|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe hating is too strong, but anyone else have a problem with dm's disliking their alchemists? I have a half-orc alchemist with a 21 INT. We started at 7th lvl, so I'm tossing around 4d6+8 bombs. Now I only have fire for damage, and most of the creatures we've been encountering have fire vulnerability, so he's understanding that, but he seems really bummed that I'm blowing things up so easily. He was wondering (I think semi-jokingly) how much the alchemist had been playtested as it seemed broken.
I could point out to him that rogues do more damage (since they get weapon dmg too) with sneak attacks and the half-orc fighter power attacking can get similar damage (16-27 each attack) out assuming he hits, but I don't know, it just seems like he's really not liking it. Anyone else experience this?
I haven't seen it with alchemists, but I've seen it with 3.5 warlocks. I don't understand it, but I've seen it.
Your GM should have probably adjusted the game when you came on board. I don't know how you let someone play an alchemist in a game with fire vulnerable opposition, without doing something about it.
The alchemist in my Saturday game is a really potent Pyromaniac gnome who takes a LOT of bombs. If he hits things at close to his power level, he usually does half or more of their life in damage in the single hit. The problem he's run into is the old adage, 'If the enemy is in range, so are you.' He's gotten dropped from full health to negatives no less than twice, once from a half-orc owner of a pawn shop (had a single magical bolt he used to threaten people, and the party jumped a thief in his shop. Then, despite the fact the half-orc was staying out of things, the gnome hit him with a bomb. The half-orc retaliated.) and the other time from a kobold barbarian with a greataxe that he taunted.
Gah, started rambling. My thing is, yes, alchemists are potent in some circumstances. So...I just added more opponents who were smart enough to spread out after the first bomb hits and vaporizes two or three of their buddies.
I could point out to him that rogues do more damage (since they get weapon dmg too) with sneak attacks and the half-orc fighter power attacking can get similar damage (16-27 each attack) out assuming he hits,
Are you standing in melee, like they are? Otherwise the comparison isn't valid.
Stand in an adjacent square, rolling to hit an opponent's normal AC, and the DM probably wouldn't have a problem. I wouldn't.
Auto-hit attacks (and that's what touch attacks essentially are) spammable from range are lame.
With that said, 12 bombs a day for a 7th level alchemist with 21 Int isn't really 'spammable'. I'd say the main problem here is the main opposition always being fire vulnerable.
Maybe hating is too strong, but anyone else have a problem with dm's disliking their alchemists? I have a half-orc alchemist with a 21 INT. We started at 7th lvl, so I'm tossing around 4d6+8 bombs. Now I only have fire for damage, and most of the creatures we've been encountering have fire vulnerability, so he's understanding that, but he seems really bummed that I'm blowing things up so easily. He was wondering (I think semi-jokingly) how much the alchemist had been playtested as it seemed broken.
I could point out to him that rogues do more damage (since they get weapon dmg too) with sneak attacks and the half-orc fighter power attacking can get similar damage (16-27 each attack) out assuming he hits, but I don't know, it just seems like he's really not liking it. Anyone else experience this?
No offense, but your GM is not only showing his inexperience, but your GM is also making himself look bad by tossing around the B-word (broken) so easily. Doubly so when he's knowingly throwing enemies into the game that are particularly vulnerable to your primary attack form (similar to throwing low AC / low Hp enemies at a pack of rogues).
Direct damage, especially elemental/energy damage is generally sub-par against enemies in both 3.5 and Pathfinder. Enemies have hit points that scale quickly, and much of your offensive power can be stolen with a simple low-level buff (resist energy) and natural energy resistances. Especially when you start getting into basic enemies with advanced hit dice and the like.
NPC warriors get roughly 5.5 hp per level before applying Constitution modifiers or even the Toughness feat, while the damage of spells like fireball scales at a rate of 3.5 per level with a save for half, so we know without any fuss that blasting is sub-par.
