
Thazar |

The mutagen was obviously created based on the caricature of what Jekyll and Hyde has become, which has nothing to do with alchemy (inexplicably yet unsurprisingly) and loads the class down with a filled ability slot that could be better filled by something more applicable.
This is more a limitation of your knowledge of various tales and other lore. I could easily make the argument that it had nothing to due with Jekyll/Hyde and everything to do with the characters from The Witcher that was produced in eastern Europe. They took potions to increase their combat power, agility, speed, endurance... and different potions for different effects. Most also had a toxicity that had a downside as well.
The mechanic is sound for someone who "brews weird stuff". Some they throw, some mimic magic, and some changes their body chemistry to allow super humanoid abilities for a short time.

Phasics |

Phasics wrote:Sayer_of_Nay wrote:BigNorseWolf wrote:
Considering that things that aren't based on magic are sub par, it's better that this class is based on magic.
This is actually the root of the problem of the Alchemist, in my mind. Magic is the be all and end all. And thus the majority of its features are based on magical effects. I would preferred for the Alchemist to focus on increasing the effectiveness of the mundane, rather than falling back on the magical; just declaring their infusions as supernatural abilities instead feel like laziness and a lack of creativity to me. The bombs need not be supernatural effects that mysteriously don't function for any other individual but the caster. Rather, they could have been designed as an augmented version of alchemist fire.
you do understand that Supernatural > Spells and Spell Like right ?
Supernatural effect unlike spells and spell like abilites are not hindered by things like spell resistance and spell immunity ;)
True. But they are still dependent on the presence of magic in order to function. Effects that neutralize magic, such as Antimagic fields and dead magic areas (which my DM just loves using) invalidate infusions and bombs.
My complaint is that all of the alchemists abilities are magical in nature, rather than scientific, like the alchemical items listed in the PH. Further, the fact that magic is the only avenue of "power" in the game, and that the alchemist *could* have offered an alternative and failed, is the root of my contention with the class.
So basically what your saying is my DM is sticking it to casters by using antimagic fields and I want a magical class that can beat him at his own game
So really this dosen't really have so much to do with the alchemist as it does your frustration is not having a "magical" class that can beat antimagic fields and dead magic areas.In that case you need to be looking at classes that have Ex abilities and stop being disappointed in magical classes that don't have Ex abilites

Sigfried Trent |

Other uses for the alchemist class.
1. A crafting specialist as they have the skills and spell selection to make a range of items and they get brew potion to start with. You can go all out with the alchemy items as well.
2. A trap/lock specialist. Its a side line but they have the skills and the int to be very good at it while still doing other things as well. Also UMD gives them variety.
3. The "hulking out" can either go for natural attacks or you can style them as a weapon or tactics combatant depending on the feats you use.
Plug...
I have 3 builds (a bomber, weapon/tactics hulk, and crafter) and 30 feats for the class in my Secrets of the Alchemist book here on Paizo that help expand a bit on the class especially in the alchemy and crafting areas.
Advanced Feats: Secrets of the Alchemist
Personally I find it one of the more balanced and original classes in the APG, although really I like all of them quite well. Alchemist was the first I did because it just felt new and different.

Sayer_of_Nay |

Sayer_of_Nay wrote:Phasics wrote:Sayer_of_Nay wrote:BigNorseWolf wrote:
Considering that things that aren't based on magic are sub par, it's better that this class is based on magic.
This is actually the root of the problem of the Alchemist, in my mind. Magic is the be all and end all. And thus the majority of its features are based on magical effects. I would preferred for the Alchemist to focus on increasing the effectiveness of the mundane, rather than falling back on the magical; just declaring their infusions as supernatural abilities instead feel like laziness and a lack of creativity to me. The bombs need not be supernatural effects that mysteriously don't function for any other individual but the caster. Rather, they could have been designed as an augmented version of alchemist fire.
you do understand that Supernatural > Spells and Spell Like right ?
Supernatural effect unlike spells and spell like abilites are not hindered by things like spell resistance and spell immunity ;)
True. But they are still dependent on the presence of magic in order to function. Effects that neutralize magic, such as Antimagic fields and dead magic areas (which my DM just loves using) invalidate infusions and bombs.
My complaint is that all of the alchemists abilities are magical in nature, rather than scientific, like the alchemical items listed in the PH. Further, the fact that magic is the only avenue of "power" in the game, and that the alchemist *could* have offered an alternative and failed, is the root of my contention with the class.So basically what your saying is my DM is sticking it to casters by using antimagic fields and I want a magical class that can beat him at his own game
So really this dosen't really have so much to do with the alchemist as it does your frustration is not having a "magical" class that can beat antimagic fields and dead magic areas.In that case you need to be looking at classes that have Ex...
No, that is not what I'm saying at all. My complaint is not based on some immature desire to "beat him at his own game." I used the antimagic field example to demonstrate my primary contention with the mechanics behind the class, that being that the alchemy is based on magic and magical effects rather than scientific.
My comment about my DM's habit of using dead magic areas in his game was to illustrate the fact that some DMs, like my own, enjoy implementing that sort of thing in their games. I did not mean for it to sound as if we have an adversarial relationship.
Sayer_of_Nay |

So you wanted a Chemyst and got an Alchemist...
The (Al)chemist wasn't a try to get technology into PF. That's why their progress is a progress in a branch of magic and not technology.
They are not really about spreading progress to armies and farmers like technology might. It's about making their immediate surrounding better.
Also keep in mind that if bombs were extraordinary and everybody would throw them, you could wait a year, make hundreds of bombs and drop a barrel of bombs on that dragon ... like a nuke.
There had to be a restriction, I would have preferred the IRA-bomber too, who would make moer traps than throw handgranades, but well, there has to be a balance.
But technology already exists in pathfinder. The alchemical items listed in the PH are not magical in nature, but they exist. Anybody can go to the corner store and buy them, if they have the gold. The problem is that they aren't very useful for the price, which is one of my complaints. The saving throws are small and don't scale up; beyond third or fourth level, there is little point buying them.
As for bombs as extraordinary effects, all that's needed to keep them in line is keep the limit of how many can be active. If you are still restricted to your level plus your intelligence bonus number of bombs a day, then passing them around will have a negliable effect on the campaign world.

BigNorseWolf |

Writing on percocet. You have been warned. Yes, you, the orangatang in the corner. I see you...
This is actually the root of the problem of the Alchemist, in my mind. Magic is the be all and end all. And thus the majority of its features are based on magical effects. I would preferred for the Alchemist to focus on increasing the effectiveness of the mundane, rather than falling back on the magical; just declaring their infusions as supernatural abilities instead feel like laziness and a lack of creativity to me.
Well, if the alchemist creates items that can be used by anyone, then there would be no point in playing an alchemist. You would simply buy things from an alchemist.
The other alternative would be to come up with alchemist only usable items, but not have them function like spells, which would require an ENTIRE new SYSTEM... not just a new class, and they would have to be as powerful as spells, defined somehow, opening up a new can of worms.
The bombs need not be supernatural effects that mysteriously don't function for any other individual but the caster. Rather, they could have been designed as an augmented version of alchemist fire.
Why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free? Why be an alchemist and not be a full bab two weapon fighting rapid shotting ranger with a bandoleer full of bombs?
I can live with the design decision that extracts are basically magic spells in bottle form, that they are, for all intents and purposes potions that only the alchemist can use (unless he uses one ofhis discoveries), but it would have been nice if the magic potions weren't the same spells every mage or cleric has access to.
I have faith that there will be more unique stuff comming. I think they may have been hesitant to pour that kind of creativity into the class , throwing it in deep water, before letting it doggie paddle around the kiddie pool for a bit.
A design decision I've never been fond of, in any edition of the game, is making magic like science, and making science a joke in terms of usage and effectiveness; an Alchemsit just needs a spell component pouch to create a large number of magical bombs, but alchemists fire is expensive and relatively ineffective after the first few levels. I would have favored a method of scalling up the mundane alchemical items.
How many adventurers make a sword after level 5? Why make what you can buy?

