Why does the Alchemist get Identify if he can't identify magical ideas due to not having detect magic?
I tried to make that point, but you actually do it better
1) I believe, as do some others, that Alchemists should be permitted to Brew potions, and be better at it than wizards or sorcerors. Either making the potions function as CL+1, or allowing the Alkie to brew potions of higher than 3rd level (perhaps with feats).... I do think that they should only be able to Brew Potions that are on their Extracts Known list, and that they should (of course) incur standard material costs for doing so.
Sorry, but reading this, I got an idea, and I'd like to throw it out. With the Warlock, even though he didn't get spells, he gained an ability called Imbue Item at level 12 that allowed him to create magic items without having the spell available. How about if we gave the Alchemist an ability similar to this at a lower level and for potions only? He's all about alchemy, gets Use Magic Device as a class skill, only thing is that he's not aimed at being awesomely charismatic. What do you think?
I've always thought that the amulet didn't stack with normal natural armor. Maybe it does actually enhance it like the enhancement bonus on a shield boosts the shields AC.
Yeah the text is:
This amulet, usually crafted from bone or beast scales, toughensthe wearer’s body and flesh, giving him an enhancement bonus to
his natural armor from +1 to +5, depending on the kind of amulet.
so it stacks with the mutagen as that is an unnamed bonus to nat armor. I know in 3.0 or 3.5 it had to be clarified that you could use the amulet even if you didnt have natural armor as it was treated that someone without natural armor is an natural armor of 0 and thus can be enhanced.
Playtest for Alchemist Character class
I had one of my players test the Alchemist class for a few sessions. He really liked the idea of a “mad bombardier” hurling liquid death from the back ranks of the party.
As a matter of fact, he and the archer became fast friends. This was a sixth level PFRPG quest I was DMing. The other party members consisted of an Elven Ranger (archer), a human fighter, and a Half Elven Cleric of Sarenrae.
To maximize the bomb ability, he took the point blank shot feat, far shot, and deadly aim. He also added toughness.
The first combat was rather interesting, as both enemies *and* allies got peppered with splashes from his grenade like weapons. Other members were none too happy with this arrangement, and I thought we were going to lose our Alchemist to mutiny.
However, the Alchemist player made up for these transgressions by infusing different extracts that specifically buff the party. For example, he always made sure to have at least one or two Bulls Strength extracts for the fighter, a Shield extract for the archer, and maybe one or two cure extracts (or Owl’s Wisdom) to keep the cleric happy.
Another thing he did was to constantly poison the ranger’s arrows (since he was usually at the back of the party with him), and those arrows became absolutely devastating.
I made sure to have regular debriefings with the player post session. These are my notes:
The Alchemist did surprisingly well (at 6th level) as a utility character. Being able to max out the skills of disable device, and use magic device proved to be especially useful.
A couple of times, the cleric went down, he was able to bring him back up with a cure light wounds wand, and kept the party going. Locked doors and traps were not a major issue either. Probably the most surprising thing to me about the class was the utility.
Don’t underestimate the power of properly used alchemical items! The Alchemist gets these in spades, and this player gave most (if not all) of them to the other characters. Smokesticks get special mention because of their ability to block line of sight. It got so that every combat began with all party members hurling thunderstones, acid flasks and tanglefoot bags before even engaging in melee.
As far as damage from the bomb ability he said that it was good “support damage” but not enough for him to be the primary damage dealer of the party.
He *really* didn’t like the mutagen ability at all. He used it a couple of times, but did not like the downside of the charisma damage. He’s also of the belief that he doesn’t think he should have to spend a discovery to give extracts to others.
Anyway, we’re still playing (will probably go to level 10). I’ll write back with more later.
Would you be able to use Swift Alchemy to apply the immediate action of poisoning a weapon during an attack of opportunity? It seems like you could, but I am not sure...
Would you be able to use Swift Alchemy to apply the immediate action of poisoning a weapon during an attack of opportunity? It seems like you could, but I am not sure...
From what I understand, the Alchemist doesn't look like he gets poisoning as an immediate action. Only as a swift action. A swift action can only be performed on your turn, so that means you can't poison a weapon on an attack of opportunity.
Would you be able to use Swift Alchemy to apply the immediate action of poisoning a weapon during an attack of opportunity? It seems like you could, but I am not sure...From what I understand, the Alchemist doesn't look like he gets poisoning as an immediate action. Only as a swift action. A swift action can only be performed on your turn, so that means you can't poison a weapon on an attack of opportunity.
It actually says "immediate action" in the description.