Alchemists are a bit better, but not a whole lot. Bombs scale at a rate of 3.5 damage every 2 levels, but you add your Intelligence bonus to their damage, and you don't have to worry about saves vs half, and you can combine them with feats such as Point Blank, Rapid, Precise Shot, and Deadly Aim. At 20th level, your splash damage per bomb will be around 20-25 damage, which is significant. Essentially, the alchemist is a class that doesn't fail at blasting but makes it work.
The thing is the alchemist still cannot easily overcome energy resistances, and the alchemist is functioning on a limited number of bombs per day. At 20th level, you'll likely have around 30 bombs baseline, assuming you've been pumping your Intelligence the whole 20 levels, which is still quite limiting.
Really, alchemists are usually better off using actual alchemical items for basic damage and using their bombs for focus-fire and control effects (once they've made a few discoveries).
Even still, a fighter can out-damage them with a bow without specializing in it, and doesn't have to worry about energy resistances (or damage reduction if he uses a good bow). So one must wonder, "GM, why the hate?"
|
Ask yourself this question:
Are you outshining the other PCs?
If so, then your character is too strong for the party, no matter anyone's thought on the power-balance of the alchemist.
I admit, I don't like alchemists. Although, in one game I play in the GM added an alchemist who got one bomb off (only affected one PC) before he was savaged by that pc's lion animal companion.
If your GM is running an adventure path, he may think it would be unfair of him to alter the adventure path to make your character less effective. I know I would, and I would be upset as a player if the monsters didn't have in-game knowledge of my tactics.
In either case, it is ultimately an issue between you and your GM.
Since the bombs count as a ranged weapon, a low level monk can deflect (or a fighter with appropriate feats). Now I am not saying that the DM should suddenly make all his baddies from the Monastery of Alchemical Hate, but there are ways of adapting and modifying encounters to present challenges to each class. It is a lot easier to work around the alchemist classes strengths than it was the warlock (deflect arrows or fire resist vs spell resistance or such).
And you must admit this would be visually cool...
Snatch Arrows (Combat)
Instead of knocking an arrow or ranged attack aside, you can catch it in mid-flight.
Prerequisites: Dex 15, Deflect Arrows, Improved Unarmed Strike.
Benefit: When using the Deflect Arrows feat you may choose to catch the weapon instead of just deflecting it. Thrown weapons can immediately be thrown back as an attack against the original attacker (even though it isn’t your turn) or kept for later use. You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to use this feat.
Unfortunately a bomb touched by someone else becomes inert...so you could deflect it, but wouldn't do much to throw it back.
|
Maybe hating is too strong, but anyone else have a problem with dm's disliking their alchemists? I have a half-orc alchemist with a 21 INT. We started at 7th lvl, so I'm tossing around 4d6+8 bombs. Now I only have fire for damage, and most of the creatures we've been encountering have fire vulnerability, so he's understanding that, but he seems really bummed that I'm blowing things up so easily. He was wondering (I think semi-jokingly) how much the alchemist had been playtested as it seemed broken.
I could point out to him that rogues do more damage (since they get weapon dmg too) with sneak attacks and the half-orc fighter power attacking can get similar damage (16-27 each attack) out assuming he hits, but I don't know, it just seems like he's really not liking it. Anyone else experience this?
As a player and Gm with over 30 years experience I have a similar view of the Alchemist class. The bomb throwing is not a issue in my opinion, its some of the other abilities ans things that alchemists can do that seem out of balance to me.
I got some hate from my DM when it came to crafting. I have a 20 int alchemist, and with crafter's fortune, I can make masterwork quality items nearly of anything by taking 10 without having invested any skill points. Although at level 1 I couldn't afford the masterwork prices, it still made Smuggler's Shiv a bit more homey.
Of course I spent some skill points in craft anyway. Mostly because of the new house rule that craft was a trained only skill. Being a human alchemist gives me 10 a level, so it wasn't as if I did not have a few points to spare.
They see me bombin'. They hatin'.
Are you outshining the other PCs?
If so, then your character is too strong for the party, no matter anyone's thought on the power-balance of the alchemist.
I agree that, "Are you outshining the other PCs?" is a great question.