Sayer_of_Nay |

Well, if the alchemist creates items that can be used by anyone, then there would be no point in playing an alchemist. You would simply buy things from an alchemist.
The other alternative would be to come up with alchemist only usable items, but not have them function like spells, which would require an ENTIRE new SYSTEM... not just a new class, and they would have to be as powerful as spells, defined somehow, opening up a new can of worms.
Not true. An alchemist would have the ability to create in the first place. Just because an item exists doesn't mean it is always avialable. By playing an Alchemist, you could create the item at a third of the price, and probably quicker than normal if you took the feat listed in the APG that ups the speed of alchmey crafting (I don't have the book on hand, and I forget its name)
In addition, an alchemist would have other tricks up his sleeves besides bomb creation. Alchemists are more than just bombs, after all.Why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free? Why be an alchemist and not be a full bab two weapon fighting rapid shotting ranger with a bandoleer full of bombs?
Because in such a system, the improved versions of alchemist fire would be more expensive and require an alchemist of a certain level to produce it to begin with. The ranger mentioned *could* spend all of his feats and money on becoming a mad bomber, but it would be a rather expensive thing to do. Depending on the campaign, these higher level, improved alchemist devices might not even be available unless you are in a large city. I assume that city wealth limits would come into play, just as they do for magic items.

Phasics |

But technology already exists in pathfinder. The alchemical items listed in the PH are not magical in nature, but they exist. Anybody can go to the corner store and buy them, if they have the gold. The problem is that they aren't very useful for the price, which is one of my complaints. The saving throws are small and don't scale up; beyond third or fourth level, there is little point buying them.
As for bombs as extraordinary effects, all that's needed to keep them in line is keep the limit of how many can be active. If you are still restricted to your level plus your intelligence bonus number of bombs a day, then passing them around will have a negliable effect on the campaign world.
Here's the thing you can have progression of magical abilities in a class, you can't progress scientific certainties.
a flask of x and y dimension filled with explosive material does a fixed Z damage as per alchemical fire.
just becuase your now 10th level instead of first the scientific fact is the alchemical fire is just as effective as it was back then as it is now.
magic however breaks scientific rules and says you know that alchemical fire well we can make it do a whole lot more with the same amount of material.
The Scientific Alchemist might be able to learn new combinations of materials but the simple fact is he's limited by the physical dimensions of the flask he's throwing.
its like saying a 1st level alchemist throwing a block of C4 will get less explosive blast than a 10th level alchemist throwing the same block.

Sayer_of_Nay |

its like saying a 1st level alchemist throwing a block of C4 will get less explosive blast than a 10th level alchemist throwing the same block.
But we see this in every instance of the game. As a person levels up, swords become less effective against him; by 10th level, a fighter will be capable of getting stabbed in the heart multiple times by a dagger without suffering serious injury, due to the fact that hit points are an abstract method of determining health. Demanding strict logic for alchemist fire while not doing the same for any other weapon is silly.
Now, before someone says the obvious "well, swords don't improve, so why should alchemist fire" line, I would say that swords can and do improve in many ways: magic, feats, and special materials all give swords more power than normal. Where as alchemist fire stays the same.It would be nice for the mundane alchemical equipment to find use beyond the lower levels, hit point inflation being what it is.
Oh, and I should clarify: when I say "scientific," I mean "in a manner that fuction without magical energy."

Phasics |

Phasics wrote:
its like saying a 1st level alchemist throwing a block of C4 will get less explosive blast than a 10th level alchemist throwing the same block.
But we see this in every instance of the game. As a person levels up, swords become less effective against him; by 10th level, a fighter will be capable of getting stabbed in the heart multiple times by a dagger without suffering serious injury, due to the fact that hit points are an abstract method of determining health. Demanding strict logic for alchemist fire while not doing the same for any other weapon is silly.
Now, before someone says the obvious "well, swords don't improve, so why should alchemist fire" line, I would say that swords can and do improve in many ways: magic, feats, and special materials all give swords more power than normal. Where as alchemist fire stays the same.
It would be nice for the mundane alchemical equipment to find use beyond the lower levels, hit point inflation being what it is.Oh, and I should clarify: when I say "scientific," I mean "in a manner that fuction without magical energy."
Just as a segway high HP doesn't mean you withstand multiple heart stabs it means your avoiding more of those critical blows.
I often think of HP as a pool of luck to avoid a killing blow eventually your luck/skill runs out.swords improve by magic... so does alchemist fire when used by an alchemist who magically augments them ... Agree ;)
swords improve by feats, yes learning to hold that sword with the right grip means you can bring it to bear with more force than someone less skilled thus more damage.
dosen't really matter how skillfully you hit someone with a splash weapon it splashes all over them there isn't a way to engulf them more than 100%.
swords improve by special materials again yes wood sword vs adamantium sword one cuts stone the other shatteres on stone.
with alchemists fire ... fire is fire is are no variation of fire in pathfinder its just fire , no red fire or green fire just fire.
Basically what your looking for is called a dragon ;)
its AOE fire improves as it progresses, and its breath weapon is not hindered in an antimagic field , sadly us mere humanoids are not dragon and must rely on magic and other means to achieve similar power ;)
I'm serious by the way what your basically asking for is a class that gives you extraordinary abilities based on biology like a dragon but humans are not extraordinary hence we use artifical classes to achieve similar feats.

![]() |

that being that the alchemy is based on magic and magical effects rather than scientific.
I'm not sure what to say. The class didn't go the way you wanted it to go *shrug* Pathfinder/ D&D is about magic, there is essentially *one* common source of power and lots of different ways to tap into it.

BigNorseWolf |

Not true. An alchemist would have the ability to create in the first place. Just because an item exists doesn't mean it is always avialable. By playing an Alchemist, you could create the item at a third of the price, and probably quicker than normal if you took the feat listed in the APG that ups the speed of alchmey crafting (I don't have the book on hand, and I forget its name)
But so could anyone with the craft (alchemy) skill and the feat . And if you made the item only creatable by alchemists that would be a little odd.
By relying on the DM to limit availability to something that should be readily available you create a lot of disparity in power between tables. An alchemist could be useful or completely useless based on a DM's economic structure.
In addition, an alchemist would have other tricks up his sleeves besides bomb creation. Alchemists are more than just bombs, after all.
Right.. they're also elixers/infusions, which you didn't like the system for either.
Because in such a system, the improved versions of alchemist fire would be more expensive and require an alchemist of a certain level to produce it to begin with. The ranger mentioned *could* spend all of his feats and money on becoming a mad bomber, but it would be a rather expensive thing to do.
If the alchemist has to produce it, even at 1/3 the cost, then the alchemist PC costs himself a LOT of money every time they go into combat.
The ranger only needs to spend 1 "off build" feat (two weapon fighting) if he's an archer.
I've seen this with my alchemist and trying to use poisons: at 1/3 the cost its not worth it unless the DM attacks me with a giant scorpion or something (in which case the elf starts whistling "i've got money, lots and lots of money...)
If it costs no money, then it sells for no money, or very little. Even if it takes a moderate to high level alchemist there should be at least one alchemist somewhere setting up shop rather than digging around dungeons waiting for that one level inappropriate encounter that will kill them.
Depending on the campaign, these higher level, improved alchemist devices might not even be available unless you are in a large city. I assume that city wealth limits would come into play, just as they do for magic items.
Right, but whats to keep your PC's from stocking up in a large city? If William Pow'el lives in stonehaven and sells an item worth BEING a class for among his wares, the adventuring community is going to know about it , your party would probably know about it and be able to take advantage of it. Without a mechanism like the one where the alchemist literally putting a little bit of himself into his work there's no reason to BE an alchemist rather than buy from one.