It actually says "immediate action" in the description.Would you be able to use Swift Alchemy to apply the immediate action of poisoning a weapon during an attack of opportunity? It seems like you could, but I am not sure...From what I understand, the Alchemist doesn't look like he gets poisoning as an immediate action. Only as a swift action. A swift action can only be performed on your turn, so that means you can't poison a weapon on an attack of opportunity.
Oops, I was looking under the Poison Use ability ability. The Instant Alchemy ability (gained at level 18) does indeed state that the Alchemist can apply poison as an immediate action.
In that case, I would allow the poisoning if the Alchemist had the poison in hand (not stowed away, as it would be a move action to take it out), and was adjacent to the person whose weapon he was going to poison. He could then trigger the immediate action to poison the weapon before the attack of opportunity happened.
I think not. Imbue item is essentially a magic item creation cheese and it distracts from what the Alchemist focus should be... alchemy. He's a fellow about potions, elixirs, and transmutation, not generic magic item creation. That's what Wizards or Artificers are for.
Yeah, I perfectly understand. That's why I don't suggest the Alchemist making armor or weapons, just making potions. That's all.
I remade my Ranger in our Council of Thieves AP. We're still on the first book. This is a series of encounters happening before the dungeon at the end of the first book. Party is a sorceror, 2 rogues, a fighter, a monk, and myself. Encounters are scaled up a bit for the larger party. We generate stats with 4d6, reroll ones, drop the lowest, put them where you want.
I'll spoiler anything from the adventure path and not homebrew.
Name: "The Claw"
Race: Elf
Age: 132 (I can't remember the ages this sounded good though, lol)
Class: Alchemist
HP: 20 (Remaining - 20)
STR: 10
DEX: 20 +5
CON: 16 +3 (14 +2)
INT: 17 +3
WIS: 11
CHA: 14 +2
Fort: +6
Ref: +8
Will: +0
BAB: +2
AC: 18, 10+ (3 Armor) + (5 Dex)
21, (w/ mutagen)
25, (shield spell)
Skills;
8 Appraise
8 Craft (alchemy)
10 Disable Device
10 Sleight of Hand
8 Spellcraft
5 Survival
7 Use magic Device
Attacks;
Longbow +7 (+8 <30 feet)
1d8, range 100ft, +1 damage <30 feet
47 arrows (mw)
Morningstar +1
1d8, bludgeoning and piercing
Special;
Alchemy - Make extraks
Bombs - 1d6+3, ranged touch attack w/ 4 splash dmg. 5/day
Uses - OOOOO
Throw anything - add INT to attacks
Mutagen - +2 ability and +2 Nat armor for 2 hours, 1/day (take 1d4 CHA damage)
Uses - O
Poison resistance +2
Poison Use
Feats;
Point-Blank Shot
+1 attack and damage <30 feet
Equipment;
GP - 283
Longbow
MW. Arrows (47)
Morningstar
Dagger
Studded Leather
Caltrops (2)
Candle (4)
Crowbar
Flint and Steel
Grappling Hook (2)
Mirror, small steel
Rope, Hemp
Tanglefoot bag (2)
Torch (3)
Potion of Cure Light Wounds (3)
Extracs
Known;
1st - reduce person, shield, true strike
Prepared;
1st - reduce person, shield, true strike
I find survival to be an odd skill for an Alchemist but since my guy is a bit of an urban hero seemed appropriate for him. Came in handy for assisting our Fighter in tracking some goblins through a sewer.
Our first encounter was against a rat swarm and two "well" armed goblins. I got top on initiative thanks to my Dex and a well placed bomb dealt the majority of the swarms health.
Next encounter was three goblins and three dire rats. The enemies won initiative and got up close and personal. I was able to get in position on my turn, bomb the rats and flat out kill them.
Then we came into the lair of the Whitechin. A decent sized room with the vermin bard Whitechin, three dire rats, some sort of advanced (fiendish?) rat, two rat swarms, and two goblins. Got top of the initiative again and started by chugging my mutagen(3 CHA damage) for the AC and to hit bonus, then moved further into the room. Some rats charge at me blows being shrugged off. Allies position themselves. Next turn I use my shield extract getting a DM-Frustrating AC of 25. The rest of the fight I use my remaining bombs laughing madly and trying to hit as many targets as possible. The 5 splash damage did end up hurting allies and myself a couple times and at this level we felt it > . <
Thanks to Point Blank Shot and the nice high DEX my longbow was even useful when I ran out of bombs.
I would have really liked to hand out my extracts to the party members but there's so few of them not a huge deal. I'm contemplating not even using a discovery for them.
