusive Feats are locked into those F-Vial uses, like the Chi's mental save reroll.
The better the FV is to genuinely use, the better that Feat, and the Chi itself, compares.

When that FVial has a 10min CD on its abysmal heal, and even has the gall to also exclude the bonus effect from the ranged FVial usage, it all adds up to the Chi not comparing well.

The counteract formula items even got buffed in the Remaster. If all Alchemists can get both the counteract Additive Feats (that cannot work with Chi's FV) and those counteract item formulas, does spending a Feat to add a counteract to your 2d6 healing vial really help?

You can't even give it credit for cleansing at range, as the FV lacks the elixir trait if you throw instead of drink it.

You keep making your analysis on the miniscule part on a class that are Field Vials.

To put it into perspective, you look at a spread of 245-250 and instead of seeing that the overall difference is tiny, you focus on the 5-10 difference and go "look, this is 2 times more effective!"

No. The overall difference is not 100%. It is 2%.

That, is completely irrelevant to overall class balance, and being so insistent on isolating the "balance comparison" to that tiny fraction is misinforming anyone not knowledgeable that happens to simply read the thread and gives him the 100% erroneous conclusion that there is a huge imbalance between the subclasses.

When in reality, the core abilities of each subclass are pretty much great for all of them and on par with each other.

---

Plus, if we want to deep dive into Field Vials:

Bomber needs his Field Vials to be stronger more than any of the other 3 subs in order for the sub to be overall balanced and not lag behind.

VVs are for all 4 subs the cornerstone of the extraordinary flexibility given to the Alchemist Class.

But for bomber, they are also their main, consumable, resourcefor turn-by-turn damage.

Every alchemist is able, and is supposed to be able, to use X VVs in exploration to counter Y thing that happened.
But if a bomber does that, that means that he could now only fight for like 2-3 rounds before being empty.
That's the main reason Bomber Field vials HAVE to be good enough to even partially carry him through the rest of the rounds/actions.

The other subs don't need them as much.

The mutagenist needs 1 and he can fight the whole fight. The Tox still has his weapon even when he runs out of poisons. The Chirurgeon the same if he chooses to. But the bomber absolutely needs his Field vials.

---

And as far as picking feats as a bomber to mimic another sub. The opposite is also true. Anyone can pick Quick Bomber. Anyone can pick the 10th level feat and add his Int bonus to bombs.

Bomber at that stage will be doing 2-3 points higher damage, comparable to a Chirurgeon giving 5 temp hps, or mutagenist starting with an extra 10 temp hps.

shroudb wrote:

I am super hopeful for Tox, they have a great chance to get out of this with a fun and viable gameplan.

But here's their actual Feature list freshly scanned out of a video, no damage-on-save in sight:

Quote:

Toxicologist

You specialize in toxins and venoms of all types. Formulas Two common 1st-level alchemical poisons.

Field Benefit | You can apply an injury poison you’re holding to a weapon or piece of ammunition you're wielding as a single action, rather than as a 2-action activity. In addition, you flexibly mix acidic and poisonous alchemical compounds. Your infused poisons can affect creatures immune to poison. A creature takes acid damage instead of poison damage from your infused poisons if either the creature is immune to poison or that would be more detrimental to the creature (as determined by the GM). Typically, this benefit applies when the creature has an immunity, resistance, or weakness to one of the damage types.

Field Vials | Your versatile vials have the poison trait and deal poison damage instead of having the acid trait and dealing acid damage (though your field benefit still applies). You can apply the contents of a versatile vial to a weapon or piece of ammunition as an injury poison. Add the versatile vial’s initial damage to the first successful Strike with that weapon or ammunition. The substance becomes inert at the end of your current turn.

Field Discovery (5th) You have handled enough poisons to become inured to their effects. You gain poison resistance equal to half your level.

Advanced Vials (11th) When you damage a creature with a versatile vial you've used as an injury poison, that creature takes persistent poison damage equal to the vial's splash damage in addition to the initial damage.

Greater Field Discovery (13th) When a creature fails its initial saving throw against an infused injury poison you created, the wound sprays poison onto another creature adjacent to it. The attacker who caused the injury chooses

...

Damage on a fort save is from their level 2 additive on poisons.

As I said, you do pigeonhole yourself in something and overstate its effect by quite a bit:

In this case it's your fixation with QVs. On average, them being suboptimal, or even bad (like for mutagenist) it's such a minimal aspect compared to the overall class budget that doesn't really impacts actual game plans.

You'll still rely on your VVs and AA for your main abilities. And those have been buffed so significantly that your "cantrips" being suboptimal doesn't warrant 3 paragraphs of explanation.

No, you do in fact tend to overstate stuff by quite a margin.

The biggest gain for anyone in the book is for Toxicologist as an example, straight up bypassing Poison Immunity makes a previously unplayable thing now very strong. And being able to do damage on successful Fort saves, which was the second pain point of the sub.

Mutagenist is the one who gained the least, but still what he gained is massive.

Now all 4 of the subclasses are not only playable, but really, really good.

SuperBidi wrote:

Tsubutai wrote:

Second, all cloth casters become just as good as regular martials at avoiding hits.

Armor Proficiency gives the same bonus to all casters right at level 3 (or 1 for Humans). It's only a change for Monks.

