Ok so my Dm texted me today to say that the classes he has allowed are going to get an overhaul because they are too overpowered with no drawbacks. He is talking about my magus, my friends gunslinger and an alchemist. His biggest gripe is they have good +to hits and against touch ac. I think alchy is his biggest gripe because he can throw his stuff and not hit any allies but hits enemies touch ac. Please give your opinion of the biggest drawbacks or weaknesses to magus alchy gunslinger classes so i can help point them out to him. Thanks guys for any feedback.
Well.. I dunno.
I personally think your DM might be a little too loving on monstrous creatures who are all natural armor and have no real touch ac. It happened with one of my DMs, he kept using tons of really big monsters and was always disappointed in the end when they were easily defeated due to rays and touch spells, flanking etc.
But from what I see, the DM also doesn't seem to try to push things like Amushes, stealing the alchemists/magus's books.. disarming the gunslinger.. etc.
If he goes and kneejerk nerfs.. I'd say switch characters with an oracle, then do dual cursed and take blindness/deafness as your curses.. after a few sessions, ask your DM if you are drawed back enough.
It seems like when these kind of questions come up, it has a lot to do with how the GM runs his/her encounters, how the PCs run their characters or some combo.
Can you maybe give a generic breakdown of the builds used by the characters and the typical type of encounter your GM runs?
Magus...very easy to design badly. Specifically because you need so many stats/feats. Honestly, what is the complaint here?
Alchemist...Limited resources. Just made a 9th level alchemist with 14 bombs and the ability to throw three per round. He can unleash hell for 4.5 rounds...and then take shots with his bow. Also, the bombs are subject to energy resistance/immunities and a low area of effect. The GM needs to be smarter with creature selection and make sure things are spread out more.
Gunslinger...I honestly don't have enough familiarity with this class to comment.
Oh another thing.. Your GM should avoid the 5 minute work day as well.
Being able to throw all your spells and then rush back to the inn for a rest before fighting the next fight..
Sounds like the GM needs to design encounters better. I always manage to encourage differeing tactics in my players by running variety of encounters. At first they basically buffed the fighter to kingdome come dropped a battlefield control spell and laughed as the fighter basically one shotted people left and right. Then they met an enchanter who laughed as she dominated the newly buffed murder machine that was the fighter.
The more you change the tactics and vary things the less overpowered classes seem to be as some classes will get to shine in some situations more than other.
In truth, these classes aren't any more powerful than their standard base classes, especially if your DM is allowing the variants from the APG.
The Magus, like all "jack of all trade" classes, is decent in two different areas, but will never be as powerful in either as more specialized classes. The Fighter is better at martial activities, and the party Wizard is a far more effective engine of magical destruction.
The Alchemist is a surprisingly well balanced class from what I can tell. A decent mix of utility and buff magic combined with some combat effectiveness, but as Fraust already pointed out, they have the same resource management issues that hinder any caster class. Their bombs aren't higher damage than the rogue's sneak attack (which, although requires the right circumstances, isn't limited in daily uses).
I *do* have some problems with the Gunslinger class, but none of them have to do with touch AC. Their touch AC mechanics are limiting. First, they target touch AC within the first range increment of their gun (20 ft. for pistols, 40 ft. for a musket). But these range increments are *very* short, putting the gunslinger in danger of melee combat at any moment. They do get an ability that lets them extend the range of their touch attack, but it cost a significant amount of grit (1 per range increment), which looks like a very limited resource right now. My problems with gunslinger instead lie in the abilities that reward them for missing (Startling Shot), their abilities that stun without allowing saving throws (Targeting, Stunning Shot), and the fact that they get a death attack at 19th level (Death's Shot) when the few other classes that get one must wait until 20th level. That said, the class is still in playtest so I can forgive it.
Sounds like the GM needs to design encounters better. I always manage to encourage differeing tactics in my players by running variety of encounters. At first they basically buffed the fighter to kingdome come dropped a battlefield control spell and laughed as the fighter basically one shotted people left and right. Then they met an enchanter who laughed as she dominated the newly buffed murder machine that was the fighter.