Right now the alchemist is easily beaten by the other classes, even regarding his own role.
A cleric/ alchemist comparison:
Alchemist: / Cleric:
Medium BaB / Meduim BaB
4 skills / 2 skills
Medium caster / Full caster
Knows few spells/ Knows all spells
Light armor / Medium armor
Simple weapons/ Simple weapons + deity
Mutagen (weak) / Powerful buffing spells
Bombs / Domain power or reserve feats
Can make alchemy items / Can make actual potions and magic items
Can heal himself / Can heal everyone at once
Conclusion: Cleric is better at everything but skills. The alchemist can only do real fun stuff at 20th lvl.
IMO: the alchemist should look more like an artificer (Eberron's) focusing on transmuting matter in general than with only bottled liquids.
They could be master makers, focusing on creating items from unworked matter (Like fabricate spell), artifact developers (slowly making some minor artifact from the beginning of his carrier).
Alchemy should be something like knowledge and transmuting over matter, not just brewing things. I think the concept needs some work.
I was thinking maybe it would work if the alchemist (and the summoner for that matter) had a sort of build progression similar to that of the Ranger. Perhaps give them their normal discovery progression but every now and then (I'm being vague on purpose) they can choose mutagen line discovery or things such as infusion that lean toward the alchemical mad scientist/grenadier end of the spectrum, as a free bonus discovery. I also liked the idea mentioned before of the Alchemist using evolution points for their mutagen builds. It would give the option of gaining those discoveries if one wanted to invest (like how a ranger can still take the bow feats even if it doesn't get them for free with a melee build) while offering a more specialized build if desired.
I like the idea in another thread of making the alchemist fit into the role of a rogue a bit, at least as far as some things are concerned. Since the alchemist already has disable devise and deals with chemicals all the time, trapfinding isn't unreasonable. Also, the fact that as written right now, his extractions don't automatically work on anyone else, I can easily see the personality of a typical rogue and typical alchemist beings similar: prefering to hanging back until the right opportunity to deal their form of damage opens up. I can also see people reacting to both classes very similarly; they both are semi unpredictable and leave those around them wondering what they are going to do next. This in no way degrades the rogue, and opens up opportunities for people who like the feel of a rogue, but want alternate ways to fill that role.
I'll be honest. Given how few extracts you get, sharing them is not a very high priority in the low levels anyways. Least when I played last night it wasn't. Felt like Gollum with his "precious"
Not sure if it's been mentioned before or not, but to make a bomb you need a vial with some chemical catalyst in it...created with an alchemist lab...which costs two hundred gold.
Sooooo....is it just me or do you not get to use bombs at first level?
|
I've always thought that the amulet didn't stack with normal natural armor. Maybe it does actually enhance it like the enhancement bonus on a shield boosts the shields AC.Yeah the text is:
This amulet, usually crafted from bone or beast scales, toughens
the wearer’s body and flesh, giving him an enhancement bonus to
his natural armor from +1 to +5, depending on the kind of amulet.so it stacks with the mutagen as that is an unnamed bonus to nat armor. I know in 3.0 or 3.5 it had to be clarified that you could use the amulet even if you didnt have natural armor as it was treated that someone without natural armor is an natural armor of 0 and thus can be enhanced.
Ah, my mistake. Thanks for clearing that up - it actually might make me try a mutagen next week. I still have issues with forcing everybody down the "Dr. jekyll/Mr. Hyde" path, though.
Sooooo....is it just me or do you not get to use bombs at first level?
It was mentioned somewhere that the APG would have an Alchemist's 'kit', effectively a portable lab, that should be within the range of starting gold (especially if they have a non-masterwork version of it, as 50 gp is a bit expensive for a required bit of equipment at 1st level).
Alchemist Playtest level 10 notes:
Some interesting things came out of this playtest through a level 10 dungeon.
During an encounter with a group of Greater Shadows, the Alchemist player finally got a chance to use his Force Bombs. All the other party members except the Cleric had ghost touch weapons. Fighter and Ranger waded into melee freshly buffed with Shield infusions. The Alchemist (cackling madly) hurled Force Bombs.
Then a question came up. Can Force Bombs do splash damage?? I imagine Force as a focused energy, even in liquid form. Force Bombs also have a knockdown component. His hope was to knockdown the shadow he hits directly, and do Force splash damage on the others in range.
In looking at a description of the Bomb ability it seems to imply that fire does splash damage. I wasn't sure about force.