But I would say, "Are you consistently outshining the other PCs over a significant period of time?"Consistently = half or more of the fights. If you are the star of 1/4 of the fights, I see no problem. If you're the star of every fight, there might be a problem.
Outshining = Dealing more than half the damage. Taking out multiple opponents before other PCs act.
Significant period = More than a two levels. There will be levels, there ARE levels, where certain classes dominate. (e.g. Level 1-2 Wizards are notoriously weak, while level 15+ Wizards are notoriously powerful.) That's not ideal, but it's part of the game.
If you are outshining the other PCs too much, modify your character. Done. No arguments. Play the same game as your party members, and you'll all have a lot more fun.
and yet an alchemist will not be able to compete against a well oiled wizard or cleric or druid
I don't know, I expect a well oiled wizard would be pretty flammable. Those robes should soak up a lot of oil, right? :)
Thinking alchemists are brokenly good is clinical insanity. I love alchemists, but it's not a strong class, much less a broken one.
|
|
I know they need to be high level to do some of the things but, being able to make any Alchemical item as a full round action, being able to convert 1000lbs of lead to the equivalent of 50,000 gp 1/month.It just seems out of balance to me some of the abilities that they receive. And I never really liked the class from the inception, the class I would choose last of any class in the game right after the witch.
Actually, the most impressive thing I've really seen alchemists do is craft items. No joke, alchemists with Master Craftsman can do some very interesting things with wondrous items, weapons and armor, and more. Sure, it's a huge feat sink and it's not usually available prior to 7th level (5th level feat = Master Craftsman, 7th = Wondrous Items or similar), but at 1 rank per level and +1 level to Craft (Alchemy), your effective check result is pretty darn super for crafting items regardless of the required spells and abilities.
^_^
|
|
Thinking alchemists are brokenly good is clinical insanity. I love alchemists, but it's not a strong class, much less a broken one.
Me-thinks you've not had to deal with a flying fast-bomb batman alchemist yet.
The alchemist suffers from feeling broken mainly because he only has 1 real primary stat being intelligence, and one secondary being dex which only really needs about a 14 to be effective since you are hitting touch AC anyway. The class is rewarded pretty heavily for dumping all stats in favor of these 2. Also saying that they aren't a problem because of the fact that they have limited bombs a day is not a valid response either in the fact that an even a moderately optimized 1st level alchemist is going to be doing an absolute minimum of 30 bomb damage a day, and that is only if he misses on EVERY throw, and that is without even taking extra bombs or being a gnome.
In short, they are too easy to optimize. They aren't any more powerful than a properly optimized fighter, ranger, or even rogue, but they get to that point MUCH faster and easier than any other class(I.E. Can be done at 1st level).
As a DM, I am currently working around a bombing alchemist in a CoT game. I deal with it by spreading my enemies out during the surprise or first round of combat. as the PCs have attained a level of fame where they WILL be recognized by pretty much any intelligent creature within the city limits. I also plan on putting a monk or 2 in with some of the fights that are supposed to be dangerous and involve swarms of enemies.
I think alchemists are fine, but it's insulting when an alchemist compares a rogue to them. A rogue has to either get great initiative or slink into flank, which could cost them several opportunity attacks or failures. An alchemist just has to be within one range increment of the person he wants to hit and can also get up to 8 (and with explosive, up to 23) of his friends. A lot of his bomb tricks also mimic or are, in my opinion, better rogue tricks.
Add on that he doesn't need to buy a magic weapon and can get by with being a crossbow master or buffing the party or buffing himself in off-rounds, has a less important outlook than a real caster on scrolls, wands and staves, can't use metamagic rods and has no need for the other special caster goodies, and it becomes a little more annoying. Definitely a class that will end up with a lot of gold surplus in comparison to, say, a dual-weapon fighter, who has to drop a ton of gp into both of his weapons to continue to hit the ever-escalating AC of his foes...
A rogue doesn't compare himself to an evoker wizard-- which is what an alchemist is the closest to. So, the alchemist shouldn't patronize the rogue in the party by pretending that throwing a bomb is even half or a quarter or even an iota of how hard it is to get into flank and land an attack or even luck into getting full attack before the monster is already dead.