The more you change the tactics and vary things the less overpowered classes seem to be as some classes will get to shine in some situations more than other.
His biggest gripe is that the other players are not nearly as powerfull or have some kind of drawback to their class ( they are playing core classes). Finding a way to defeat us is not his problem as he is looking for specific drawbacks to these new classes to balance out what they can do. Low saves low attack bonus or anything of the sort. Im just not familliar enough with all the classes to point out how they parr up. Thanks so far though im getting good amunition for him. bliding and stealing books are ways to get at anyone as im looking for drawbacks of the new classes that are specific to these 3 classes. Thanks again
Every class has drawbacks. In what ways are the other classes supposedly weaker?
His biggest gripe is that the other players are not nearly as powerfull or have some kind of drawback to their class ( they are playing core classes). Finding a way to defeat us is not his problem as he is looking for specific drawbacks to these new classes to balance out what they can do. Low saves low attack bonus or anything of the sort. Im just not familliar enough with all the classes to point out how they parr up. Thanks so far though im getting good amunition for him. bliding and stealing books are ways to get at anyone as im looking for drawbacks of the new classes that are specific to these 3 classes. Thanks againSounds like the GM needs to design encounters better. I always manage to encourage differeing tactics in my players by running variety of encounters. At first they basically buffed the fighter to kingdome come dropped a battlefield control spell and laughed as the fighter basically one shotted people left and right. Then they met an enchanter who laughed as she dominated the newly buffed murder machine that was the fighter.
The more you change the tactics and vary things the less overpowered classes seem to be as some classes will get to shine in some situations more than other.
The problem is that one of the classes is a fighter you are using.
What are the other classes at the table and how are they weak?
For example Magus vs Wizard. Here is the magus selection of spells and then here is the wizards selection of of
To a GM, there are only overpowered classes but to a player all are underpowered.
I'm not sure what drawbacks he thinks other classes have, except in that every class has things it can't do. The classes are archetypes, and breaking out of those archetypes is hard (and rightly so). The Rogue isn't going to cross blades with the antipaladin. The Fighter isn't sneaking in the back door to catch him unaware. The Wizard isn't busy tending to the wounded.
If he's looking for specific stat block drawbacks, then he should be able to see them looking at the class progression tables. The Alchemist and Magus only have medium BAB progressions, limiting their combat effectiveness. None of these classes have perfect saving throws. And all of them have limitations in their class abilities. None of them have great skill point allotments. Take the Gunslinger's pistols away (disarm, sunder, theft) and it's no better than an NPC class. That sounds like a hefty drawback to me.
I'm not doubting that these classes shine. It's just that they don't shine any more than the base classes in their respective roles.
The Magus has huge Draw Back. It's a crazy MAD class. You need INT, enough to cast 6th level spells or higher for DCs and bonus spells as well as your Arcane pool and bonuses applied from Magus Arcana. You Need Strength, enough wear the armor you will eventually have as well this is your attack and damage bonus. Then there is DEX, you defense. You need to shore up the weak reflex save. You also want a good initiative to avoid being his by a readied attack when you go to cast with spell combat. Then there is AC at low levels, not as important at higher levels with better armor. If you go Dex build with weapon finesse you really need you Dex up there and can ignore STR and skip the heavier armors. Then there is Constitution, your in melee and you need as many hit points as you can get. Wisdom and Charisma are dump stats. You'll have to dump them to raise those other 3-4 stats. This creates weaknesses.
This is the standard thing any Mad Class has to deal with. The better the stats the better the Magus gets. The Inquisitor is much the same as is the Bard and Monk. Even a Paladin has a bit of this problem.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Alchemist bombs are nice, but honestly the damage isn't that great against the big beefcake monsters, and the number of bombs per day is VERY limited. You're aces for a couple rounds per day, then not so much.
The nastier alchemist bombs are being able to mix up damage with various kinds of status effects, but that's no different from casters and spells, except that you get far fewer of them.