Aside from coming on line later, the big difference is that casters using armor proficiency have to invest in strength to avoid penalties since they'll need at least studded leather to hit the cap whereas the dragonblood feat lets them dump it and focus on other more useful stats.

Meh, a chain shirt is just a -1 to stealth and you hit the cap at level 1 as a human with no str investment.

shroudb wrote:

I mean, having 2 teammates getting slammed for 100+ damage from a rune giant in fists every round in addition to his AoE kinda blurs the argument of "high level needs less healing" imo.

In general this is the exception not the rule (unless your GM makes every encounter as extreme).

Anyway it's not usual that a creature that deals 3d12+17 (+3d6 if is under effect of Rune of Flames) dealing 100+ damage every round without a high critical rate (what's usually means that the party level is pretty low to a rune giant critic with a high frequency). In my gameplay experience most level 15+ encounters rarely requires in combat healing.

1 action to attack 2 creatures, plus absolutely gigantic threat area plus 2 reactive strikes will do that for you even without his 1 action "breath".

Yes but this isn't chirurgeon exclusive. Feats like Invigorating Elixir, Fortified Elixirs, Improved Invigorating Elixir and Supreme Invigorating Elixir aren't subclass locked.

While not locked, usually you'll only go deep in feat chains for your subclass.

I mean, having 2 teammates getting slammed for 100+ damage from a rune giant in fists every round in addition to his AoE kinda blurs the argument of "high level needs less healing" imo.

Trip.H wrote:

Not really sure what else the injection trait could be referring to in regard to injecting allies for 1A.

"usually an injury poison" is atypically permissive for Paizo.

and Collar is there as an example of explicitly injecting elixirs.

There's no indication that it contemplates injecting allies, rather than enemies.

"Usually an injury poison" seems like typical future proofing. Maybe they'll come up with another injectable substance that is not a poison and has rules for being injected. Right now that's only injury poisons, although I could see case for a contact poison in an injection reservoir - the contact trait says they can't go on weapons because of the risk of poisoning yourself, but the reservoir seems to avoid that risk. Stab, activate, and run away.

But the elixir trait (and specific elixir of life description) require drinking. Nothing in the injection reservoir or injection trait overcome this.

The Collar is explicitly there as an example of how a thing that grants a new method of administering something has to say "this specific thing does a thing that could not otherwise be done under the existing general rule."

The Injection trait does stipulate that you can put beneficial things in the items:

This weapon can be filled with a liquid, usually an injury poison. Immediately after a successful attack with the weapon, you can inject the target with the loaded contents with a single Interact action. (If the target is willing, the injection takes only 1 Interact action total.) Refilling the weapon with a new substance requires 3 Interact actions and uses two hands.

Any liquid and there are even provisions of how to use an Injection weapon on willing subjects (no attack required, just spend the 1 interact to administer)

they even went out of their way in calling out that you fill it up with "a substance" rather than straight up say "with a poison".

Uh, sorry, I did not make myself clear.

My actual question is : if I have the formula for said expendable item, can I make it with remastered Advanced Alchemy or Quick Alchemy ?

Bottled Monstrosities have this text about them:

Bottled monstrosities in particular bear special mention, as most include a line like, “Craft Requirements Supply the corpse of a roc.” While these crafting requirements can be ignored for the sake of the story being told, they can also be a potent storytelling tool, enabling your players to directly convert their triumphs on the battlefield into new tools for adventuring.

Which in layman's text roughly translates to:

Trip.H wrote:

Has anyone seen news of what happened with Enduring Alchemy?

It went unmentioned in the BadLuckGamer comprehensive video, so I think it's safe to assume it's unchanged. Meaning we can't take that quick vial from Double Brew over to the next turn.

shroudb wrote:

Knuckles and plain Gauntlet are B weapons, so that leaves Spiked Gauntlet to apply the poisons.

I think it's worth noting that this is a 1d4 agile weapon, with no finesse trait. So if you want to hit with it, you'll need to invest in Str, and then your "power" strike is running off a smaller die than you'd use otherwise.

Trip.H wrote:

Any Alchemist that doesn't have a piece of equipment occupy their hand slot could now wear two spiked gauntlets pre-loaded if the GM allows the gimme of re-making and loading the 10-min VVs.

(This used to compete with Gloves of Storing, an unexpected boon of the OGL shift to the Retrial Belt)

Another use is to stick your weapon runes on the gauntlet, even if you're Dex, then use doubling rings to swap between different melee weapons, potentially having multiple pre-poisoned, or using an agile weapon to land poison and a non-agile one for better damage.

Something else I thought of to get around the action cost of setting up Double Brew: having a familiar with Independent+Manual Dexterity that uses its actions to either take the weapon from your hand or put it back. So if Toxi starts empty-handed with a familiar holding a weapon, they can either Quick Bomber Double Brew (and incur MAP) or Double Brew and drop the item for someone else to pick up and use later, have the familiar put a weapon in their hand for free, poison it for their second action, then make one Strike for their third.

If we're doing Familiar, I think Valet is less clunky but it only works with Advanced.

In a practical build imo:
You're using 2 of your VVs to keep your weapon poisoned and the injector full. A 3rd VV for your mutagen.
And a few more Advanced poisons in your person from your daily preps.