Sayer_of_Nay |

Just as a segway high HP doesn't mean you withstand multiple heart stabs it means your avoiding more of those critical blows.
I often think of HP as a pool of luck to avoid a killing blow eventually your luck/skill runs out.
That is one way of looking at it. And a good way at that. But hit points, by their very nature, are abstract. Your interpretation is a valid one, but not the only one. Hit points can also mean you are tough enough to take 50 arrows and still fight.
*shrug*

Canor Auror |

But we see this in every instance of the game. As a person levels up, swords become less effective against him; by 10th level, a fighter will be capable of getting stabbed in the heart multiple times by a dagger without suffering serious injury, due to the fact that hit points are an abstract method of determining health. Demanding strict logic for alchemist fire while not doing the same for any other weapon is silly.
Now, before someone says the obvious "well, swords don't improve, so why should alchemist fire" line, I would say that swords can and do improve in many ways: magic, feats, and special materials all give swords more power than normal. Where as alchemist fire stays the same.
It would be nice for the mundane alchemical equipment to find use beyond the lower levels, hit point inflation being what it is.Oh, and I should clarify: when I say "scientific," I mean "in a manner that fuction without magical energy."
If I'm reading you correctly it seems that basically what you are looking for is non-magical ways to increase an alchemist and or their creations, kind of like you use the same basic recipes but substitute higher quality ingredients learned as your level/skill increases.
Alchemist fire
(A direct hit deals 1d6 points of fire damage. Every creature within 5 feet of the point where the flask hits takes 1 point of fire damage from the splash. On the round following a direct hit, the target takes an additional 1d6 points of damage.)
Improved alchemist fire
(This fire burns hotter than normal alchemist fire - causes Damage as normal alchemist fire but also reduces benefits from armor and shields by (insert number here) until armor/shields are repaired.)
Greater alchemist fire
(This type of alchemist fire burns hotter, faster and longer than normal - add to damage of basic alchemist fire, add to the number the AC is reduced, lower Dex, Int, and Wis by 2 (burns so hot that once hit, it hurts to move and the pain is so distracting that people hit can't think straight until X days have passed or magical healing is applied, if left uncured will cause a permanent loss to CHA due to scarring *for those reoccurring villains*)
More or less something like that only applying to all his creations instead of just the alchemist fire?

Sayer_of_Nay |

Sayer_of_Nay wrote:
But we see this in every instance of the game. As a person levels up, swords become less effective against him; by 10th level, a fighter will be capable of getting stabbed in the heart multiple times by a dagger without suffering serious injury, due to the fact that hit points are an abstract method of determining health. Demanding strict logic for alchemist fire while not doing the same for any other weapon is silly.
Now, before someone says the obvious "well, swords don't improve, so why should alchemist fire" line, I would say that swords can and do improve in many ways: magic, feats, and special materials all give swords more power than normal. Where as alchemist fire stays the same.
It would be nice for the mundane alchemical equipment to find use beyond the lower levels, hit point inflation being what it is.Oh, and I should clarify: when I say "scientific," I mean "in a manner that fuction without magical energy."
If I'm reading you correctly it seems that basically what you are looking for is non-magical ways to increase an alchemist and or their creations, kind of like you use the same basic recipes but substitute higher quality ingredients learned as your level/skill increases.
Alchemist fire
(A direct hit deals 1d6 points of fire damage. Every creature within 5 feet of the point where the flask hits takes 1 point of fire damage from the splash. On the round following a direct hit, the target takes an additional 1d6 points of damage.)Improved alchemist fire
(This fire burns hotter than normal alchemist fire - causes Damage as normal alchemist fire but also reduces benefits from armor and shields by (insert number here) until armor/shields are repaired.)Greater alchemist fire
(This type of alchemist fire burns hotter, faster and longer than normal - add to damage of basic alchemist fire, add to the number the AC is reduced, lower Dex, Int, and Wis by 2 (burns so hot that once hit, it hurts to move and the pain is so distracting that people...
Right. Something that will allow the mundane alchemy to actually retain some usefulness past the first few levels of play.

Sayer_of_Nay |

Quote:Not true. An alchemist would have the ability to create in the first place. Just because an item exists doesn't mean it is always avialable. By playing an Alchemist, you could create the item at a third of the price, and probably quicker than normal if you took the feat listed in the APG that ups the speed of alchmey crafting (I don't have the book on hand, and I forget its name)But so could anyone with the craft (alchemy) skill and the feat . And if you made the item only creatable by alchemists that would be a little odd.
By relying on the DM to limit availability to something that should be readily available you create a lot of disparity in power between tables. An alchemist could be useful or completely useless based on a DM's economic structure.
Quote:In addition, an alchemist would have other tricks up his sleeves besides bomb creation. Alchemists are more than just bombs, after all.Right.. they're also elixers/infusions, which you didn't like the system for either.
Quote:Because in such a system, the improved versions of alchemist fire would be more expensive and require an alchemist of a certain level to produce it to begin with. The ranger mentioned *could* spend all of his feats and money on becoming a mad bomber, but it would be a rather expensive thing to do.If the alchemist has to produce it, even at 1/3 the cost, then the alchemist PC costs himself a LOT of money every time they go into combat.
The ranger only needs to spend 1 "off build" feat (two weapon fighting) if he's an archer.
I've seen this with my alchemist and trying to use poisons: at 1/3 the cost its not worth it unless the DM attacks me with a giant scorpion or something (in which case the elf starts whistling "i've got money, lots and lots of money...)
If it costs no money, then it sells for no money, or very little. Even if it takes a moderate to high level alchemist there should be at least one alchemist somewhere setting up shop rather than digging around...
Alright, I'm having some issues with my reply editing, so please bear with me.
1. Anyone with the skill points can craft alchemy, 'tis true. The Alchemist class, however, would represent a more dedicated approach. Hence, the Alchemist would be the only one capable of producing the improved/upgarded versions of alchemical items.
2. I don't like the extract system because, mainly, is uncreative and uninspired. They just choose a bunch of arcane and divine spells, put them in a bottle, and called them "extracts." They might as well have just called them spells.
Once they add enough new, unique extracts to dwarf the murder of spells afflicting the list, my opinion might change.

hogarth |

Playing one right now and its lots of fun.
[..]
C) honestly how may different options do you need ?
Ranged bomber
Melee Beast
Extract Support
Poison Use
Craft Potion Monkey
Skill Monkey (high INT = lotsa skills and you get a decent list)
I rather like the alchemist class. I'm playing two alchemists currently and they seem quite different (one is a melee fighter and the other uses a bow and stink bombs), so claiming they all play the same seems a bit odd to me.
My favourite part is getting something nice at each level. There are enough discoveries that I don't think I'll run out of tempting options any time soon; by way of comparison, the witch's hexes and the rogue's talents have a few really nice ones and a bunch that I'm indifferent about.

Sayer_of_Nay |

Sayer of Nay wrote:that being that the alchemy is based on magic and magical effects rather than scientific.I'm not sure what to say. The class didn't go the way you wanted it to go *shrug* Pathfinder/ D&D is about magic, there is essentially *one* common source of power and lots of different ways to tap into it.
Very true. I love magic, I really do. But, I 'm not keen on the fact that they keep throwing technology in the game (in the form of alchemy, firearms, and the like) and then neglect to give it staying power.
That being said, I'm not saying the Alchemist is a bad class.