Rakshasas happen to be a perfect monster for an alchemist (vs. other classes) - modest touch AC, big SR to screw spellcasters, big DR to screw meleers, but not great hp. Certain classes match up well with certain creatures. Against creatures with energy resistance, or against large numbers of enemies that are not tightly bunched for your convenience, the alchemist looks a lot wimpier.
As stated upthread, your DM needs to give you a longer work day. If you only have 1-2 combats per day, the alchemist will look great.
Hey guys-
I play in the same group as DD-Rex and I wanted to add my comments.
I don't think the issue that the DM has is so much about the newer classes being overpowered in and of themselves. I think that a couple of the other players feel that their core-class characters are overshadowed by some of the newer ones that we have in the group.
The classes in the group are as follows (all started as 8th level):
- Fighter 8 (classic STR build with power attack, cleave, etc)
- Oracle 8 (mystery is battle, I believe)
- Ranger 8 (Infiltrator)
- Ranger 8 (Dual wield build)
- Alchemist 8 (feated out to maximize the number of bombs/day and number he can throw/round)
- Sorceror 8 (fire bloodline)
- Magus 8
- Gunslinger 8
- Fighter/Rogue 5/3 (Dex build, geared toward sneak attacks and crits, with a high CON to help tank)
I believe that the issue lies mostly with how well some of the players have built their characters.
Seeing this list, do you guys see anything that would indicate that the Gunslinger, Magus, Alchemist, or Oracle would have such strong advantages over the other characters?
I'm personally playing the last two characters, the gunslinger and the fighter/rogue....and although the gunslinger can deal some solid damage with his pepperbox, I think the fighter/rogue is the more effective character.
Well our str fighter in our group is our OP character. She hits something it is vaporized
I'd say the infiltrator could be weak due to bad things picked as well as the duel wield ranger.
Jesus, 9 characters? How many players are there?
Honestly, your group seems to be a huge blasty group, all focused on damage, none on support or battlefield control. At level 8, that alchemist is going to be doing his average of 15 damage a bomb a few times.
That fighter is going to be whooping ass all day long. The only thing the Alchemist has over the fighter is his extracts. If the Infiltrator is focusing on Archery, he'll be doing so much more damage than the alchemist at range, it's hardly worth comparing. By that level, he'll have 2 base attacks, one from rapid shot, one from manyshot, and one from haste if the sorc is smart enough to take that. Five attacks, all with pretty good damage.
I see nothing that would make the classes you listed to be more powerful, other than the poor choices of the other characters.
You have no less than 9 characters in your group and god knows how many npc's and you're worried about one or two being OP?
Sorry....should've clarified. We don't generally have 9 characters in the group at any one time. We have a few players who can't all be there every time we get together, so we generally have about 6 of those listed. No henchmen or NPCs or cohorts or anything like that.
The infiltrator isn't archery based.
The fighter is generally devastating. But he does miss more often when compared to the alchemist and gunslinger when they are making touch attacks.
I think the touch attacks are the main gripe....but I'm also playing a fighter/rogue and I don't feel that he is less effective than the gunslinger or the others.
I feel it's the builds and choices that the players have made. I think it seems you guys feel that way too.
Remind him that these classes all went through one or two public playtests to make sure they were not overpowered. The devs clearly knew what they wanted when they chose Touch attacks. That alchemist? At level 20, he'll be doing on average 35 damage per bomb. 35 is nothing, especially with all the Fire Resistance that'll be going on around then. If he uses force bombs? 25 damage on average. Whooped-di-do. The fighter will be doing twice that with one hit, and the sorcerer will be creating his own Demiplanes and calling meteors from the sky.
The gunslinger is being playtested right now. Let him play as normal, and then post your results so if he *is* overpowered, it'll be fixed.
The Magus went through two or three rounds, so there's really very little chance he's super over powered. As others have pointed out, he's MAD as hell.
To a GM, there are only overpowered classes...
Monk.
To a GM, there are only overpowered classes...Monk.
...s are over powered in a jail cell.
His biggest gripe is that the other players are not nearly as powerfull
That doesn't have to be a class problem. Sometimes, characters are more powerful (By the way: Only one l in powerful. Yes, full has two, no, It doesn't really make sense, but that's how language sometimes works. If you think that's bad, look up how forecastle is pronounced!) because the player who created the class is better at the game (or cared more about having a powerful character).