An example: The alchemist in our party for Serpent's Skull ended up doing over 88 points of damage during an encounter, while my rogue did 12. Why? Because the alchemist didn't need to worry about positioning-- whereas my rogue was caught in the surprise round and was on the far flank of everyone else being attacked from the front by three zombies. I couldn't flank any of them.
TLDR Alchemists should compare themselves to wizards, not rogues, because it's insulting to pretend that throwing bombs is hard
Alchemists lose a lot when their opponents are spread out, open spaces, and tight spaces, and against fairly beefy creatures. If you're running an encounter with multiple weak opponents using teamwork (one of the best), spreading enemies out in open spaces makes group-bombing more difficult. The reverse is also true, since in tight and narrow spaces, it can become difficult for the alchemist to avoid catching party members in the blast. Against high HP sponges, the alchemist generally is sub-par. Against many enemies with high HP, they also have low AC, meaning that classes who have harder times hitting (but inflict more damage per hit) do so more often.
Really, there are so many ifs and buts to consider, but an alchemist generally isn't particularly amazing. Easy to optimize, sure, but the ceiling for that optimization is much lower than that of other classes. I think that is a very good thing, because it shouldn't be hard to make a character function well, but it should be harder to actually break them. This is something the Tome of Battle and Alchemist share in common (easy to make good, hard to break).
and yet an alchemist will not be able to compete against a well oiled wizard or cleric or druid
This, if your DM is complaining about an alchemist he has probably never experienced a well build caster.
An alchemist just has to be within one range increment of the person he wants to hit and can also get up to 8 (and with explosive, up to 23) of his friends.
The splash damage is kind of a joke after a while.
An example: The alchemist in our party for Serpent's Skull ended up doing over 88 points of damage during an encounter, while my rogue did 12. Why? Because the alchemist didn't need to worry about positioning-- whereas my rogue was caught in the surprise round and was on the far flank of everyone else being attacked from the front by three zombies. I couldn't flank any of them.
Isn't it just as possible for the alchemist to be far away and/or cornered by enemies?
By the way, what level is your party?
|
|
The splash damage is kind of a joke after a while.
While that IS true, "A while" can easily mean one player having a character out-shinning all the rest for 6 months, and that is never fun. Most campaigns rarely break double digits and that is when the alchemist begins to level out with the rest of the classes.
.
..
...
....
.....
Have you tried kicking back your chair, standing up and shouting:
''GM GM WHAT THE FOCK WHAT THE FOCK? WHY YOU ALWAYS BE HATING ON A PLAYER YO?''
..it.. might work.
o_o
An alchemist just has to be within one range increment of the person he wants to hit and can also get up to 8 (and with explosive, up to 23) of his friends.The splash damage is kind of a joke after a while.
It'll still be 13 or so splash damage at higher levels. It's not 100 damage, but it is about 52 or less splash damage to multiple targets per round considering a bomber alchemist will likely be able to haste himself and will also have fast bombs. So, 52 to like, 3 other people, and 40d6+24 to the main guy. That's not bad at level 12 considering the 40d6 will likely always yield over 100 damage anyways and that the alchemist is attacking the lowest of ACs.
An example: The alchemist in our party for Serpent's Skull ended up doing over 88 points of damage during an encounter, while my rogue did 12. Why? Because the alchemist didn't need to worry about positioning-- whereas my rogue was caught in the surprise round and was on the far flank of everyone else being attacked from the front by three zombies. I couldn't flank any of them.Isn't it just as possible for the alchemist to be far away and/or cornered by enemies?
By the way, what level is your party?