First couple of rounds you rely on the poison in your weapon and your injector.
As soon as you use those, Command (1st action), the familiar gives you one of your Advanced poisons, apply (2nd action), Strike (3rd action), the familiar gives you the second poison.
Next round you start with the poison in hand, so you can Apply, Strike, have a free action.

---

Throwing weapons via the Thrower's bandolier, keeping like 3 of them prepoisoned using VVs is also a reasonable approach to Toxicologist.

Trip.H wrote:

* Double-Brew's second item: Nope, can't do it. Double brew needs 2H, and Tox must both wield the weapon & hold the injury poison. By needing weapons to carry their poisons, Tox cannot reasonably use Double Brew at all.

You can with a free hand weapon: so Gauntlet, Knuckle Duster and Spiked Gauntlet out of the box.

Knuckles and plain Gauntlet are B weapons, so that leaves Spiked Gauntlet to apply the poisons.

As for infused "collars":

I never thought that infused permanent " items were ever intended, so to begin with I never allowed those in my table.

Trip.H wrote:

Ritunn wrote:

With folks starting to get PC2 (alas I still wait to get my hands on it), the new familiar options and specific familiar changes have been revealed. I did want to go over some stuff first though!

Alchemists got a lot of changes, including to Alchemical Familiar which now gets Construct for free. However, I'm going to need to do a total rebuild of the build in the guide! Especially with the addition of the Item Delivery familiar ability, which finally allows familiars to easily transport and feed allies consumable items (which was the whole point of the build). Probably the best new option ever for alchemists (and for any item delivery familiar). Either way, quite excited for these familiar changes and I look forward to writing about them for all of you! At latest, the guide will be updated during GenCon, but I hope to be able to update it this week if possible.

If you want to skim the Alch news thread, there's discussion of the familiar change news, starting here:

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs4qj44&page=4?First-impressions-of-alchemis t-news#196

Many are discussing the item delivery as a 3 for 2 action save / bonus of Command --> [take] + [move] + [Feed/Handoff]

My take, the item delivery ability's main issues:

* Pre-req of item in the master's hand. This means that:
* * the action cost of getting item in-hand has already been paid.
* * Any time the desired patient is in reach of master, delivery is useless.
* * The master has the option to throw the item to an ally for 1A via remaster Interact; familiar delivery must be more desirable for some reason.
* * familiar & master must be sharing a square ahead of time

* familiar ends the action in the ally square:
* * The 3:2 save is deceptive. Actions must be spent to move the familiar back to the master.
* * moving across the battle map means familiar is put at combat risk.

The ability is not really an action save, but a possible way to feed allies

...

The differences with tossing items to allies are:

a)it costs overall 1 extra action for the Ally (create, throw, then on his turn the ally needs an extra action to drink it, so total of 3 actions vs 2 actions of create, command)

b)the ally needs a free hand

c)you can fail the Toss (it's a DC15 ranged attack with 10ft increment)

so, overall, worse action economy, needs ally to have free hand, and can fail vs you need to recall the familiar at a later round to you (either with indepenent or with another command)

shroudb wrote:

No matter how you flavor it, it would be an Animal.

And that's extremely bad thematically for an Alchemist. Being FORCED to have an Animal familiar.

Dude, this just is outright lying.

The Feat providing the base "animal" familiar is not a limitation. It's not being FORCED to have an animal-themed familiar.

This is getting absurdly dishonest.

Any Alchemist could choose the construct trait if they really wanted to spend a f.ability on that mechanic. I'd imagine most wanted to take the theming provided by the Feat's text, but explicitly preferred the mechanics of the base familiar.

===============

Not only does forcing the construct trait genuinely prevent its removal, but it also causes conflict with any other trait-type f.ability from being selected.

No alchemist can construct their familiar of concentrated elemental essences.

No one can use forbidden secrets to stitch and animate an alchemical undead familiar.

No one can have their backstory include a deal w/ a dragon that let them use its blood in the creation of a dragon-trait familiar.

But every one of those possibilities was there with the old familiar feat.

It is insane that I have to explicitly spell this out.

===============

This inarguable loss of options is why I'm so quick to criticize the new Feat not having the trait be optional.

Not if they want the familiar to do ANYTHING.

In order to pick Construct you need also Tough.

So you need to spend BOTH abilities in order to have a familiar that's a construct and does nothing else.

If you wanted a truly alchemical familiar and not an Animal you HAD to have the familiar being 100% useless

Saying anything ELSE is the dishonest part, where you pretend a 0 abilities familiar to be worthwhile.

I'm just glad the homunculus is a thing now. It wasn't, either in the alchemist feat or as a specific familiar, for the longest time, and I was frustrated by that, especially when it was in the bestiary and is so strongly linked to alchemy.

I've also got a mad scientist-type character from PF1E that I've been waiting to port over, and the homunculus was a fairly important bit of their character narratively.

Even worse, the old poisoner familiar ability required a "homunculus" familiar (similar to the new one) without a way to have one lol.

shroudb wrote:

Especially since said extra ability is a thousand times more thematic than "being forced" to have an animal familiar if I am an alchemist.

Base concepts can be papered over thematically, which is another way of saying that "flavor is free" idea.

You already could imagine your alch familiar as homuncular in nature, or you could imagine them as a magical animal. Now, you are forced to have a familiar that exists as pseudo-life construct.