What classes are the others playing, anyway?
or have some kind of drawback to their class ( they are playing core classes). Finding a way to defeat us is not his problem as he is looking for specific drawbacks to these new classes to balance out what they can do.
When GMs looking for specific drawbacks, alarm bells go off in my head.....
My thoughts on those three classes:
True, they can be scary. Quite the combat monsters. And if you manage to get several crits, it can skew perceptions upwards.
However, real warrior classes (i.e. those with full BAB) are scary, too. Actually, I'd argue that they're more scary. Take a fighter or paladin with a falchion (or another two-handed weapon. I'm just a fan of crits, especially for fighters, so I really like the falchion).
Those guys get the kind of attack bonuses that make GMs lose their sleep. It's not only their first hit that is all-but assured to hit, their second attacks are likely to hit home, too (unless the critter has the kind of AC that will make magi struggle to hit with their prime attacks).
And their damage output is nasty even without magic (or with only a bit of magic in the paladin's case). They can easily afford to power attack most of the time, which adds more damage to their already impressive two-handed damage bonuses.
The magus is by all means no bad warrior, but the full-time warriors can do it better still, especially since a lot of their power is available to them all the time.
They also get magic, true, like a bard (i.e. no more than 6th-level magic), but they get mostly "martial magic". Stuff to deal damage directly (or to add to their attacks), some buffs, some defences. There isn't much in the way of hex magic in there, though. And that's where spellcasters are at their scariest. Spells that will completely f$&! you up if you fail your save. Not do a lot of damage or anything. You're just plain screwed. Ouch. Magi don't get that stuff.
Magi have to start with light armour (they later get the heavier stuff, but they have to survive until they get their). That means they need some dex to keep the AC decent. And they need str for attacks and damage. And con, of course, since they're mêlée characters. And int for their magic. A fighter gets by with less, and so does a wizard.
All in all, I wouldn't consider them to be out of line compared to the other classes.
Seen one in action, was very effective, but that player usually has effective characters. The bard he played once was effective, too! Yes, bard, a class that in 3e was considered pathetic.
Anyway, The bombs are not that bad, but they're only overwhelming if the alchemist gets to hoard them to toss out all at once.
The whole juicing part is great, too, but it's also something limited and time-consuming. Again, the fighters (the "benchmark class" when it comes to putting sharp things into soft things that scream and bleed) of Pathfinder are born buffed. Given enough time and alchemical concoctions, the alchemist can probably outperform the fighter, but he can't do it that often, and the rest of the day, he won't be nearly as good. The fighter has great AC, great attack bonuses and great damage bonuses (and usually some sick extra powers he can use all day long - if not, we're probably talking about AC, attack and damage ratings that are ridiculous).
Can't say too much, as I haven't played one or seen one played yet. Plus, we only have the beta version. I do recall lots and lots complaints about the class since the consensus seems to be that their damage output is just not enough.
All in all, those classes are effective and well-rounded, but I wouldn't say they're overpowered. If you post more info about the characters in question (their races, classes and a bit about how they're set up and what they usually do), we can probably tell you more about the situation.
And, in the end, it's a lot about how the GM runs his games, too.
After reading the thread, it definitely sounds like the DM needs to break out the bestiary and throw some different stuff at the group. Perhaps try larger groups of smaller monsters so that everyone has something to kill, touch ACs are likely going to be higher, and overall AC on a bit lower.
I am not sure if the problem is the DM's bad desing of encounters or playstyle (they might very well be), but i think that the real problem is that most of the other characters are built very very bad.
Than I would probably suggest sitting down with the other players and seeing what can be done to improve their characters. Perhaps even use a regular gaming session to do so. That way, everyone is on the same page of what they want and expect from the game, making it easier for the DM to design the encounters.