After much debate, I decided that the knockdown component of the Force Bomb was enough to compensate for not having splash damage, so I ruled that there was no splash damage to Force Bombs. A rules clarification may be in order here.
The battle ended with strength damage all around. The Alchemist player had been making a habit of keeping two 2nd, two 3rd, and one 4th level Formulae slot "open" just in case of emergency. In this case he was able to make Restoration infusions to *greatly* help the Cleric with Restorations for the strength damage.
There was also a rather nasty battle with a Clay Golem. This creature nearly wiped the party. Luckily it was a guardian and did not chase them all over the dungeon because the party had to retreat.
The golem was able to surprise the group, and chose the closest target to slam. That target happened to be the Alchemist. Were it not for the Shield Other spell cast by the cleric in the previous combat, his wounds would have been much worse (I rolled a crit).
What made this combat even more interesting was the fact that the Alchemist actually began the fight in melee. This *greatly* reduced his ability to quaff potions, dole out infusions, and throw bombs. And of course, there was the reach to contend with. The Alchemist sustained another round of attacks before the fighter finally got the creatures attention when he intervened.
The Alchemist was able to get back to the rear of the party and bomb away again. However, the Cleric failed the check to heal the cursed wounds. By this time, the Fighter went down, and the Ranger was about to fall as well. It was at this point, when the Alchemist, Cleric, and Ranger were in full retreat that the Alchemist player said "Wouldn't it be cool if I could hit the Fighter with a Cure infusion from range and get him back up?"
More playtest notes of a non combat nature.
On a more utility based note, the Alchemist in the group has focused on bombs, poisons, and the Craft (Alchemy) skill.
Alchemy crafting checks are pretty much a foregone conclusion at this point now as it relates to making alchemical items. In that same vein, the dependance on offensive alchemical items has dropped of tremendously. The party still carries thunderstones, tanglefoot bags, etc., however their usefulness at this level is negligible. The only things that see much use at all are smokesticks, sunrods, antitoxin, and tindertwigs.
Poisons are another Alchemist specialty. Since there are no Paladins in the group, *everyone* uses it. The rest of the party has even donated some of their share of the treasure to help fund some of the more...extravagant poisons on the list. I might have mentioned this before, but poisoned arrows can be absolutely devastating against the right kind of target.
On a different note, the Mutagen ability is never used. The player believes that the penalties outweigh the actual abilities that it gives, and does not like using resources to heal damage purposefully taken. He believes that this is the weakest part of the class.
Alchemist:
1)in the text it says they get four 0-level extracts, but no extracts of that level are listed anywhere in the pdf.
2)my group consists of all good aligned pc's, so the poison use never comes into play as they all consider it to be an evil - or at least highly dishonorable - act.
3)not enough discoveries. compared to witches(hexes every other lvl), rogues(talents every other lvl), barbarians(rage powers every other lvl), etc... the Alchemist gets shafted on his main class feature.
4)Mutagens: love this ability, but wish it was more versatile. with its limited potential, it tends to get ignored unless the Alchemist gets bum-rushed by minions, and is forced into melee. i don't see why he couldn't make more than one at a time. perhaps at 7th, 13th, and 17th level the alchemist can maintain 1 additional mutagen at once. this would especially be useful if there were different mutagen effects as suggested elsewhere in this thread.
5)unlike some others, i'm glad that they don't get brew potion. the way i see it, their "magic" works completely different than that of arcane casters who bottle their spells into potion form. and thats cool with me.
that's it for now. hope to have more feedback after the holidays (wish i could comment on the other 5 classes, but this one is the only one of the 6 that my players were even interested in trying). party is 10th level, but we won't play again til after christmas.
a lot of good stuff
My understanding is all bombs are splash weapons and get splash damage accordingly. I base this off of the fact that they all say, "The direct target of the bomb is affected by (whatever)"... if there is a direct target, and only that target is affected by the special why point this out unless there are indirect targets as well (i.e. splash targets). Several of the other bombs state that their area of effect is the splash radius of the bomb (or some multiple there of)... so if it didn't have a splash radius it wouldn't have the area of effect to make it useful.
a lot of good stuffMy understanding is all bombs are splash weapons and get splash damage accordingly. I base this off of the fact that they all say, "The direct target of the bomb is affected by (whatever)"... if there is a direct target, and only that target is affected by the special why point this out unless there are indirect targets as well (i.e. splash targets). Several of the other bombs state that their area of effect is the splash radius of the bomb (or some multiple there of)... so if it didn't have a splash radius it wouldn't have the area of effect to make it useful.