Phasics |

0gre wrote:Sayer of Nay wrote:that being that the alchemy is based on magic and magical effects rather than scientific.I'm not sure what to say. The class didn't go the way you wanted it to go *shrug* Pathfinder/ D&D is about magic, there is essentially *one* common source of power and lots of different ways to tap into it.Very true. I love magic, I really do. But, I 'm not keen on the fact that they keep throwing technology in the game (in the form of alchemy, firearms, and the like) and then neglect to give it staying power.
That being said, I'm not saying the Alchemist is a bad class.
maybe thats becuase this is a fantasy RP and they don't want tech to take center stage but are not naive enough to think they won't sell more copies if there a little bit of tech in there to appease those who enjoy it.
You may find when the start fleshing out other planets (i.e. not golarion) that tech and classes based around it come to the forefront. think steampunk, think ebberon, you may find paizo have an offshoot which fills the niche your after in a different setting

Sayer_of_Nay |

Sayer_of_Nay wrote:0gre wrote:Sayer of Nay wrote:that being that the alchemy is based on magic and magical effects rather than scientific.I'm not sure what to say. The class didn't go the way you wanted it to go *shrug* Pathfinder/ D&D is about magic, there is essentially *one* common source of power and lots of different ways to tap into it.Very true. I love magic, I really do. But, I 'm not keen on the fact that they keep throwing technology in the game (in the form of alchemy, firearms, and the like) and then neglect to give it staying power.
That being said, I'm not saying the Alchemist is a bad class.
maybe thats becuase this is a fantasy RP and they don't want tech to take center stage but are not naive enough to think they won't sell more copies if there a little bit of tech in there to appease those who enjoy it.
You may find when the start fleshing out other planets (i.e. not golarion) that tech and classes based around it come to the forefront. think steampunk, think ebberon, you may find paizo have an offshoot which fills the niche your after in a different setting
Maybe.
But you can expand the usefulness of the tech without it taking center stage. I'd rather not have an "offshoot." I'd like for there to be available, optional rules for such things with having to resort to a trip to Mars.
Frankly, I don't think its asking too much; I'm not demanding a horseless carriage, or computers, or space ships. Just an expansion on existing rules to make them more viable in higher level play. The Alchemist would have been an idle vehicle for that, but it was not used as such. Augmenting alchemist's fire will still never replace fire balls on the battle field, and the it can only change the nature of a capaign setting as much as the designer or DM let's it; guns exist in Galorian, but they haven't done much to change the landscape. Nor will they ever, in the face of magic.

Phasics |

Phasics wrote:Sayer_of_Nay wrote:0gre wrote:Sayer of Nay wrote:that being that the alchemy is based on magic and magical effects rather than scientific.I'm not sure what to say. The class didn't go the way you wanted it to go *shrug* Pathfinder/ D&D is about magic, there is essentially *one* common source of power and lots of different ways to tap into it.Very true. I love magic, I really do. But, I 'm not keen on the fact that they keep throwing technology in the game (in the form of alchemy, firearms, and the like) and then neglect to give it staying power.
That being said, I'm not saying the Alchemist is a bad class.
maybe thats becuase this is a fantasy RP and they don't want tech to take center stage but are not naive enough to think they won't sell more copies if there a little bit of tech in there to appease those who enjoy it.
You may find when the start fleshing out other planets (i.e. not golarion) that tech and classes based around it come to the forefront. think steampunk, think ebberon, you may find paizo have an offshoot which fills the niche your after in a different setting
Maybe.
But you can expand the usefulness of the tech without it taking center stage. I'd rather not have an "offshoot." I'd like for there to be available, optional rules for such things with having to resort to a trip to Mars.
its the equivalent of asking for psionic classes and lore to be included in Golarion. While it might make some happy others won't be so happy and even though you can say well then don't allow it in your games you have to remember Golarion is for pathfinder Society.
I've got my money on a psionics equivalent and tech offshoot on another planet setting.

Sayer_of_Nay |

Sayer_of_Nay wrote:Phasics wrote:Sayer_of_Nay wrote:0gre wrote:Sayer of Nay wrote:that being that the alchemy is based on magic and magical effects rather than scientific.I'm not sure what to say. The class didn't go the way you wanted it to go *shrug* Pathfinder/ D&D is about magic, there is essentially *one* common source of power and lots of different ways to tap into it.Very true. I love magic, I really do. But, I 'm not keen on the fact that they keep throwing technology in the game (in the form of alchemy, firearms, and the like) and then neglect to give it staying power.
That being said, I'm not saying the Alchemist is a bad class.
maybe thats becuase this is a fantasy RP and they don't want tech to take center stage but are not naive enough to think they won't sell more copies if there a little bit of tech in there to appease those who enjoy it.
You may find when the start fleshing out other planets (i.e. not golarion) that tech and classes based around it come to the forefront. think steampunk, think ebberon, you may find paizo have an offshoot which fills the niche your after in a different setting
Maybe.
But you can expand the usefulness of the tech without it taking center stage. I'd rather not have an "offshoot." I'd like for there to be available, optional rules for such things with having to resort to a trip to Mars.
its the equivalent of asking for psionic classes and lore to be included in Golarion. While it might make some happy others won't be so happy and even though you can say well then don't allow it in your games you have to remember Golarion is for pathfinder Society.
I've got my money on a psionics equivalent and tech offshoot on another planet setting.
Psionics is already included in the campaign setting. Page 234 of the setting book goes into details about it. The fact that pathfinder doesn't have its own rules for it is the only reason its not in play.
And the rules of the game are not there to serve PFS. Its the other way around. If society play doesn't allow something, that has no bearing on whether or not it should exist to begin with.

BigNorseWolf |

1. Anyone with the skill points can craft alchemy, 'tis true. The Alchemist class, however, would represent a more dedicated approach. Hence, the Alchemist would be the only one capable of producing the improved/upgarded versions of alchemical items.
Ok, but unless he is also the only one capable of USING it, either
1) the alchemist will severely bite into his WBL by having to pay to use his bombs (albiet at 1/3 the rate of anyone else, but still heavily)
2) Adventurers of all stripes will be using his bombs, and with a full bab some adventurers will do it better.
2. I don't like the extract system because, mainly, is uncreative and uninspired. They just choose a bunch of arcane and divine spells, put them in a bottle, and called them "extracts." They might as well have just called them spells.
Once they add enough new, unique extracts to dwarf the murder of spells afflicting the list, my opinion might change.
I don't think that will ever happen. I am happy enough with being able to do a few "impossible" things , like giving the paladin a 'potion' of true strike, and alchemical allocation (something unique to the alchemist and very, VERY thematic and versitile)
-There were a few higher level alchemical items in the apg
-The drugs section of gamemastery? was very useful, those were alchemical items.
- Elves of golarion had arrows that were alchemical items, that were pretty useful.

Sayer_of_Nay |

Quote:1. Anyone with the skill points can craft alchemy, 'tis true. The Alchemist class, however, would represent a more dedicated approach. Hence, the Alchemist would be the only one capable of producing the improved/upgarded versions of alchemical items.Ok, but unless he is also the only one capable of USING it, either
1) the alchemist will severely bite into his WBL by having to pay to use his bombs (albiet at 1/3 the rate of anyone else, but still heavily)
2) Adventurers of all stripes will be using his bombs, and with a full bab some adventurers will do it better.
Quote:2. I don't like the extract system because, mainly, is uncreative and uninspired. They just choose a bunch of arcane and divine spells, put them in a bottle, and called them "extracts." They might as well have just called them spells.
Once they add enough new, unique extracts to dwarf the murder of spells afflicting the list, my opinion might change.I don't think that will ever happen. I am happy enough with being able to do a few "impossible" things , like giving the paladin a 'potion' of true strike, and alchemical allocation (something unique to the alchemist and very, VERY thematic and versitile)
-There were a few higher level alchemical items in the apg
-The drugs section of gamemastery? was very useful, those were alchemical items.
- Elves of golarion had arrows that were alchemical items, that were pretty useful.
1. To clarify: I may have mixed things up. Bombs would remain a class feature; they wouldn't need to pay for them (unless you count the spell component pouch). If I had my way, they would be extraordinary items, and would function when someone else used them. BUT, the Alchemist would still be limited in the number of bombs he could have in existence at one time (level plus int modifier) and they would still fizzle out after a day. basically, it would allow them to be useful to others, but still limit the effect he would have.
2. The upgraded versions of mundane alchemy (alchemist's fire et all) would require crafting, as normal.