If the alchemist is far away, so is everyone else-- that example is really not that stellar. I'm saying that he could be 300 feet away, use bomber's eye and all he's getting is a -10 on his attack rolls. -5 if he has Far Shot. +1 to hit from bomber's eye and then he hastes himself and full attacks with his bombs from artillery distance at a meaningless -3. Unless he's attacking a rogue or a kitted out target with deflect and dodge bonuses, he's got to hit something pitiful like an 18 at best-- which he can likely do on a 9 if he has his bonuses running. And then it gets even worse when creatures begin to expand in size because he could be rolling without Precise Shot. -8 to attacks-- and likely still a bonus. Huge size w/ medium creatures engaging? -6 to attacks and still a bonus.
If the alchemist is cornered by his enemies he's got nothing to worry about if he's prepared. I would imagine that most bomber alchemists can achieve a pretty solid AC if they focus on Dex, use Dex mutagens, use shield, keep their armor updated, keep their off-AC items like rings and amulets updated. And even then, you're talking about a class that has invisibility, blur, displacement, fly, gaseous form and freedom of movement as non-interruptable spells.
We're level 5.
Remember that I'm not arguing that the alchemist is overpowered or broken but that it's annoying for an alchemist to compare himself to a rogue. A wizard doesn't go "My enlarged intensified maximized quickened fireball is like I'm sneak attacking these 10 people all at once for maximum damage," a rogue says that "Each time I sneak attack, it's like I'm dropping a single-target fireball!"
A 10th level fighter full attacking with a double weapon doesn't say "It's like I'm a 20th level wizard who chose a lot of melee combat feats and can't cast spells full attacking while wearing plate mail that he doesn't take non-proficiency penalties for."
Alchemists CAN use rapid shot,point blank shot, and precise because their bombs are treated just like ranged attacks by the alchemist once they get Fast attacks (a discovery EVERY alchemist is going to take. Its the weapon specialization/natural spell of the alchemist world)
They just can't do many shot, because that specifically requires a bow.
I got some hate from my DM when it came to crafting. I have a 20 int alchemist, and with crafter's fortune, I can make masterwork quality items nearly of anything by taking 10
You're a 5th level character. Making masterwork items to save 2/3's of the cost is pretty trivial considering each encounter should earn you enough gold to buy them anyway. As for crafting being broken its nothing compared to what a wizard or sorcerer can do with fabricate.
Comparing an alchemist to a rogue isn't fair to either. Yes, the alchemist puts out more damage per round.. IF he has bombs available. Its not the alchemists fault that the rogue is so weak in combat. That's compensated for (in theory) by their usefulness outisde of combat with social skills and with their allegedly superior trapfinding ability (once their trapfinding puts them ahead of the clerics and druids perception scores)
Alchemists can barely compete with a Scorching ray tossing wizard/sorcerer, and at higher levels will run out of bombs well before the wiz runs out of spells.
Most groups seem to tilt the game further in favor of the casters and resource allocating classes than was intended by design, simply because no one wants to keep track of their spell lists between sessions, and combat takes too long to have more than 2-3 encounters per game night if you want to leave time for socializing, role playing, and dungeon crawling.
Since the bombs count as a ranged weapon, a low level monk can deflect (or a fighter with appropriate feats). Now I am not saying that the DM should suddenly make all his baddies from the Monastery of Alchemical Hate, but there are ways of adapting and modifying encounters to present challenges to each class. It is a lot easier to work around the alchemist classes strengths than it was the warlock (deflect arrows or fire resist vs spell resistance or such).
And you must admit this would be visually cool...
Snatch Arrows (Combat)
Instead of knocking an arrow or ranged attack aside, you can catch it in mid-flight.
Prerequisites: Dex 15, Deflect Arrows, Improved Unarmed Strike.
Benefit: When using the Deflect Arrows feat you may choose to catch the weapon instead of just deflecting it. Thrown weapons can immediately be thrown back as an attack against the original attacker (even though it isn’t your turn) or kept for later use. You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to use this feat.
Even though I hated the movie in general this totally reminded me of Spiderman 3 where peter parker web slings the bomb by harry "new goblin" back into the fireplace... guess spiderman was a monk and goblin was an alchemist...