Just wanna say thanks so much guys this is a great community. After speaking with him again we talked about alot of stuff and he had some great points. It seems that the alchy is his biggest problem by far. The way the person is playing him may not be correct. He is throwing 3 bombs per round that do 5d6 plus i think around 7or8 dmg per bomb. Does the discovery fst bombing stack with rapid shot? Also do monsters get to use SR against the stuff he throws? We are currently playing with him throwing 3 bombs per round with some insane damage output and it always hits since its against touch. He is now a lvl 9 alchy. Does this seem right to you guys? The numbers seem awfully high for a lvl 9 character. He can do like well over 100 points of dmg in 1 round if he rolls very well. Thanks again guys
Just wanna say thanks so much guys this is a great community. After speaking with him again we talked about alot of stuff and he had some great points. It seems that the alchy is his biggest problem by far. The way the person is playing him may not be correct. He is throwing 3 bombs per round that do 5d6 plus i think around 7or8 dmg per bomb. Does the discovery fst bombing stack with rapid shot? Also do monsters get to use SR against the stuff he throws? We are currently playing with him throwing 3 bombs per round with some insane damage output and it always hits since its against touch. He is now a lvl 9 alchy. Does this seem right to you guys? The numbers seem awfully high for a lvl 9 character. He can do like well over 100 points of dmg in 1 round if he rolls very well. Thanks again guys
No SR for bombs. They aren't spells.
The official answer to whether an alchemist can use Rapid Shot is a very clear "yes".
A 9th level pure alchemist will be doing 5d6+Int modifier damage per round. +1 if using Point Blank Shot. I'm guessing he has an int of 22, and PBS, which gives +7 damage. This means the average damage per bomb is 24.5 damage. Given Haste, he'll be able to make 4 attacks per round, if he uses Rapid Shot as well. But that'll drain 4 bombs from him, and he will have Class Level + Int Modifier + (times taken Extra Bombs * 2). Assuming he's taken that feat once, he'll have 17 bombs a day. And he just used up one fourth of his available bombs in that one round. That's a pretty good tradeoff if you ask me.
Remind the DM that he can spread out enemies, and not just have one enemy, and the alchemist will be a lot less effective. Assuming three accounters, he can only go "nova" (use 4 bombs a round) just over once per encounter.
Imagine the damage that would happen if your sorcerer used 1/4th of his spells all in one round. That's basically the same thing the alchemist is doing.
Seems in line with a 2h fighter or a TWF rogue if he rolls well. They can both get pretty big damage if things go right for them.
Yeah thats why a sorc cant use all that in 1 round. I am seeing as to why my Dm thinks the alchy is OP a bit. We are running a converted queen of the spiders campaign if that helps. Im surprised that more people dont think that 100 points dmg average is too much for 9th lvl. I know it uses alot of resources to do it but we honestly dont want this to turn into 4th ed where the best way for a dm to make it challenging is to wear us down every time. That gets old fast. What monsters do you guys think would work best vs and alchy? I would say something that casts vs will like illusions or something. Maybe mind flayer? Thanks again
Imagine the damage that would happen if your sorcerer used 1/4th of his spells all in one round. That's basically the same thing the alchemist is doing.
Isn't that sort of the point though? There's absolutely no way for a sorcerer to do that, whereas the alchemist can.
Imagine the damage that would happen if your sorcerer used 1/4th of his spells all in one round. That's basically the same thing the alchemist is doing.Isn't that sort of the point though? There's absolutely no way for a sorcerer to do that, whereas the alchemist can.
I suppose. But a level 9 sorcerer using 1/4th of his spells would be far, far more powerful.
No SR for bombs. They aren't spells.
Do you know if this is the official ruling? I was just checking it out, and it doesn't address it in the class ability description. It does list it as a supernatural ability and it says in the description that the bombs contain some of the alchemists magical power.
I'm pretty sure there are other supernatural abilities that SR works against.....like the base sorceror bloodline attack (firebolt, etc.).
I can see the argument going either way.
No SR for bombs. They aren't spells.
Do you know if this is the official ruling? I was just checking it out, and it doesn't address it in the class ability description. It does list it as a supernatural ability and it says in the description that the bombs contain some of the alchemists magical power.