You also seem to have oopsed a bit, as the old Feat:

Alchemical Familiar wrote:

You have used alchemy to create life, a simple creature formed from alchemical materials, reagents, and a bit of your own blood. This alchemical familiar appears to be a small creature of flesh and blood, though it might have some unusual or distinguishing aspects depending on your creative process. Like other familiars, your alchemical familiar assists you in your laboratory and on adventures. The familiar uses your Intelligence modifier to determine its Perception, Acrobatics, and Stealth modifiers (see Familiars for more information).

The old alch familiar already primed its flavor text to be more thematic than an animal, without forcing the construct trait.

You keep forcing this false binary when that entire notion is what I'm trying to oppose here.

You cannot counter "Hey, they are forcing every salad to have croutons."

with: "Because I like my salads w/ croutons, this is better, actually. And as a matter of fact, you're wrong for trying to deny salads the opportunity to have croutons."

Because, no, your counter of being "forced" to use medicine/elixirs is outright untrue. You can add the construct trait to your familiar if you wish to do so. But now no one can take construct off.

============

Removing the OPTION of the vanilla, while mandating the alch familiar have the specific spice of the construct, is 100% unambiguously a narrowing of theme.

You can add thematic flavor to anything so long as it does not cause...

No matter how you flavor it, it would be an Animal.

And that's extremely bad thematically for an Alchemist. Being FORCED to have an Animal familiar.

Regardless if you see it as a buff or a nerf, it's something that adds tons and tons of flavor and just makes sense for the Alchemist to have.

shroudb wrote:

Construct trait is not a "nerf".

While you cannot give them elixirs of health, you can Quick Repair them, and they get a host of immunities as well.

You may not like it, but it isn't a nerf.

It's instant death at 0 HP if fully applied, vs dying and wounded values that apply to PCs, normal familiars, and animal companions.

That part of Construct trait ability was removed in the remaster.

shroudb wrote:

Construct trait is not a "nerf".

While you cannot give them elixirs of health, you can Quick Repair them, and they get a host of immunities as well.

You may not like it, but it isn't a nerf.

As far as thematics go, I'd say it's 100% on brand for the alchemical familiar to be a Construct, and the only way before the remaster for the base familiar to be one was if it had 0 other abilities.

So in fact it majorly EXPANDS the available thematics for alchemical familiars rather than restricting them.

Quick Repair is a Skill Feat.

Repair requires a repair toolkit.

Constructs are immune to ALL healing, which is really bad. The benefits of their other immunities only really matter when they specifically targeted by such effects, making them likely to never once help during a campaign.

The ability for low HP familiars to use the dying rules is essential for their viability in combat, especially with Alchemists having common access to Fast Healing elixirs.

The addition of an OPTION to make one's familiar a Homunculus or a construct would have expanded the themeing.

The FORCED change for all alchemist familiars to become constructs is a big thematic restriction.

Your repeated contrarian "no, it's good actually" stance is becoming more transparent with each repetition.

===========

Look, I'm eager and excited to try out the new Alchemist. There are enough positive core changes, like all infused getting scaling DCs, that the good could outweigh the bad.

But I have to call a spade a spade. It helps no one and nothing to knee-jerk defend every little change.

As an alchemist you will always be trained in Craft but not necessarily in Medicine.

So it being a construct means you can always heal it up without being FORCED to spend skills on medicine or FORCED to feed it your few Elixirs (see? I can capitalize words too!)

No matter how you capitalize your words, a free ability that even ignores the requirements to get it, is overall a boon, even if it requires some extra work to get the full benefits of.

Especially since said extra ability is a thousand times more thematic than "being forced" to have an animal familiar if I am an alchemist.

---

Basically, if my options are "forced to have an animal familiar if I want it to do anything" and "forced to have an alchemical familiar but it's immune to healing" I'd always picked the 2nd.

Raisengen wrote:

That's the basic value offer, as far as I can see. (Though you probably make the item with Quick Alchemy rather than drawing it.) You've then got 1 action left to do something else, e.g. make a 0 MAP strike or use a second item you made with Double Brew. You can then either leave your familiar sitting in the middle of nowhere, or spend an extra action on a later turn to call it back, so it's overall more flexible.

I guess what I’m getting at is that Familiar abilities are largely there for classes that get familiars. This isn’t an Alchemist specific ability (unless I’m misunderstanding things). So, it shouldn’t be judged solely on whether or not it solves everything for the Alchemist. As a Witch, I might be regularly sending my familiar out anyway. I could have it deliver a healing potion to a downed opponent, and then trigger its ability with a Hex. Or I might need to both deliver an item and sustain a spell.

Alchemists having other ways to do their thing is fine. And maybe this isn’t worth the investment for them. It doesn’t mean that the Familiar ability is useless for everyone or that Paizo made some mistake with the way they constructed it.

I mean, there were always abilities that were not universal.

Lab Assistant only worked for alchemy stuff, spellcasting familiar and extra cantrips and extra slots only worked for spellcasters, and etc.

Construct trait is not a "nerf".

While you cannot give them elixirs of health, you can Quick Repair them, and they get a host of immunities as well.

You may not like it, but it isn't a nerf.

As far as thematics go, I'd say it's 100% on brand for the alchemical familiar to be a Construct, and the only way before the remaster for the base familiar to be one was if it had 0 other abilities.

So in fact it majorly EXPANDS the available thematics for alchemical familiars rather than restricting them.