Hmmmm. Looking at it this way, I think I made an incorrect ruling. Very good insight Abraham! I would still like to see some kind of clarification in the final draft, however in this light it may not be needed. I may have eventually come to this conclusion if I had read the rule a few more times before deciding.
Yeah in situations like this (a playtest) it's good to ask those sorts of questions regularly simply so the designer knows if he's getting the full intent across. Many people may look at it and go "well duh" but that doesn't mean it couldn't be a bit more clearer.
|
Here's my experience on the 3rd level Alchemist I played in the latest Pathfinder Society scenario:
Jason: post the level at which you are using the class and details about the game.
- I playtested the Alchemist at 3rd level. I played him through the Pathfinder Society scenario, The Beggar's Pearl at tier 3-4. The scenario had a lot of combat but I was not able to use a mutegen until the final encounter. The reason was we had two tanks that dispatched the creatures easily. I could have used a couple of extracts prepared as cure light wounds but we had healing available from another PC.
Jason: Were any of the powers or special abilities too good or not good enough?
- I used the bombs and formulae sparingly. I couldn't throw any bombs because of the splash damage to the tanks. Also, like I commented above, the combats were over quickly. My typical turns in combat went like this: (round one) move, draw a bomb (end of turn in round), (round 2: hold back throwing to avoid splash dmg as fighters were now adjacent to the creatures), move to avoid cover, draw a formulae (end of turn in round), (round 3) - combat was over by the time my turn came up.
- When I beat the fighters on initiative I was able to throw one bomb in that combat round before the fighters closed. Or, I'd double move then on the next round draw a bomb looking for a creature to move away from the PC/NPC pack to avoid splash dmg to friendlies.
- What I should have done was take Quick Draw to avoid the move-draw-end of turn issues. Perhaps the Alchemist can get that as a bonus feat? Having to deal with it in every combat makes it frustrating.
Jason: Are the powers and abilities clear in their presentation and language?
- Yes, no issues understanding how the class worked.
Jason: Do they function the way they are intended and if not, what are the ramifications?
- As I commented above, the move-draw-end of turn issue was a drawback. I was held back a lot to not cause splash damage to the party members. A couple PCs were 1st level. Taking 5pts splash from me (I was 3rd level with a 16 INT) would cause too much pain.
- The formulae was fine. I took CLW, enlarge person, disguise self, and true strike. I used enlarge person in the final combat but not until 2 members of a 6-person party was left standing (me included). Our tank ended the fight before I could close (again, back to the draw - drink - end of turn issue)
- After the scenario we players shared comments about the splash damage. I dropped our party's animal companion from splash damage. Perhaps, we thought, at higher levels the alchemist gets better at throwing bombs that he can avoid certain adjacent squares from splash damage, thereby not hitting friendlies.
Jason: How do these classes work as NPCs or villains?
- I think unless the NPC is pre-buffed it won't be effective in combat to use anything but his/her bombs. Roleplay-wise I think it'll be fun. I played up my Alchemist, who was half-orc, as an addicted, explosion curious nut job. I had fun with it. Players enjoyed my turn in initiative. Even though I didn't contribute much with damage I was entertaining to the table.
Jason: foes that they faced and the results of the combat.
- The final combat was pretty rough. I was able to take advantage of the bombs as the PCs started to drop. The reason I was effective was as a creature would move away from a downed PC I would throw a bomb (unfortunately I would miss more than hit due to low d20 rolls). My thought is for an effective alchemist he'd need to take point blank shot and precise shot.
My experience is also similar to Jeremiziah. I sniped "J's" comments because I'll add a comment from my own from my experience. My comments aren't intended to debate Jeremiziah's. I'm adding my experience to help out Jason. Jeremiziah's comments are valid as they describe his experience.
Last night I played a Level 8 Alchemist....At no time did I have any urge to use a mutagen.
** RA comment - I didn't use one until the final encounter and only because four PCs were down.
...like to see the compatibility of Bombs with feats like Far Shot and Point Blank shot called out.
** RA comment - Yes, me too. Also, if the alchemist got Quick Draw as a bonus feat would be very helpful. Or, perhaps being able to consume an extract as a move action instead of standard. That way during the alchemist's turn in combat he could draw an extract (free with Quick Draw), drink (move equivalent), then contribute in the round with his/her remaining Standard Action.
...Alchemists should be permitted to Brew potions
** RA comment: the formulae selections are limited. I wasn't lucky in the the game to have chosen the correct formulae as my known and prepared formulae. I could have bought scrolls and used a UMD but if I could have brewed potions from any spell list perhaps I could have contributed more the party. Also, instead of scroll use being able to use potions he brewed would play into the class concept better.