Maybe hating is too strong, but anyone else have a problem with dm's disliking their alchemists? I have a half-orc alchemist with a 21 INT. We started at 7th lvl, so I'm tossing around 4d6+8 bombs. Now I only have fire for damage, and most of the creatures we've been encountering have fire vulnerability, so he's understanding that, but he seems really bummed that I'm blowing things up so easily. He was wondering (I think semi-jokingly) how much the alchemist had been playtested as it seemed broken.
I could point out to him that rogues do more damage (since they get weapon dmg too) with sneak attacks and the half-orc fighter power attacking can get similar damage (16-27 each attack) out assuming he hits, but I don't know, it just seems like he's really not liking it. Anyone else experience this?
No offense to your DM but...he's acting like a word that can also describe a "female dog". He's set up a quest with a particular theme and set of encounters, and he didn't check into how effective the guy tossing exploding fire all over place was going to be.
In other words, he didn't do his homework. If he did, he'd have realized what your character was capable of and learn to come up with different challenges to that. For example, the enemies should be ganging up on your deadly alchemist. Or the enemies, if intelligent, will run and formulate a plan to take him down, trap your party somehow, or incapacitate one or two other party members before ganging up on you.
If he's running dumb beasts, well, then he needs to throw more dumb beasts, simple as that.
How many party members do you have? Are you the only "spellcaster" able to perform crowd control? You'd be no different if you had a fire sorcerer or a wizard with fire magic and fire magic items (like scrolls and wands) at his disposal. If you are the only one, then you're doing your job fine and your DM lacks the experience to handle it, it seems.
I think your runner has forgot Dunelord's second rule of GMing.
2. The PCs are going to set it on fire. More then once if the first one gets put out. The princess, the shop, the shop keeper, the mooks, the Big Bad, the guy who sold them the oil for the fire, each other, themselves, random NPCs, and if they can figure out a way the fire elemental. Just accept that every adventurer at some point enjoys (I wouldn't call it suffering) a bout of pyromania.
|
|
The splash damage is kind of a joke after a while.
I'm not sure I agree with that. At 11th level with rapidshot and haste an alchemist can launch 4 bombs in a round. Targets that get hit with splash from all 4 bombs are taking 25-50 points of damage, roughly 1/3 the hit points of a CR appropriate creature. No, not deadly by itself but considering it was very likely deadly to the primary target that's decent.
Not "OMG Borken!!!", but I don't think a joke either, consider it a beneficial side effect.
Compare this to cone of cold which averages <38 points of damage on all targets in a bigger area and no concentrated damage on anyone.
|
|
Alchemists are a bit better, but not a whole lot. Bombs scale at a rate of 3.5 damage every 2 levels, but you add your Intelligence bonus to their damage, and you don't have to worry about saves vs half, and you can combine them with feats such as Point Blank, Rapid, Precise Shot, and Deadly Aim. At 20th level, your splash damage per bomb will be around 20-25 damage, which is significant. Essentially, the alchemist is a class that doesn't fail at blasting but makes it work.
The thing is the alchemist still cannot easily overcome energy resistances, and the alchemist is functioning on a limited number of bombs per day. At 20th level, you'll likely have around 30 bombs baseline, assuming you've been pumping your Intelligence the whole 20 levels, which is still quite limiting.
Alchemists damage doesn't scale linearly. It scales at 3.5/ 2 levels until 8th level then it jumps to 3.5/ level until 16th level when it jumps again to 5.25/ level. If you factor in rapid shot and haste it scales even faster. Peak damage is better than a wizard's peak damage (which is ok because wizards have lots of other cool stuff).
With a little planning energy resistances are not a problem for alchemists. Force bomb damages nearly everything and drops a nasty effect on them at the same time. You can also take discoveries to get frost/ electric/ acid so you can nail nearly everyone's weaknesses.
As for bombs/ day being limiting, this hasn't been my experience because I tend to focus on using the bombs when they will count the most and using other attacks or extracts when lesser mayhem is required. So yeah, it's something that I have to deal with but it's manageable, particularly since you also get extracts and mutagens to play with (and you can do ok with weapons with buffing).
|
The splash damage is kind of a joke after a while.I'm not sure I agree with that. At 11th level with rapidshot and haste an alchemist can launch 4 bombs in a round. Targets that get hit with splash from all 4 bombs are taking 25-50 points of damage, roughly 1/3 the hit points of a CR appropriate creature. No, not deadly by itself but considering it was very likely deadly to the primary target that's decent.