BigNorseWolf |

1. To clarify: I may have mixed things up. Bombs would remain a class feature; they wouldn't need to pay for them (unless you count the spell component pouch). If I had my way, they would be extraordinary items, and would function when someone else used them. BUT, the Alchemist would still be limited in the number of bombs he could have in existence at one time (level plus int modifier) and they would still fizzle out after a day. basically, it would allow them to be useful to others, but still limit the effect he would have.
-They would become the staple of an adventuring party anywhere as soon as the party had teleport. Teleport to large city shop, head back. This leaves no reason for the class to be taken at high levels.
-Upgraded items for sale leave no reason for the alchemist to be a PC class.

Sayer_of_Nay |

1. To clarify: I may have mixed things up. Bombs would remain a class feature; they wouldn't need to pay for them (unless you count the spell component pouch). If I had my way, they would be extraordinary items, and would function when someone else used them. BUT, the Alchemist would still be limited in the number of bombs he could have in existence at one time (level plus int modifier) and they would still fizzle out after a day. basically, it would allow them to be useful to others, but still limit the effect he would have.-They would become the staple of an adventuring party anywhere as soon as the party had teleport. Teleport to large city shop, head back. This leaves no reason for the class to be taken at high levels.
-Upgraded items for sale leave no reason for the alchemist to be a PC class.
1. Lol, I suppose it's possible. I doubt it would be the case, anymore than a party of adventurers zipping back and forth to purchase fireball scrolls everyday.
That kind of reasoning is a bit extreme.2. That's like saying that scrolls for sale leaves no reason to be a PC wizard. Anybody can take ranks in Use Magic Device, and, by your logic, render the party wizard pointless. We both know that that is not the case. And let's not forget that spells are significantly superior to alchemy, even upgraded alchemy.

![]() |

I suppose you're looking at it to be Core. If not, Krazy Kragnar's Alchemical Surplus Shop pdf by Super Genius Games is a great way to expand on Alchemy. They have a Alchemical Goad in it that increases the DC to any alchemical item its added to by +2, +4, and +6. Makes things like Alchemist's fire harder to put out or tanglefoot bags harder not be stuck.
And don't discount low level alchemical items at higher levels. Last session I saved our 8th group from what could have been a tpk with a thunderstone. Satyr was devastating us (we all have horribly low will saves), I forget how we escaped, but we did and I was able to deafen us all to prevent him from screwing us royally.
My Alchemist is focused on bombing, but he also has made every single alchemical item paizo's released and keeps it in his bag of holding or haversack. There's been a lot of fights where cheap low-level items have saved the day. Like vermin repellent from Adventurer's armory and the swarm of bees we were getting kicked around by. My bombs were doing great against them, but I can't throw when I'm nauseous.
Just because alchemy isn't big or flashy definitely doesn't mean its not worth having at higher levels. Would I jump at the chance to have better alchemist's fire? Sure I would, but I'm not going to bee-sting (starts with a bee ends with an itch) and moan that it doesn't level with me because there isn't better alchemist's fire yet. Give them time, and you might be surprised.

BigNorseWolf |

1. Lol, I suppose it's possible. I doubt it would be the case, anymore than a party of adventurers zipping back and forth to purchase fireball scrolls everyday.
That kind of reasoning is a bit extreme.
The only reason that that's extreme is that scrolls LAST, so you don't need to buy them every day, and you DO see adventurers making trips to the city to stock up on them. At high levels i HAVE had a wizard tport over to a friendly temple to get a curse removed mid fight.
Even if it wouldn't happen at your table, remember that this is a class being made for wide distribution. Many MANY tables would have people doing this, not to mention some folks are running urban campaigns.
2. That's like saying that scrolls for sale leaves no reason to be a PC wizard. Anybody can take ranks in Use Magic Device, and, by your logic, render the party wizard pointless. We both know that that is not the case. And let's not forget that spells are significantly superior to alchemy, even upgraded alchemy.
The party wizard isn't pointless because it doesn't cost him anything (worth mentioning) to cast his spells. If anyone could cast a wizards or clerics spells by paying 3 times what the wizard has to pay, no matter where you set that amount, the wizard becomes unviable because either
1) its cheap enough for everyone or
2) Its too expensive for the wizard.
Non magical alchemy items wouldn't even need ranks in use magic device.

Oterisk |

And let's not forget that spells are significantly superior to alchemy, even upgraded alchemy.
I think that is why they got "spells". Otherwise it would be a balance issue.
Of course I think that a simple fix to some of the alchemist's items is simply to give them a DC equal to the bombs. Making a better tanglefoot bag or thunderstone makes them more useful later. Putting out a discovery or a feat to allow someone to craft bombs isn't a bad idea, just have them scale in price like potions, and it won't be abused any more than the existing system.
One thing that I think is often overlooked with bombs is the no save bit. Hit them with the bomb, and damage happens. Not to mention the intelligence modified damage. At level five, I can throw 3d6+7 bombs (22 int, point blank shot). It does the same damage as a fireball against the big bad guy, right? NOPE. If I hit, which I usually do, he gets no save which means no evasion or improved evasion as well. Also, with precise bombs, I can not hit my meleers who are working to flank the dude. Sure the splash isn't as good, but I also get a whole lot more bombs than a wizard gets fireballs. Then there are frost bombs, poison bombs, and it goes on. It gives "glass cannon" a whole new meaning.
I made a crafty alchemist, I basically have my guy able to make "anything". On smuggler's shiv, it was great, because I could fix/make anything we needed to survive. I had brought materials with me (was planning on going on an expedition in the Mwangi anyway), and have been terribly useful to the party. After taking master craftsman, I will be able to make all sorts of wondrous items to help out the party as well.

Sayer_of_Nay |

I suppose you're looking at it to be Core. If not, Krazy Kragnar's Alchemical Surplus Shop pdf by Super Genius Games is a great way to expand on Alchemy. They have a Alchemical Goad in it that increases the DC to any alchemical item its added to by +2, +4, and +6. Makes things like Alchemist's fire harder to put out or tanglefoot bags harder not be stuck.
And don't discount low level alchemical items at higher levels. Last session I saved our 8th group from what could have been a tpk with a thunderstone. Satyr was devastating us (we all have horribly low will saves), I forget how we escaped, but we did and I was able to deafen us all to prevent him from screwing us royally.
My Alchemist is focused on bombing, but he also has made every single alchemical item paizo's released and keeps it in his bag of holding or haversack. There's been a lot of fights where cheap low-level items have saved the day. Like vermin repellent from Adventurer's armory and the swarm of bees we were getting kicked around by. My bombs were doing great against them, but I can't throw when I'm nauseous.
Just because alchemy isn't big or flashy definitely doesn't mean its not worth having at higher levels. Would I jump at the chance to have better alchemist's fire? Sure I would, but I'm not going to bee-sting (starts with a bee ends with an itch) and moan that it doesn't level with me because there isn't better alchemist's fire yet. Give them time, and you might be surprised.
I'll have to check out that supplement, it sounds like what I'm looking for. Of course, I would prefer core rules to come out, since many a DM don't allow third party stuff in their games.