Similarly, what about the extra vial familiar ability? Is that one time use, or can it be recovered like all the others?

If I remember correctly there's 2 abilities, one for an extra Advanced and 1 to regain a Versatile.

---

The one thing I remember is that there's finally a Specific Homunculus familiar, that gets a lot of the alchemist specific abilities, plus you are fully aware of what it sees and hears up to 1500feet, it has your knowledge (basically everything you know it knows) and if you get dropped unconscious it has 2 actions to respond to you falling like you've commanded it (in your round I think)

shroudb wrote:

a)by RAW nothing in either Manual Dexterity or Lab assistant allows a familiar to Activate an alchemical item to Administer it.

b)even if you houserule it to be ok, you still need the familiar to do 3 actions to either mak or take the item, then move, then administer, this compresses said 3 actions into 2.

Trip.H wrote:

Even just the new option to Command: [Q-Alch] + [Feed me] would be a game-changing action save nearly akin to Quick Bomber for self-used items. It would even be quite balanced due to the familiar's 0 reach.

You seem to be in agreement on this point; could I ask where you're getting this from? Because I've not been able to find anything.

Manual Dexterity lets the familiar take manipulate actions, and elixirs just take a 1-action manipulate (Interact on older ones, which is itself just a manipulate action) to use. Assuming they work like potions, you can feed them to another willing creature with the same action you'd otherwise use to drink them yourself.

I see stuff saying familiars/pets can't benefit from item bonuses and can't make strikes, but nothing banning them from using items (at least, once you've given them Manual Dexterity). So what's stopping you from spending 1 action to telling your familiar to QA an elixir and feed it to you?

(I admit I forgot that they have reach 0 so can't pass to adjacent allies normally, so they'd need to be able to make a ranged attack roll to do so. But feeding it to someone in the same space as them should be fine.)

Zalabim wrote:

Does everyone interested in familiars just never move? The action savings of any of the proposed options is easily lost if you ever have to command your familiar just to keep up with you in battle. Familiars are tiny, with default 25 speed and 0 reach. It's easy for a familiar to get left behind, even if it can be Independent. It must be in your space to use lab assistant, and must start in your space for item delivery. Item delivery then requires it to reach

...

letting them ride on your shoulders is pretty fine since even the devs themselves in their playthroughs and in their presentations have done so, and it's even half-referenced in the rules about pcs riding pcs (that those follow different rules than simpyl having a tiny familiar riding you and etc)

but up to this point, the raw has been straightfowrard that familiars "cannot activate items" and administering items requires to activate them.

so, so far, familiars have been unable to actually do so. So any kind of action gain by having the familiar do the quick alchemy, or having the familiar carry the potions, has been reduced to basically 0 because they then have to pass the item for the actual character to activate it, which is basically a pure +1 action tax negating any benefit you gained from the familiar.

this is the first ability ever printed that specifically allows familiars to activate and administer the elixirs, in addition to being 3 actions taken by the familiar with a single command.

which is why it's such a clear action economy booster.

---

that said, you probably want at least a feat or two in familiar master archetype to truly make it shine.

shroudb wrote:

Like, do you even read what you write?

What's the suppossed action compression of Lab assistant? ! action to command and hand the item. 1 action for whomever got it to drink the item.
With the EXTREME caveat that whoever you handed off the item needs to ALSO have a free hand for any of this to happen. With the same 2 actions you can make it and administer it yourself.

As I wrote, the action compression of Lab Assistant comes from the Alchemical Chart.

The item allows Q-Alch creations to last 1 turn longer before dissolving.

This means that on turn one, you can call out an item to your familiar (not Command, just Independent) and the familiar will brew it.

Now, at any point during your next turn, the familiar has the item in-hand and an Independent action to make use of it.

Mostly, that's going to be putting it into your hand for a total of 0 of your actions.

I'm pretty sure there's a rule somewhere that says something like "if your familiar must make an attack roll use ___ for it's value" which would be great to use for the Interact throw/pass, but until I track that down I'm not going to hard recommend that as a valid thing you can do with it.

=================

Please refrain from accusing someone of that when you are the one too amped up to realize you are failing to properly read the post.

Chart doesn't give any compression, it just allows it to even work with exactly 0 actions gained.

The Action gain for "spend 1 action, create 1/2 items, spend 1 action administer something in range, 1 action left" vs
"spend 1 action make 1 item, move, spend 1 action administering, 0 actions remaining"

It's a clear +1 action that you can use it in whatever you want, with Double Brew it's even better since you're left with an item in hand and an actual Action left to use it/drink it.

shroudb wrote:

Btw, half of the worries I had about Action Efficiency are mitigated by the new familiar ability "item delivery"

with a command (so 1 action): the familiar takes an item you are holding, use a move action to get to a target, and then gives the item to the target OR administers the item.

the poison familiar ability also helps, but not as impressive: doesn't require command, is just a single interact, so it can be done with Independent, and basically applies an injury poison you had prefilled it with to an ally's blade (I guess here a familiar's ally, so that would include you, but the wording may imply that for some reason the familiar can only poison your ally's weapons and not yours, not sure about that)

that said, here we go again having a familiar being kinda mandatory if you're not a bomber as a negative, but at least action efficiency is now very good.