Not "OMG Borken!!!", but I don't think a joke either, consider it a beneficial side effect.
Compare this to cone of cold which averages <38 points of damage on all targets in a bigger area and no concentrated damage on anyone.
Cone of Cold seems like a peculiar comparison.
At this level the wizard is rocking Summon Monster VI, Planar Binding, Acid Fog, Chain Lightning, Freezing Sphere, Circle of Death, Disintegrate, Form of the Dragon I, Flesh to Stone...
Sorcerors and wizards damage per spell is about d6/level, alchemists half that. For example 7th level half-orc dragon sorc does 4d6+7 with sorching ray and fires 2 of them / spell meaning 8d6+14 damage, with fireball 7d6+10. Now alchemist gains a lot with 8th level as Fast Bombs show up (assuming he has already taken Rapid Shot), however he will then use his daily bombs much faster witch may become a problem.
Now as a bomb thrower you are goups glass cannon. Comparing to fighter leads to strange conclusions. Fighter has more ability to resist damage, make AoOs (effectively protecting you), being in melee doesn't bother him and with bow he can be deadlier in long distances (even if he is specialized in melee). Anyway comparing glass cannons damage to others is kind of moot. No matter how much Alchemist does damage, the party will miss the healing Cleric more ;).
Yeah also as others have pointed out, the fire vulnerability of opponents is kind of coincedence and not likely to continue to the end of the campaign (else its probably a very short campaign). I like Alchemists, but as implicitly mentioned, I don't think they are extremely effective glass cannons. They will need to use more their abilities (average BAB, Mutagens, probably poisons) to stand out of sorcerors duty field.
The splash damage is kind of a joke after a while.I'm not sure I agree with that. At 11th level with rapidshot and haste an alchemist can launch 4 bombs in a round. Targets that get hit with splash from all 4 bombs are taking 25-50 points of damage, roughly 1/3 the hit points of a CR appropriate creature. No, not deadly by itself but considering it was very likely deadly to the primary target that's decent.
I can see a GM having a legitimate complaint about the Fast Bombs discovery; it allows an alchemist to unload a lot of damage in a single round. But otherwise, no, I don't think that 13 damage (save for 1/2) is particularly worth mentioning against CR 11+ foes.
|
|
Cone of Cold seems like a peculiar comparison.
At this level the wizard is rocking Summon Monster VI, Planar Binding, Acid Fog, Chain Lightning, Freezing Sphere, Circle of Death, Disintegrate, Form of the Dragon I, Flesh to Stone...
Hogarth was talking about the splash damage which is an area effect damage, Cone of Cold is mentioned as a reference to the effectiveness of an ability and that is all.
In the bigger frame of things, I'm not sure what your point is. Alchemists aren't wizards? You are correct, alchemists don't have the spell selection or spells per day wizards do, that's what wizard's schtick is. Alchemists schtick is blowing stuff up... plus a fistful of other fun stuff.
|
|
I can see a GM having a legitimate complaint about the Fast Bombs discovery; it allows an alchemist to unload a lot of damage in a single round. But otherwise, no, I don't think that 13 damage (save for 1/2) is particularly worth mentioning against CR 11+ foes.
Well 48 points would be full damage, (6+INT Bonus of 6)*4 (rapid shot and haste), 24 with the save. Considering the DC scales the save is going to be decent at all levels so there is a good chance they are missing at least one or two of those 4 saves.
Without haste or on a standard action round it's far less interesting.
Definitely a side show.
|
|
Cone of Cold seems like a peculiar comparison.
At this level the wizard is rocking Summon Monster VI, Planar Binding, Acid Fog, Chain Lightning, Freezing Sphere, Circle of Death, Disintegrate, Form of the Dragon I, Flesh to Stone...