Sayer_of_Nay |

Quote:1. Lol, I suppose it's possible. I doubt it would be the case, anymore than a party of adventurers zipping back and forth to purchase fireball scrolls everyday.
That kind of reasoning is a bit extreme.The only reason that that's extreme is that scrolls LAST, so you don't need to buy them every day, and you DO see adventurers making trips to the city to stock up on them. At high levels i HAVE had a wizard tport over to a friendly temple to get a curse removed mid fight.
Even if it wouldn't happen at your table, remember that this is a class being made for wide distribution. Many MANY tables would have people doing this, not to mention some folks are running urban campaigns.
2. That's like saying that scrolls for sale leaves no reason to be a PC wizard. Anybody can take ranks in Use Magic Device, and, by your logic, render the party wizard pointless. We both know that that is not the case. And let's not forget that spells are significantly superior to alchemy, even upgraded alchemy.
The party wizard isn't pointless because it doesn't cost him anything (worth mentioning) to cast his spells. , the wizard becomes unviable because either
1) its cheap enough for everyone or
2) Its too expensive for the wizard.
Non magical alchemy items wouldn't even need ranks in use magic device.
And the party alchemist isn't pointless because he still has bombs (which only he can craft), his infusions (which are very useful, despite my distaste for them), and his potion crafting, along with the proposed ability to upgrade alchemical items.
I'm afraid I can't see the logic in your argument. You keep trying to make it seem like improved alchemy would somehow break the game and every campaign world out there; somehow the common folks with their alchemist's fire will rise up and overthrow the magic users as the most powerful being in the world. I'm just not seeing it.
"If anyone could cast a wizards or clerics spells by paying 3 times what the wizard has to pay, no matter where you set that amount..."
1. This is already possible, in the form of scrolls, potions, and wands. If a character seriously wants to use these items, he can put ranks in Use Magic Device and buy them. And yet, I notice the wizards are clerics haven't been invalidated.
2. Even if these adventurers are teleporting into the cities everyday and buying up all the alchemy, I say its not a big deal, because of:
A) The items are not going to be as powerful as scrolls/wands/potion. If they want to spend their gold on something, why complain? It's their gold.
B) Do these adventurers have unlimited wealth in your games? I'd laugh if the PC's decided to go broke buying up alchemy (even upgraded versions). You'll find that these individuals will miss having better magic items, items they could have bought with all the gold they've spent on alchemy.
Again, I'm not seeing much of a case as to why there shouldn't be rules for better alchemy other than "the PC's might..." That form of conjecture is flimsy reasoning at best. The PC's might decided to teleport to every major city and buy up every scroll of Meteor Swarm on the planet, and then reduce the DM's BBEG and his minions in ashes from orbit. It doesn't mean it will happen.

Phasics |

BigNorseWolf wrote:Quote:1. Lol, I suppose it's possible. I doubt it would be the case, anymore than a party of adventurers zipping back and forth to purchase fireball scrolls everyday.
That kind of reasoning is a bit extreme.The only reason that that's extreme is that scrolls LAST, so you don't need to buy them every day, and you DO see adventurers making trips to the city to stock up on them. At high levels i HAVE had a wizard tport over to a friendly temple to get a curse removed mid fight.
Even if it wouldn't happen at your table, remember that this is a class being made for wide distribution. Many MANY tables would have people doing this, not to mention some folks are running urban campaigns.
2. That's like saying that scrolls for sale leaves no reason to be a PC wizard. Anybody can take ranks in Use Magic Device, and, by your logic, render the party wizard pointless. We both know that that is not the case. And let's not forget that spells are significantly superior to alchemy, even upgraded alchemy.
The party wizard isn't pointless because it doesn't cost him anything (worth mentioning) to cast his spells. , the wizard becomes unviable because either
1) its cheap enough for everyone or
2) Its too expensive for the wizard.Non magical alchemy items wouldn't even need ranks in use magic device.
And the party alchemist isn't pointless because he still has bombs (which only he can craft), his infusions (which are very useful, despite my distaste for them), and his potion crafting, along with the proposed ability to upgrade alchemical items.
I'm afraid I can't see the logic in your argument. You keep trying to make it seem like improved alchemy would somehow break the game and every campaign world out there; somehow the common folks with their alchemist's fire will rise up and overthrow the magic users as the most powerful being in the world. I'm just not seeing it.
"If anyone could cast a wizards or clerics spells by paying 3 times...
The real question is what do you want to be able to do with alchemical items that can't be accomplished with magical items ?
a wand of fireball vs an "upgraded" alchemist fire with same area and damage.
If they're exactly the same just from different fluff sources whats the point of having both ? Its redundant.
I'd venture the best course of action is actually to rename instead of remake.
There's no reason you couldn't make a wizard and call it an alchemist, he doesn't cast spells , the verbals and somatic components are him mixing alchemical materials. Then take spells are rename them with alchemical slants
fireball is now alchemical fireblast
But the rules are exactly the same as a wizard.
Renaming often works alot better than trying to remake things the way you want them.
An example for my alchemist I'm playing right now.
He dosent grow claws with the ferral mutgaen he grows crsytalline spikes
his skin dosent get tougher +2 Nat Arm it becomes studded by crystal growth offering protection.
Thorn Body extract doesn't make thorns grow on his skin it makes crystal spikes grow from his skin.
Now I could have tried to change rules and abilities specifically around crystalline abilities but to what end if the mechanics would be the same.
Renaming > Remaking

Sayer_of_Nay |

Sayer_of_Nay wrote:...BigNorseWolf wrote:Quote:1. Lol, I suppose it's possible. I doubt it would be the case, anymore than a party of adventurers zipping back and forth to purchase fireball scrolls everyday.
That kind of reasoning is a bit extreme.The only reason that that's extreme is that scrolls LAST, so you don't need to buy them every day, and you DO see adventurers making trips to the city to stock up on them. At high levels i HAVE had a wizard tport over to a friendly temple to get a curse removed mid fight.
Even if it wouldn't happen at your table, remember that this is a class being made for wide distribution. Many MANY tables would have people doing this, not to mention some folks are running urban campaigns.
2. That's like saying that scrolls for sale leaves no reason to be a PC wizard. Anybody can take ranks in Use Magic Device, and, by your logic, render the party wizard pointless. We both know that that is not the case. And let's not forget that spells are significantly superior to alchemy, even upgraded alchemy.
The party wizard isn't pointless because it doesn't cost him anything (worth mentioning) to cast his spells. , the wizard becomes unviable because either
1) its cheap enough for everyone or
2) Its too expensive for the wizard.Non magical alchemy items wouldn't even need ranks in use magic device.
And the party alchemist isn't pointless because he still has bombs (which only he can craft), his infusions (which are very useful, despite my distaste for them), and his potion crafting, along with the proposed ability to upgrade alchemical items.
I'm afraid I can't see the logic in your argument. You keep trying to make it seem like improved alchemy would somehow break the game and every campaign world out there; somehow the common folks with their alchemist's fire will rise up and overthrow the magic users as the most powerful being in the world. I'm just not seeing it.
"If anyone could cast a wizards or clerics spells by
I like alchemy because it is something that everybody can use out the gate. That being said, I don't want it to compare to or even replace magical effects. rather, I'd like it to have some staying power as a campaign goes it. That being said:
1. I agree that it would be redundant for alchemist's fire and a fireball to be the same, which is why I'm not suggesting such a thing. For instance, increase the alchemist fire to 2d6 and have it last 2 rounds instead of one. Have it cost 500 gp instead of 50, and there you go. Things like that.
2. Renaming something is all well and good. But it doesn't change the fact that it's still magic. Alchemical fireblast is still a fireball, whatever you wish to call it. Same range, same damage, same magic. Magic being the keyword. The entire point of my rant is improving the nonmagical methods, without sacrificing magic in the process. Despite what some people argue, I think it is possible to have nonmagical, alchemical effects be useful with them invalidating magic.
I'm not saying remake the system. Rather, I'm saying add to it. Build it up. Expand.
Expand > Renaming

Abraham spalding |

I had a concept for an alchemist based off of Jillas, from slayers (need guns, though)
Also an Alchemist who went master chemist, trying to recreate lycanthropy using alchemy.
Our table has an alchemist from alkenstar that uses a scattergun -- he currently has it upgraded to a +1 seeking scattergun and is looking to get distance put on it next.