In terms of action compression, the delivery service doesn't sound too impressive. Lab Assistant + Manual Dexterity already lets a familiar make + admninister elixirs for 1 action, or... hm. I wanted to say that they can make + chuck the item to someone else with Interact, but the Interact action says you "typically" need to pass a DC 15 ranged attack roll for that. Familiars are Pets, and Pets can't make Strikes. However, it's just a raw attack roll, not a Strike action (you're not trying to deal damage). However however, the familiar doesn't have an attack modifier, so it's going to have a hard time actually making the DC. (Even for PCs, does an attack roll interact with MAP if it's not part of an action with the Attack trait?)

That said, I feel like this was probably an oversight, and that a more permissive GM would allow it. Point is, this is competing with existing action compression that's potentially more useful (1A elixirs on yourself and adjacent allies, or 1A make+pass off at some range.)

(I guess this also means a familiar can produce + feed a quick vial to a Mutagenist for 1 action,...

a)by RAW nothing in either Manual Dexterity or Lab assistant allows a familiar to Activate an alchemical item to Administer it.

b)even if you houserule it to be ok, you still need the familiar to do 3 actions to either mak or take the item, then move, then administer, this compresses said 3 actions into 2.

shroudb wrote:

Trip.H wrote:

Lol.

Dude, that's still 2 Actions, and what happens after you use it?

Your familiar is in another square.

And if that ability requires Manual Dex, that's your 2 familiar ability slots gone. Meaning you will have to Command the familiar to move them back! It's not even possible to be an action save without Independent, which means Dedication time.

Moreover, I've had all my GMs thus far want to ignore involving the familiar in combat, and so the helpful little guys just sit on my PC the whole time. But as soon as the familiar is moving across the battlefield, they get a token, and start being a target.

1 action to administer something in range.

That means 1 extra action done.

It's amazing action economy.

No, it really is not, please actually read before replying.

You are "saving" an action up front by adding an action cost later. The familiar ends out of position and can no longer help you. You must command the familiar to return to you later to get back to normal.

This means it is not really an action save at all.

Even IF you also have Independent, that return move could have been spent on other Independent actions.

Like Lab Assistant, which is genuinely a way to save actions. Familiars get 2 "hands" via Manual Dex, so they should be able to hold an Alchemical Chart (though a GM might rule they cannot benefit from it).

With the Chart to extend the Quick Alchemy items across turns, the familiar genuinely CAN hand off the Q-Alch items for saved actions and 1A usage.

============

This new item delivery thing *might* have a use-case in getting items used in an emergency within the same turn, such as if the familiar has flying while the PC does not, but it seems far too rare and unlikely a reactive circumstance for me to ever consider occupying the slot.

The turn you use it you save 1 action. Who cares about the fact that if you want to repeat it at some point in the future you need to recall the familiar back first, and yes, with independent, even that is not an issue. It's straight up 1 action gained /2 rounds.

Lab assistant actually doesn't save anything, since at most the familiar can spend an "action" to hand off the item, and then whoever got it needs to spend another action to use it.

Like, do you even read what you write?

What's the suppossed action compression of Lab assistant? ! action to command and hand the item. 1 action for whomever got it to drink the item.
With the EXTREME caveat that whoever you handed off the item needs to ALSO have a free hand for any of this to happen. With the same 2 actions you can make it and administer it yourself.

shroudb wrote:

Btw, half of the worries I had about Action Efficiency are mitigated by the new familiar ability "item delivery"

with a command (so 1 action): the familiar takes an item you are holding, use a move action to get to a target, and then gives the item to the target OR administers the item.

the poison familiar ability also helps, but not as impressive: doesn't require command, is just a single interact, so it can be done with Independent, and basically applies an injury poison you had prefilled it with to an ally's blade (I guess here a familiar's ally, so that would include you, but the wording may imply that for some reason the familiar can only poison your ally's weapons and not yours, not sure about that)

that said, here we go again having a familiar being kinda mandatory if you're not a bomber as a negative, but at least action efficiency is now very good.

Lol.

Dude, that's still 2 Actions, and what happens after you use it?

Your familiar is in another square.

And if that ability requires Manual Dex, that's your 2 familiar ability slots gone. Meaning you will have to Command the familiar to move them back! It's not even possible to be an action save without Independent, which means Dedication time.

Moreover, I've had all my GMs thus far want to ignore involving the familiar in combat, and so the helpful little guys just sit on my PC the whole time. But as soon as the familiar is moving across the battlefield, they get a token, and start being a target.

1 action to administer something in range.

That means 1 extra action done.

It's amazing action economy.

Btw, half of the worries I had about Action Efficiency are mitigated by the new familiar ability "item delivery"

with a command (so 1 action): the familiar takes an item you are holding, use a move action to get to a target, and then gives the item to the target OR administers the item.

the poison familiar ability also helps, but not as impressive: doesn't require command, is just a single interact, so it can be done with Independent, and basically applies an injury poison you had prefilled it with to an ally's blade (I guess here a familiar's ally, so that would include you, but the wording may imply that for some reason the familiar can only poison your ally's weapons and not yours, not sure about that)

that said, here we go again having a familiar being kinda mandatory if you're not a bomber as a negative, but at least action efficiency is now very good.

shroudb wrote:

_shredder_ wrote:

Legacy ancestors oracle was quite objectively one of the worst subclasses in the system, but it was also probably the mechanically most fun build I ever played here. I loved going all in on the curse and letting the ancestors decide how my character plays every turn. My big hope was that remaster would keep everything that was so incredibly cool and unique about ancestors oracle and its playstyle while making the passive benefits stronger.