I'm pretty sure there are other supernatural abilities that SR works against.....like the base sorceror bloodline attack (firebolt, etc.).
I can see the argument going either way.
"Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). A supernatural ability's effect cannot be dispelled and is not subject to counterspells."
The sorcerer bloodline powers your referring to are Spell-like Abilities (SP) not Supernatural ones.
Imagine the damage that would happen if your sorcerer used 1/4th of his spells all in one round. That's basically the same thing the alchemist is doing.Isn't that sort of the point though? There's absolutely no way for a sorcerer to do that, whereas the alchemist can.
A rogue can do this. Give him a brilliant energy weapon and he cna do it all day everyday with touch attacks. No energy weapon? Turn him invisible so he'll be hitting flatfooted AC instead. That's a base class. And one of the weaker ones as well.
It seems we will most likely house rule if need be that bombs need a SR check. This with new monsters will most likely do the trick. Thanks all
Im surprised that more people dont think that 100 points dmg average is too much for 9th lvl.
He doesn't average 100 points...the only way he'll deal 100 points in a round is with perfect rolls. He hasn't done that much yet. I think he gets 3 bombs a round and does 4D6+8 or so. So if he hits with all three on one target, he'll likely do about 65 points. Significant, but easily achieved with other classes.
My fighter/rogue can do just about that under the right conditions. Granted, it's only to one target, but he also doesn't run out.
I think the alchemist is a potent class, but I really don't think it's overpowering. I'm pretty sure a 9th level wizard would be capable of at least comparable damage output.
The alch seems capable of pooring out tons of damage quickly, but then being next to useless once he does so.
The sorcerer bloodline powers your referring to are Spell-like Abilities (SP) not Supernatural ones.
Ah that makes sense....thanks for pointing that out, I was thinking they were the same.
I did a quick stat up of a level 9 fighter, barely optimized. He uses 5 of his 11 feats, all of which are "obvious" choices. There's no trickery done here. And due to the +25 base damage, he can easily get an average of 50 damage, unbuffed, per round. And he can keep on doing this with a high chance of hitting. I'd really like to drive home the idea that the damage an alchemist does is not amazing, and I would think that the only way it's balanced is due to the touch AC. Using regular AC with that low of damage would be extremely weak.
A suggestion I have for solving one problem, and one far, far better than adding SR to bombs (which makes absolutely no sense IMO. Does it extend to alchemist's fire too? Thunderstones? Bombs are the same thing) is to simply make Precise Bombs a discovery that is asterisk'd. By that, I mean you can't modify the bomb with any other asterisk'd ability. That way he'll have to choose between Precise Bombs, and perhaps Frost Bombs.
edit: if you would like to see an alchemist that is arguably overpowered, look at the Master Chymist and Feral Mutagen. They can take discoveries to increase damage die of all natural attacks, they can get up to +8 str from Mutagens, as well as +6 Natural Armor, +6 to Con, and +4 to Dex. A level 9 master chymist will get +6 to damage of natural attacks from class abilities. They can grow Large by using their mutagen with the Growth Mutagen (which gives another +2 to Str plus Reach).
And with haste? That's 4 attacks at Full BAB. You're going to hit with all of them.
Throw Vivisectionist in there, and there's a ton of damage.
Well the thing to remember about alchemists is that they are still using splash weapons, and that means when they miss, they can miss bad. If the alchemist is using rapid shot, that's a -2 to all his attacks. While his first two bombs thrown probably hit 90% of the time, his third bomb probably isn't made with an attack better than +7 or so. A +7 misses quite frequently against quite a few enemies- even against touch AC. Combine this with the very short range of thrown weapons, and we arrive at a situation where an alchemist can miss with his bombs a number of times.
And remember, when an alchemist misses with his thrown weapon, the precise bombs discovery has no effect. That means friendly fire (with possible status conditions), property damage, and the like should be a not so uncommon occurrence with the alchemist.
Maybe the alchemist in your party out damages the fighter when he goes nova. But does the fighter hurt other party members, destroy important items, or set fire to a building on a simple missed hit?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I might be wrong here but is the DM familliar with the rules for using a ranged attack? (i think that bombs have the same restrictions)
When you are trying to hit a target (with a ranged attack) that is in melee with an ally then you take -4, which is negated by precise shot.