Hogarth was talking about the splash damage which is an area effect damage, Cone of Cold is mentioned as a reference to the effectiveness of an ability and that is all.
In the bigger frame of things, I'm not sure what your point is. Alchemists aren't wizards? You are correct, alchemists don't have the spell selection or spells per day wizards do, that's what wizard's schtick is. Alchemists schtick is blowing stuff up... plus a fistful of other fun stuff.
The wider scheme of things here is a thread discussing a GM's claim that the class is 'broken'.
These are abilities which show that the wizard is also pretty good at area damage (freezing sphere, chain lightning) but has other awesome stuff to do as well.
Power, and thus brokkun-ness, is a relative concept. So, I was providing additional information which seemed relevant.
At level 11 the wizard can bust out 3 or 4 cone of cold spells and he's still got his best spells left.
If the alchemist insists on going nova he's back to the crossbow and watching the wizard outstrip him fairly swiftly. He does have other utility stuff but it's not really competing with a wizard.
Remember that I'm not arguing that the alchemist is overpowered or broken but that it's annoying for an alchemist to compare himself to a rogue. A wizard doesn't go "My enlarged intensified maximized quickened fireball is like I'm sneak attacking these 10 people all at once for maximum damage," a rogue says that "Each time I sneak attack, it's like I'm dropping a single-target fireball!"
Here's my take on it:
-An alchemist does (A/2)d6 + B damage, A + B times per day, basically (where A is his level and B is his Int bonus) at range. He has some other fancy gimmicks, some of which are defensive (spells & mutagens, mostly) and some of which are offensive (bomb discoveries).
-A rogue does (A/2)d6 + C damage, D times per day (where A is his level, and C and D depend on many factors), possibly at range but generally in melee. He has some other gimmicks that aren't terribly fancy.
So whether a rogue is similar to an alchemist depends on how many times per day your rogue is successfully sneak attacking (i.e. the relative sizes of A+B and D) and on whether it's at range or in melee. I admit that those factors can vary wildly from campaign to campaign. But the principle remains similar, I think. A warlock or a sorcerer who uses most of his spell slots for Scorching Ray would be even more similar, of course, but the first isn't a PFRPG class and the second is not nearly as common as a regular rogue, in my experience.
Am I the only one that keeps scrolling by this thread and reading it as "DM dating my alchemist"?
I always see "DM eating my alchemist" myself.
I could point out to him that rogues do more damage (since they get weapon dmg too) with sneak attacks and the half-orc fighter power attacking can get similar damage (16-27 each attack) out assuming he hits,Are you standing in melee, like they are? Otherwise the comparison isn't valid.
Stand in an adjacent square, rolling to hit an opponent's normal AC, and the DM probably wouldn't have a problem. I wouldn't.
Auto-hit attacks (and that's what touch attacks essentially are) spammable from range are lame.
With that said, 12 bombs a day for a 7th level alchemist with 21 Int isn't really 'spammable'. I'd say the main problem here is the main opposition always being fire vulnerable.
No, Rogues arn't always going after the oppoents "Normal" ac. Otherwise they ain't really that roguish are they?
A rogue vs an equal level monk, The rogue is capable of hitting a far lower AC than normal due to most of the monks ability being dex based. (Flatfooted AC)
An alchemist on the other hand has a harder time against such foes, cause they have a far higher touch ac.
But all that pales in comparison with a well oiled Rogue/Wizard. Acid splash? 1d3+how many sneak attack die? Now if you want to see an Auto-Hit look at that.
(And if you ever play any of our games, you will know that even if I have to just roll a 2 to hit, I will still miss 80% of the time. )
Burning hands, flaming sphere and scorching ray are all staples of your basic evoker or other explody caster. I think a sorcerer with some metamagic and the arcane bloodline really outstrips an alchemist quite easily.
I like THIS BUILD
Flexibility of a Wizard with a pocket full o' fire/ice/misc...
..and a at 500lbs of pure man meat, fun and minty to play!
Also, I hear the creator is humble and all-powerful..