From what it looks like the exact opposite happened - all the flavorful ancestor mechanics are gone, and ancestor will now play very similar to other oracles and divine sorcs, while still being not all that good due to getting one of more punishing curses.

While legacy ancestors oracle wasn't perfectly designed, it did an amazing job at making me actually feel like my character is possessed by their ancestors. Mechanics and flavor worked perfectly together. I don't care that the mystery is probably stronger on average now, having as many slots as a sorcerer and becoming clumsy after using a strong spell like ability has just nothing to do with what made ancestors oracle appealing to me in any way.

The old "roll 1d4 and see what you're this round" still exists but as a cursebound feat.

So, if you liked that flavour, you can still do it.

It's just that objectively it was bad to leave it as a chance what to do each round, so I don't think many will be picking said feat.

The cursebound feat meddling futures is absolutely terrible (especially compared to other powerful cursebound feats) and even more punishing and less rewarding than the ancestors curse was, and you have to use it every turn if you want that flavorful mechanic instead of it just being an always on thing that gives you passive benefits, which is extremely restricting and makes the class way more repetitive. My previous ancestors oracle also used a bow to strike when possesed by a warrior ancestor, and becoming clumsier ever round completely...

I know it's bad, I even said so in the post you're quoating.

But it's not like it was good before.

The "flavor" part is unchainged though, that's why I said that if you just wanted it for flavor, it's there (but you should probably skip it for the other, actually strong, cursebound feats).

Chirurgeon has a 10min cooldown on its main ability.

Considering that you cant win a combat on healing alone, is this hobbling even nessiary?
I feel like they are just a chassis to bolt medicine feats onto.

Mutagenist take a -2 hit to AC and reflexes to get a +1 bump to accuracy?
And that's the goto for combat?
That seems terrible.

As for Soothing, can multiple of them stack?
1 point of healing on your turn seems underwhelming.

I feel like Alchemist players may have become accustomed to some subpar choices,making even subpar improvements seem excellent.

The Field Vial is not his "main ability". That's just his cantrip.

His main ability is Elixirs of Health, and those have no cooldown.

Legacy ancestors oracle was quite objectively one of the worst subclasses in the system, but it was also probably the mechanically most fun build I ever played here. I loved going all in on the curse and letting the ancestors decide how my character plays every turn. My big hope was that remaster would keep everything that was so incredibly cool and unique about ancestors oracle and its playstyle while making the passive benefits stronger.

From what it looks like the exact opposite happened - all the flavorful ancestor mechanics are gone, and ancestor will now play very similar to other oracles and divine sorcs, while still being not all that good due to getting one of more punishing curses.

While legacy ancestors oracle wasn't perfectly designed, it did an amazing job at making me actually feel like my character is possessed by their ancestors. Mechanics and flavor worked perfectly together. I don't care that the mystery is probably stronger on average now, having as many slots as a sorcerer and becoming clumsy after using a strong spell like ability has just nothing to do with what made ancestors oracle appealing to me in any way.

The old "roll 1d4 and see what you're this round" still exists but as a cursebound feat.

So, if you liked that flavour, you can still do it.

It's just that objectively it was bad to leave it as a chance what to do each round, so I don't think many will be picking said feat.

Quote:

Lookout

1) Correct. Step is not available for those movement types. Those movement types are often houseruled to have their own version of Step for them.

So, a character with a specific feat can step. For example, Wing step for strix, You Step 5 feet twice. Or is it on the ground without fly ?

Any activity that references a subordinate action still uses all the rules for said subordinate action except those that the activity specifically alters.

Looking at Wing Step as an example, it says your Step twice, and doesn't references any changes to said Steps, so you still can only do them on the ground.

shroudb wrote:

It lasts 10mins but the resource you spent to poison it comes back in 10mins.

You can keep perpetually 3 things poisoned with VVs precombat basically.

"If you're below your maximum number (of VVs), you can gather reagents from the environment around you. For every 10 minutes you spend in exploration mode, you regain 2 (3 at higher levels) vials; this doesn't prevent you from participating in other exploration activities"

If I'm reading that right you can:
- Keep your VVs at MAX -1, if 7 is MAX then 6 is MAX -1
- At the 9:59 minute mark use 3 VVs for 10 min buffs
- At the 10:00 minute mark regain 3 VVs letting you start combats at 6 VVs with 3 perpetual buffs

Which is a dubious way of interpreting the text but still RAW I think? Also even without this, it just highlights how clunky this strategy is, "Hey DM after this fight, when I regain all my VVs which would be around 20 - 30 mins. I'd like to spend 3 VVs to continuously apply/reapply buffs". After that you enter combat with half your VVs. I don't dislike the strat but I just hope there's a smoother way to do it.

I'd argue that the timer is different between VVs.

So, if you used a VV now, you start "regaining up to your maximum" which at that point is regaining 1.

If 7 minutes later you use another 2 VVs, it's only at that point where you start regaining those.

When the difference is a few seconds in between 10min recharge (the VVs used in a combat), it can easily handwaved, but when its 50%+ of the total recharge time, I don't see anyone allowing this.