BigNorseWolf |

And the party alchemist isn't pointless because he still has bombs (which only he can craft), his infusions (which are very useful, despite my distaste for them), and his potion crafting, along with the proposed ability to upgrade alchemical items.
All of which 1) the alchemist has to spend cash on and 2) anyone ELSE can spend cash on, have all of the alchemists abilities AND their class abilities on top of it.
I'm afraid I can't see the logic in your argument.
I really can't make it more obvious.I don't know what you keep missing but its plain as day and certain. Stat out one item, how much it would cost to make and how much it would be worth, and what would it do? You want an entire class worth of such items, surely its not a problem to ask you to make one of them?
If anyone could cast a wizards or clerics spells by paying 3 times what the wizard has to pay, no matter where you set that amount..."
1. This is already possible, in the form of scrolls, potions, and wands.
It is not , repeat, NOT already possible to do this. Lets do this with the MOST efficient item, wands.
It costs a cleric nothing to cast cure light wounds. It costs a rogue 15 gold peices (750 gp wand of CLW /50 charges)
It costs a wizard nothing to cast Fireball. It costs a rogue 225 Gold pieces to cast a fireball
It costs a cleric nothing to cast freedom of movement. It costs a rogue 420 gp to do so with a wand.
It costs a wizard nothing to cast baleful polymorph. It costs the rogue 1,125 gp. (with a scroll)
In addition, for any offensive spells the Save DC will be in the john. So what we have is something worse than 15 times, 225 times, 420 times, or one THOUSAND times more expensive for the rogue than the cleric to get an inferior product.
So unless the alchemist is using the items for free, or essentially for free , the regular crafting rules only allow him a 67% discount (because for crafting 1/3 of the price is raw materials)
If the alchemist can use the items for free, then there's essentially nothing from keeping the prices to bottom out near zero.
2. Even if these adventurers are teleporting into the cities everyday and buying up all the alchemy, I say its not a big deal, because of:
A) The items are not going to be as powerful as scrolls/wands/potion. If they want to spend their gold on something, why complain? It's their gold.
If the alchemist items aren't as powerful as scrolls and spells why be an alchemist? You seem to have this fluffy, vague idea in your head of what you want and you're ridiculing me for not seeing it. I'm not a mind reader. I don't see any solution to the problems i'm pointing out. Put down the alchemy system you want and we can see if i have a point.
B) Do these adventurers have unlimited wealth in your games? I'd laugh if the PC's decided to go broke buying up alchemy (even upgraded versions). You'll find that these individuals will miss having better magic items, items they could have bought with all the gold they've spent on alchemy.
Paying a little more attention to the problem and getting a little less derision would be really helpful at this point.
Again, I'm not seeing much of a case as to why there shouldn't be rules for better alchemy other than "the PC's might..." That form of conjecture is flimsy reasoning at best. The PC's might decided to teleport to every major city and buy up every scroll of Meteor Swarm on the planet, and then reduce the DM's BBEG and his minions in ashes from orbit. It doesn't mean it will happen.
You don't understand the argument and yet you're going to call it flimsy anyway.... Put something concrete and the table and we'll talk.

BigNorseWolf |

1. I agree that it would be redundant for alchemist's fire and a fireball to be the same, which is why I'm not suggesting such a thing. For instance, increase the alchemist fire to 2d6 and have it last 2 rounds instead of one. Have it cost 500 gp instead of 50, and there you go. Things like that.
The alchemist in this scenario has to pay 166.66 gold peices per shot (1/3 of 500 for raw base materials). That will break a character where 2d6 fire damage is useful. This is roughly what i said a few posts ago was the problem with poison. It also requires enough downtime to craft it, which even with the feats and alchemist ability is considerable because you're going to need multiple doses of this PER ROUND to be effective.
2. Renaming something is all well and good. But it doesn't change the fact that it's still magic. Alchemical fireblast is still a fireball, whatever you wish to call it. Same range, same damage, same magic. Magic being the keyword. The entire point of my rant is improving the nonmagical methods, without sacrificing magic in the process. Despite what some people argue, I think it is possible to have nonmagical, alchemical effects be useful with them invalidating magic.
I think its harder than you think.

Sayer_of_Nay |

Quote:And the party alchemist isn't pointless because he still has bombs (which only he can craft), his infusions (which are very useful, despite my distaste for them), and his potion crafting, along with the proposed ability to upgrade alchemical items.All of which 1) the alchemist has to spend cash on and 2) anyone ELSE can spend cash on, have all of the alchemists abilities AND their class abilities on top of it.
Quote:I'm afraid I can't see the logic in your argument.I really can't make it more obvious.I don't know what you keep missing but its plain as day and certain. Stat out one item, how much it would cost to make and how much it would be worth, and what would it do? You want an entire class worth of such items, surely its not a problem to ask you to make one of them?
If anyone could cast a wizards or clerics spells by paying 3 times what the wizard has to pay, no matter where you set that amount..."
Quote:1. This is already possible, in the form of scrolls, potions, and wands.It is not , repeat, NOT already possible to do this. Lets do this with the MOST efficient item, wands.
It costs a cleric nothing to cast cure light wounds. It costs a rogue 15 gold peices (750 gp wand of CLW /50 charges)
It costs a wizard nothing to cast Fireball. It costs a rogue 225 Gold pieces to cast a fireball
It costs a cleric nothing to cast freedom of movement. It costs a rogue 420 gp to do so with a wand.
It costs a wizard nothing to cast baleful polymorph. It costs the rogue 1,125 gp. (with a scroll)
In addition, for any offensive spells the Save DC will be in the john. So what we have is something worse than 15 times, 225 times, 420 times, or one THOUSAND times more expensive for the rogue than the cleric to get an inferior product.
So unless the alchemist is using the items for free, or essentially for free , the regular crafting rules only allow him a 67% discount (because for crafting 1/3 of the price is raw materials)
...
Since when do alchemists have to spend cash on bombs and infusions? Perhaps you're confused, or I jumbled my explainations. If so, my apologies. Let me set things right:
1. I'm not suggesting making the alchemists class abilities (bombs, infusions, etc) into marketable abilities; you won't, for instance, be able to use craft (alchemy) to create bombs. The ability to share a bomb with someone else would be just that. The alchemist alone can create infusions, bombs and mutagens.
What I refer to are the mundane alchemical items you find in the PH and other sources. My ranting has been based on the fact that the items don't scale and (with a few exceptions) become not so useful after a few levels. I suggest that rules should be created to allowing improved versions of such items to be create, at increased prices and difficulty.
I'm not understand why you keep referencing the casting of wizard/cleric spells at three times the price. I'm not suggesting, AT ALL, that the alchemist's class abilities (bombs, infusions) become items that you can pick up at a store. They are the Alcemist's class abilities, after all, not standard items.
My point, friend, is not supplying the non-casters with items that are equivalent in power/utility as spells. The only thing I refer to is improved, enhanced versions of the common, mundane, market place alchemical items, such as tanglefoot bags, alchemists fire, and smokesticks. My contention is that there should be a method of improving these items to keep them viable at higher levels. That's all. Not use them as magic replacements. Not flood your precious little campaign with tech. Nor have I ever stated the idea of using these items to replace the usefulness of magic and magic items. The only person who keeps bringing it up is you.
Now, as for the cost of these improved, upgraded, mundane alchemical items, that would have to be decided on once the upgraded versions are created. If you like, I would be more than happy to post a few ideas I've had for such items.

Sayer_of_Nay |

I created an Alchemist in 3.5 that was all about creating stronger versions of existing alchemy. The major problem I had with it was"what's stopping the alchemist from giving it to the rest of the party and everybody blowing stuff up?" I still have it somewhere...
I'd say the same thing as crafting an endless supply of disposable magic in the form of potion, neckless of fireballs, and the like: Time, Money, and the campaign itself.
The key is to balance *how* much better the items are against how much they cost. That and having the necessary space and equipment.
I'd love to see what you came up with.