...believe that you should completely scrap the mutagen idea. I understand the "Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde" concept, but forcing every Alkie...
** RA comment: I played this part up. I think with a couple adjustments from the playtest comments the Dr. Jekyll/Mrl Hyde concept will work perfectly. When I took a mutegen (enlarged person) in the final encounter I described my transformation into a large, ugly creature ready to go into melee combat. I enjoyed it a lot.
Looking forward to seeing the next revision of the class. Once released I'll play him as a 5th level alchemist in a Pathfinder Society scenario.
Giving Quick Draw would be a bit pointless I think. Personally I read the drawing the vile, and infusing it as the same move action. Then the standard action to throw it.
However if you really think it requires a move action to draw then a move action to infuse it that's already covered by simply having +1 BAB, it's even in the Quick Draw feat.
Normal: Without this feat, you may draw a weapon as a move action, or (if your base attack bonus is +1 or higher) as a free action as part of movement.
Quick Draw is really there to help you get your hidden weapons and be able to take your full attack with thrown weapons while standing still.
i actually like the idea of being able to add extractions or other abilities to a mutigen... like scent or ... well almost like adding the eidolon revolutions, but only as long as the mutigen lasts... you could have them level dependent or all equal and able to ad one at lower levels oand more as you raise
|
I think not. Imbue item is essentially a magic item creation cheese and it distracts from what the Alchemist focus should be... alchemy. He's a fellow about potions, elixirs, and transumutation, not generic magic item creation. That's what Wizards or Artificers are for.
Sorry, but reading this, I got an idea, and I'd like to throw it out. With the Warlock, even though he didn't get spells, he gained an ability called Imbue Item at level 12 that allowed him to create magic items without having the spell available. How about if we gave the Alchemist an ability similar to this at a lower level and for potions only? He's all about alchemy, gets Use Magic Device as a class skill, only thing is that he's not aimed at being awesomely charismatic. What do you think?
Except I can see an Alchemist treating a weapon with his elixirs to make it's edge dull(Merciful) or serrated(Viscious) or even change it's molecular structure(Brilliant Energy). Armor can be made to resist heat, cold, electricity, and acids, or make the wearer "light" enough to fly(Celestial Chainmail). I guess that's waht the Master Craftsman feat is for, huh?
i actually like the idea of being able to add extractions or other abilities to a mutigen... like scent or ... well almost like adding the eidolon revolutions, but only as long as the mutigen lasts... you could have them level dependent or all equal and able to ad one at lower levels oand more as you raise
I recently playtested an idea like this. Results are posted here.
i actually like the idea of being able to add extractions or other abilities to a mutigen... like scent or ... well almost like adding the eidolon revolutions, but only as long as the mutigen lasts... you could have them level dependent or all equal and able to ad one at lower levels oand more as you raiseI recently playtested an idea like this. Results are posted here.
Please do check that out, it's a wonderful idea. Having two classes that refer to the same huge chuck of pages really justifies its existence.
I have read them actually... I think this idea bears more consideration...
|
|
Giving Quick Draw would be a bit pointless I think. Personally I read the drawing the vile, and infusing it as the same move action. Then the standard action to throw it.
However if you really think it requires a move action to draw then a move action to infuse it that's already covered by simply having +1 BAB, it's even in the Quick Draw feat.
Normal: Without this feat, you may draw a weapon as a move action, or (if your base attack bonus is +1 or higher) as a free action as part of movement.Quick Draw is really there to help you get your hidden weapons and be able to take your full attack with thrown weapons while standing still.
This is a copy/paste of the APG Alchemist text.
"Creating a bomb requires a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity as the alchemist infuses the catalyst vial with magical energy. Detonating a bomb (typically by throwing the vial of volatile liquid) is a standard action that utilizes the “Throw Splash Weapon” special attack (see page 202 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook)."
Drawing a weapon that is in a scabbard (or a wand) is possible on the move if the PC has at least a +1 BAB. Otherwise it is a move-equivalent action, and either does not provoke an AoO. Potions, vials, flasks, alchemist fires, tanglefoot bags, shields, and any other stowed gear is drawn or readied as a move-equivalent that may or may not provoke an AoO.
Therefore, drawing the flask (which is the bomb) is a move-action and infusing the bomb is move-action then Quick Draw is important and relevant. I never read anything that describes bombs being treated as "weapon" equivalent to a drawing a sword. That is why I used the rules it is stowed and drawn as an alchemist fire.