---

I don't find anything clunky about "I have a pool of 7 VVs, I use 2 of those to be permanently under my mutagen and X, so I have 5 remaining when combat starts".

Xenocrat wrote:

Mutagenist has lots of problems (applying mutagen in round 1 is action ineffecient

Use the Collar of the Shifting Spider for that. You gain nearly 1 hit point per level with the level 1 ability, it's not bad on a martial.

But I agree that 2 actions to suppress a Mutagen downside is a joke. Overall, the Mutagenist Research Field is really focused on the Bestial Mutagen. If you want to play a Weapon Mutagenist you now switch to Toxicologist.

Xenocrat wrote:

Everyone but bomber has field stuff that doesn't really do much.

Toxicologist's poison circumventing Poison Immunity/Resistance is massive. Chirurgeon's main ability has always been free Medicine proficiency. And Soothing Vials is downright broken. Mutagenist's thing is the double Mutagen at level 13 but I agree it's really late.

Chirurgeon level 13 now that Quick Alchemy is so much more abundant is also insanely good late game.

And indirectly, Chirurgeon also gets a big buff from a new level 3 general feat:
Without weird requirements like Godless Healing, this new feat gives you +your level when you get healed by treat wounds/battle medicine and the immunity to battle medicine goes down to 1/hour instead of 1/day.

If I poison weapons before a fight, and I should, then it only lasts 10 minutes. It doesn't have to be my weapons. And I don't know why I can apply poison as one action instead of two.

I'm trying to think of some way that the alchemist gets to use alchemy in combat instead of before combat. The bomber is doing it. Why not everyone else.

It lasts 10mins but the resource you spent to poison it comes back in 10mins.

You can keep perpetually 3 things poisoned with VVs precombat basically.

Toxicologist got major upgrades.

ignore poison immunity
damage on a succesful save
the level 13 ability is simply amazing for poison spreading
3x VV poisons each fight
and etc

yes, some of the old builds, like archer toxicologist won't work as well, and yes QV is weaker than the bomber but still usable as a static damage increase on a Strike

he has some action economy issues during the middle of combats probably, but he's also the sub that gains the most out of a simple haste.

overall they gained a lot, if they gained enough to put them up there in the charts, we'll have to wait and see.

Hey guys, I’m sorry but I have to ask a question that was already discussed on the pages here before because I do not understand it. Part of my difficulties comes from people using a lot of shorthand notation, but I’m rather new to pathfinder and it would be nice if you could spell it out for me because it is very hard to follow if you do not have much intuition.

That said, about the new quick alchemy x quick bomber x double brew (I’m looking here at the versions presented in the youtube channel of The Rules Lawyer)
The way I understand it, either
(A) double brew is useless,you can have quick bomber and double brew gives you nothing in addition
or
(B) double brew is only really useful if you have quick bomber, AND the prepared versatile vials (2+int) are completely useless
which depends on whether or not you can use quick alchemy off of a versatile vial in your inventory, those 2+int that are replenishable (A) or if you have to draw them first (B).

My thought process is the following:
(A)
In this path, the cost of actions to throw a versatile vial are as big as throwing a bomb from the book so you can always modify them to be one of your book, so long as you have the resources. Once they are gone, you have to spend one additional action to first create the needed vials or throw the vials themselves at the cost of having a less impressive bomb - the cost of limited resources by their nature.
(A.1) You do not have quick bomber. You do not have double brew.
Action 1: Modify a versatile vial from inventory into a bomb in your hand
Action 2: Throw the bomb.
(A.2) You do have quick bomber. You do not have double brew.
Action 1: Modify a versatile vial from your inventory into a bomb in your hand and throw it for free.
(A.3) You do not have quick bomber. You do have double brew.
Action 1: Modify 2 versatile vials from your inventory into 2 bombs in your hands.
Action 2: Throw the first bomb.
Action 3: Throw the second bomb.
Using (A.2) twice costs one action less, so if you only want to spend one...

You are generally correct that when you have Quick Bomber, the double brew doesn't do much when you want to "throw 2 bombs".

Basically, draw/create a bomb and throw it with 1 action is the same action economy with draw/create 2 bombs, throw 1 with 1 action, and then throw the other one with a second action.

BUT even for bombers with quick bomber, you can use double brew on all the turns when you need the second VV to be an elixir instead.

something like "double brew to make and throw a bomb and make an elixir, 2nd action drink the elixir".

Yup, 3per 10min after level 9, and there's a low level feat you regain 0-3 based on a crafting check for 1 action once per day.

I mean, I don't want to get at it again now that the swashbuckler has received some buffs that I think most of us here like, so going over DPR discussions again would kinda feel bad IMO, but if those DPR discussions we had earlier proved something was that even in the best case scenarios swashbucklers didn't even had that much of a difference in damage when compared to rogues (and we didn't compare swash to the best rogue builds available). Also, like Squark said, even if the swashbuckler would be better in some situations, the fact that you have to do something as unnatural as make your strongest attack with a penalty is just weird. At least you don't have to jump so many hoops as you used to, which technically makes this a more possible tactic than before, but I just will never like it. At least losing panache now isn't as bad as it used to.

there's a great difference in:

basically, the only way swash could reach rogue levels of damage was by doing 2 attacks.

you claiming that "they still are doing only 1 attack" is purely spreading misinformation at this point, when it has been clearly shown to you that 2 attacks are factually better over and over again.