BigNorseWolf |

Since when do alchemists have to spend cash on bombs and infusions? Perhaps you're confused, or I jumbled my explainations. If so, my apologies. Let me set things right:
This is what's getting crossed. You have three apparently seperate complaints.
1) alchemical items are junk at higher levels
2) The alchemist class doesn't rely on alchemical items and it should
3) Alchemists bombs etc should not be supernatural or use a portion of his life energy, they should be able to be given out.
1. I'm not suggesting making the alchemists class abilities (bombs, infusions, etc) into marketable abilities; you won't, for instance, be able to use craft (alchemy) to create bombs. The ability to share a bomb with someone else would be just that. The alchemist alone can create infusions, bombs and mutagens.
What you're suggesting is that the alchemist be able to make a bomb infusion or mutagen that is usable by anyone, lasts for 24 hours, costs nothing to make, but (and this is the part i have a problem with) for some reason is not for sale. You don't want something like that to be too available (obviously) but you don't have an apparent MECHANISM including in the idea you've presented in the class so that it wouldn't be for sale. You have something very very useful that the alchemist can produce for nothing and then give away... they should be readily for sale if an alchemist is not going to need all of his bombs for that day (which would be most non adventuring alchemists most of the time)
As near as i can tell most of the anger seems to be at the class not working in your particular world (which has a large number of anti magic fields) which is not really something the designers could anticipate. The problems i outlined above ARE things they anticipated and dealt with rather nicely. Making the bomb last only a few seconds means that the alchemist is in your party or a bomb is unusable. Making infusions require a discovery/feat means not every alchemist can hand them out, and making the infusions usable only by other alchemists and so that one mutagen winks out when another is brewed keeps them off the market.
What I refer to are the mundane alchemical items you find in the PH and other sources. My ranting has been based on the fact that the items don't scale and (with a few exceptions) become not so useful after a few levels. I suggest that rules should be created to allowing improved versions of such items to be create, at increased prices and difficulty.
I have no problem with that idea.
I'm not understand why you keep referencing the casting of wizard/cleric spells at three times the price. I'm not suggesting, AT ALL, that the alchemist's class abilities (bombs, infusions) become items that you can pick up at a store. They are the Alcemist's class abilities, after all, not standard items.
Because your example for something that the alchemist CLASS should be using was a crafted fire bomb. Crafted items cost 1/3 of their base price to make. I don't see, based on what you proposed so far, how you keep alchemical items from being things you pick up at the store. Krazy Kagars one day only sale! buy early buy often!
Now, as for the cost of these improved, upgraded, mundane alchemical items, that would have to be decided on once the upgraded versions are created. If you like, I would be more than happy to post a few ideas I've had for such items
Sure, just let me know when it veers back into a problem with the alchemist class.

Sayer_of_Nay |

This is what's getting crossed. You have three apparently seperate complaints.
1) alchemical items are junk at higher levels
2) The alchemist class doesn't rely on alchemical items and it should
3) Alchemists bombs etc should not be supernatural or use a portion of his life energy, they should be able to be given out.What you're suggesting is that the alchemist be able to make a bomb infusion or mutagen that is usable by anyone, lasts for 24 hours, costs nothing to make, but (and this is the part i have a problem with) for some reason is not for sale.
As near as i can tell most of the anger seems to be at the class not working in your particular world (which has a large number of anti magic fields) which is not really something the designers could anticipate.
First, You are putting words in my mouth. I never once stated that infusions and mutagens should not be supernatural effects, nor did I say that they should be given out freely. I made such a statement concerning bombs, and only bombs. Second, I never said that these bombs shouldn't be for sale. What I was dismissive of was the notion of adventurers teleporting back and forth everyday to get more.
Third, you assume anger where there is none. As I said in a previous post, my feelings toward bombs have nothing to do with my DM's campaign world. Rather, as I stated, I was using it as an example and to get one of my points across.Now, as for my 3 complaints that you bring up:
1. You have that one on the money.
2. Half right. I would have rather had the class expand upon mundane alchemy, rather than poorly adapted spellcraft. That being said, I don't think the class is bad.
3. Again, half right. I do think that bombs should not be supernatural in nature. That feeling doesn't arise, however, in a desire to supply bombs to every man, woman and child I see. Giving the out should be an option, but a regulated one.
Now, how is all this linked to the Alchemist Class? I made that clear from the start: the Alchemist class *could* have been an effective medium to implement rules for improved alchemy; should have been, as far as I'm concerned. But instead, it decided to ignore alchemy and focus on magic. That point may have been lost in all of the debating and quotes and requotes.

KaeYoss |

KaeYoss wrote:Thanks for the Rifts reference -- I like that.Not really. Dr. J. had an elixir that changed his personality, too. The normally mild-mannered scientist turned into a brutal, blood-thirsty monster.
Alchemists aren't like that. They're just juicers. They might take a (light) hit to their mental faculties, but their personality doesn't change.
I don't know Rifts, the name just fits.

KaeYoss |

This is more a limitation of your knowledge of various tales and other lore. I could easily make the argument that it had nothing to due with Jekyll/Hyde and everything to do with the characters from The Witcher that was produced in eastern Europe. They took potions to increase their combat power, agility, speed, endurance... and different potions for different effects. Most also had a toxicity that had a downside as well.
I recently played the game, and I got a very strong magus/alchemist vibe from Gerald.
And the game flat-out uses the word "mutagen".
I haven't read the books, but I assume that the word was used there as well.

BigNorseWolf |

First, You are putting words in my mouth.
... no. I'm double checking to see if the words i'm hearing are the ones you're saying are the same thing.
I never once stated that infusions and mutagens should not be supernatural effects, nor did I say that they should be given out freely. I made such a statement concerning bombs, and only bombs.
Quote:I would preferred for the Alchemist to focus on increasing the effectiveness of the mundane, rather than falling back on the magical; just declaring their infusions as supernatural abilities instead feel like laziness and a lack of creativity to me. The bombs need not be supernatural effects that mysteriously don't function for any other individual but the caster. Rather, they could have been designed as an augmented version of alchemist fir
Second, I never said that these bombs shouldn't be for sale.
As I've already said, if the bombs ARE for sale why be an alchemist? As it is, the bombs cost nothing to make and can be made very quickly. The two biggest constraints on market value have been removed
What I was dismissive of was the notion of adventurers teleporting back and forth everyday to get more.
Why? Because it doesn't happen at your table?
Now, as for my 3 complaints that you bring up:
1. You have that one on the money.
2. Half right. I would have rather had the class expand upon mundane alchemy, rather than poorly adapted spellcraft. That being said, I don't think the class is bad.
I've tried to point out why trying to build an entire class around mundane items won't work. The point of the bombs only lasting a minute and the infusions requiring a bit of the alchemist is to keep the class relevant and not just have their products for sale.
3. Again, half right. I do think that bombs should not be supernatural in nature. That feeling doesn't arise, however, in a desire to supply bombs to every man, woman and child I see. Giving the out should be an option, but a regulated one.
I'm not saying that you want the bombs to not be supernatural IN ORDER to supply every man woman and child, I'm saying that the EFFECTS of having them not be supernatural or really short duration is to arm every rogue, ranger, and fighter.
What is supposed to regulate giving out the bombs?
the Alchemist class *could* have been an effective medium to implement rules for improved alchemy; should have been, as far as I'm concerned. But instead, it decided to ignore alchemy and focus on magic. That point may have been lost in all of the debating and quotes and requotes.
No, i've kept it in sight... its the basis for pointing out the problems i see with what you want implemented. In order for a class to be useful they have to have something of their own. There is a problem in balancing that with a class who's main point is that they produce cheap, stable , reliable mundane items that anyone can use. The supernatural elements of the alchemist class act like a key to the car. They let the alchemist get around and do his thing, but prevent just anyone from wandering along and doing his job for him.
Basically, I'm saying that there are unintended consequences for having alchemists, and the supernatural elements tend to mitigate that.