Point out any text in the Core Rulebook or the Alchemist write up that says something different from this reply. Unless the bombs and other extracts are stowed with adventuring gear that allows a PC to draw it as a free action, and therefore allows the PC to infuse it as a move-equivalent, and then throw it as a standard action, then my original point is valid.
"Creating a bomb requires a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity as the alchemist infuses the catalyst vial with magical energy."
that is one action... a move action to create and infuse ... I have reread it yet again and I think you are actually right it does not specify that drawing the vial you made earlier in the day is part of that action. if this was the intent to have it part of that action I think it should be specified otherwise it should not be assumed it is part of it
edit: maybe it could read " to create a bomb the summoner draws a vial and infuses it with energy as a move equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity"
actually it doesn't at all say that... was this ruled differently by the Paizo people and I missed it? if so can someone find a link?
this has been covered on another thread. it reads that drawing the vial is an act of retrieving spell components. this is actually a free action. The act of infusing it with power is the AoO move equiv action & detonation is a standard.
That was something you came up with, and what you quoted in that thread distinctly relates only to the use of an extract as it pertains directly to the casting of spells.
There's nothing that says getting the vial to create a bomb is similar to getting the materials for casting a spell. (There probably should be)
Easiest way around this is to use one of the new adventurer satchels from PC: Keepers of the Secrets that let's you retrieve items from it as a free action instead of a move action.
I hope that the intent was to draw the vial as part of infusing it...but this needs to be clearified
I'm confused on how you guys can't figure out how the move-equivalent action works. Here is the wording from the play test, "Most alchemists create a number of catalyst vials at the start of the day equal to the total number of bombs they can create in that day—once created, a catalyst vial remains usable by the alchemist for years." Then to activate it in combat, "Creating a bomb requires a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity as the alchemist infuses the catalyst vial with magical energy." Your not simply drawing a vial and throwing it, which is what quick draw assists in, drawing a weapon for use. You have to mix the catalyst with chemicals as a move action to make it explosive, you don't walk around with ready made bombs on you. While it would be nice to just move pull and throw, that would be a bit ridiculous cause you are throwing around a rogues sneak attack with splash damage included, and you aren't required to meet any circumstances such as flanking. If you could continue to move, while pulling out bombs and lobbing them the class would quickly be able to out maneuver / out damage everything out there.
I'm confused on how you guys can't figure out how the move-equivalent action works. Here is the wording from the play test, "Most alchemists create a number of catalyst vials at the start of the day equal to the total number of bombs they can create in that day—once created, a catalyst vial remains usable by the alchemist for years." Then to activate it in combat, "Creating a bomb requires a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity as the alchemist infuses the catalyst vial with magical energy." Your not simply drawing a vial and throwing it, which is what quick draw assists in, drawing a weapon for use. You have to mix the catalyst with chemicals as a move action to make it explosive, you don't walk around with ready made bombs on you. While it would be nice to just move pull and throw, that would be a bit ridiculous cause you are throwing around a rogues sneak attack with splash damage included, and you aren't required to meet any circumstances such as flanking. If you could continue to move, while pulling out bombs and lobbing them the class would quickly be able to out maneuver / out damage everything out there.
Oh yes! Cause 10d6 damage ONCE a round is so much more than 10d6 five to six times a round... oh wait a minute it's not...
Come to think of it that 10d6 as a full round of actions isn't better than the standard action meteor swarm either (which is much better on splash)...
Heck it really doesn't even compare to a delayed blast fireball which could be done much earlier...
Heck even a level 10 wizard could do 10d6 in half the time the alchemist could with a fireball...
Hm... something isn't right...
I am ok with it being a move action that quick draw does not assist in... but if it needs to be drawn then infused then thrown... that is still 2 move and 1 standard action... and it would really limit the class
if you instead draw and infuse as one move action and throw as onother ... it puts it on par with a light crossbow for speed. but where you can't make it faster with rapid reload, you do get more damage as you go up...
but it isn't "stated" as part of the move action that infuses the bomb
Come to think of it that 10d6 as a full round of actions isn't better than the standard action meteor swarm either (which is much better on splash)...
Heck it really doesn't even compare to a delayed blast fireball which could be done much earlier...
Heck even a level 10 wizard could do 10d6 in half the time the alchemist could with a fireball...
Hm... something isn't right...
I dunno, but I think, THINK, someone is being sarcastic. :p
The Alchemist Class is pretty fun but my main concern is if they'll be another class that gets trapfinding or not.
Skizzy I think you made your sense motive check...
Trapfinding would make sense with the way the class is designed right now. I would also like to see more discoveries learned and faster... the current progression just hasn't worked, leaving me feeling like a third wheel when it comes to effects. I can't even do as well as a wizard at blasting, or buffing as a paladin, or melee as even a second liner. If I had discoveries earlier and more often my bombs could actually have unique effects at levels when they matter, and my mutagen could be more worthwhile instead of being a wasted class feature between level 3~12, and a waste of discoveries at level 20. The various poison features would be great to take if I had the space to take them in between all the stuff that feels for the class to just barely function.
Now I'm not saying I don't like the alchemist class -- I really really do, however it currently feels at about the fighter 3.5 level and that simply won't do for a base class, especially when compared to how well all the other APG classes are designed.
|
|
I'm confused on how you guys can't figure out how the move-equivalent action works.
Read my original post above again. I don't think you get the point. We don't have an issue on how move-equivalent works. Nor do we have an issue on understanding how bombs work. The question is the class write up does not state whether pulling a bomb and infusing it is a move-equivalent. Right now, as written, only infusing it is a move-equivalent. Therefore, pulling it would fall under the core rules of pulling a stored item, which is move-equivalent action. Since pulling and infusing isn't stated as being one move-equivalent action it limits the alchemist to throw a bomb every other round. I'm sure Jason will see this an post a confirmation of the ruling.
I think you're just focusing to much one thinking the alchemist is about 1 thing. He isn't simply a mad bomber, or a buffer, or a melee second liner. It's the fact that you can simply fill a void in any of those at any time. If your group is missing healing or buffing, at lvl 4 make it so you can pass out your extracts with infusion. If your missing someone that can go into melee, take enlarge person and enhance your mutagen to gain reach and 3 attacks. The bombs are just extra splash damage that you can throw around and enhance to do cool things, like knockdown on the target that was hit directly or you can even make it so it becomes an incendiary cloud at lvl 16. You can throw this 20 times / day with an int of 18. A wizard can only cast that 1 time / day at lvl 18. And with trapfinding, your not a master at finding or disarming traps. Your good at mixing magic and chemicals so that they become explosive, if used within the round created, which to me says you don't use a move to draw, a move to mix, and a standard to throw, its you draw and mix as a move sorta like a heavy crossbow(you retrieve the bolt and load it as a move action). "Bombs are unstable, and if not used in the round they are created, they degrade and become inert...", and the post above about force bombs not dealing splash damage, they do as the text states "Creatures that take a direct hit..", if there is no splash damage then why state that the creatures NOT taking splash damage don't get knocked down.
Actually he can't.
He can't buff until level 4 at the earliest, and if he buffs he can't throw bombs of a different type.
If he buffs and gains bombs then his Mutagen is going to suck. Even then he's not really good at bombing, a wizard is still much better at any level with the area damage and the buffs.
Heck at level 4~13 the bard can do better blasting with Sound Burst, Shout and Greater Shout respectively... and the bard is going to be better at buffing, and better at healing, and better at fighting.
The problem with the alchemist as it stands now is the class is a nonstarter and a nonfinisher. It shines at nothing, and does it the entire time.
It has a lot of good potential, but it's not there yet.
|
|
I think you're just focusing to much one thinking the alchemist is about 1 thing.
No, I'm not. I'm well aware of the other things the Alchemist can do. Agan, look at my original post on my actions. I don't have a question about those other abilities. During my playtest I did perform other actions. Please, Kraven, don't presume how a play a character and especially tell me I'm playing it wrong. Criticizing another person's play style or decisions isn't the point of this play test. I posted my experience following Jason's instructions. I had a question about pulling, infusing, and throwing bombs because that is the only ability in question. I'm not gong to debate my play style or in game decisions with you. Since tone doesn't come across well in posts don't take this an rebuff. I'm asking you not to presume how I play my PC. Let's focus on the play test experience and questions arising from it.
seems a bit out there, but that being said:
alchemists can make mutagens which raise their ability scores natural armor and so on.
the question is that; givin this is it forseeable that a feat is created which would allow alchemists to make diseases, or anti-mutagens?
|
|
I think you're just focusing to much one thinking the alchemist is about 1 thing....Please, Kraven, don't presume how a play a character and especially tell me I'm playing it wrong. Criticizing another person's play style or decisions isn't the point of this play test...
You cannot claim that your playstyle is inviolate if you are criticizing the class yourself. Thats like me complaining that the wizard is lame because the familiar is incredibly weaker than an animal companion or summoners eidolon.