Also when you don't have a direct line with the target (even if an ally is blocking you), then the target has soft cover (+4 AC), which is negated by the improved precise shot.
I am not sure if the DM knows those rules, but if he doesn't it might explain why he sees the alchemist hitting with every attack.
Also, the splash damage should be almost negligible. That guy should be doing something like 12 damage, reflex save for half. Even if the GM groups monsters up (which he shouldn't), at that level such small damage effectively makes bombs a single-creature attack.
Yeah thats why a sorc cant use all that in 1 round. I am seeing as to why my Dm thinks the alchy is OP a bit. We are running a converted queen of the spiders campaign if that helps. Im surprised that more people dont think that 100 points dmg average is too much for 9th lvl. I know it uses alot of resources to do it but we honestly dont want this to turn into 4th ed where the best way for a dm to make it challenging is to wear us down every time. That gets old fast. What monsters do you guys think would work best vs and alchy? I would say something that casts vs will like illusions or something. Maybe mind flayer? Thanks again
No, we're saying that 100hp of damage is a lot (and that's not his average output, it's his max), but that it fits into the game in general.
For example, a level 9 sorcerer who lobs a fireball at an approaching group of 10 foes just did 90d6 damage (save for half) in a round -- and that was at the cost of 1 level 3 spell slot.
And, too, I think that the earlier comment about your GM needing to pay attention to the -4 for firing into Melee (negated by Precise Shot), and the additional -4 for firing over your friends (who provide cover, negated by Improved Precise Shot, which an Alchie 9 doesn't have the BAB to get yet) is a very good one - especially since you lose the benefits of Precise Bombs and thus everyone takes splash damage on a miss.
Having said that, I'm also not sure why the GM's having a hard time making foes that challenge you -- you want a tough foe for that alchemist?
- Any cleric from the fire domain above level 6 (or, better still, 12)? (Especially if he casts Shield of Faith or Entropic Shield or both on himself)
- Any sorcerer with Red, Brass or Gold Draconic Bloodline
- Summoned Monsters (either Elementals or outsiders like Hell Hounds that are immune to fire, or Fiendish creatures that get Fire/Cold Resist).
- Most higher CR but small creatures as they tend to have high dex and thus harder touch ACs (Plus, they often have fun powers, too, like pixies are naturally invisible)
- Someone who cast Draconic Reservoir on himself would probably *like* the alchemist a great deal.
And all of that ignores the ability for almost any foe to have a ring, potion, scroll, wand, whatever of Resist Energy or Protection from Energy... not to mention spells like Entropic Shield that provide a miss chance, or Wind Wall that make it hard to hit with missiles, etc, etc, etc...
The classes in the group are as follows (all started as 8th level):
- Fighter 8 (classic STR build with power attack, cleave, etc)
- Oracle 8 (mystery is battle, I believe)
- Ranger 8 (Infiltrator)
- Ranger 8 (Dual wield build)
- Alchemist 8 (feated out to maximize the number of bombs/day and number he can throw/round)
- Sorceror 8 (fire bloodline)
- Magus 8
- Gunslinger 8
- Fighter/Rogue 5/3 (Dex build, geared toward sneak attacks and crits, with a high CON to help tank)I believe that the issue lies mostly with how well some of the players have built their characters.
Seeing this list, do you guys see anything that would indicate that the Gunslinger, Magus, Alchemist, or Oracle would have such strong advantages over the other characters?
No, but I can see how they would look that way.
You have 3-4 solid combat classes, who are not going to shine with all the others around. They aren't going to stand out. Then you have the magus and gunslinger who do fighting very differently, so they DO stand out.
You have very little magic support, so the magus and the alchemist stand out as casters even though a single wizard would knock both into a cocked hat.
I think the touch attacks are the main gripe....but I'm also playing a fighter/rogue and I don't feel that he is less effective than the gunslinger or the others.
If your DM throws a gang of monks at the party he will find very quickly just how overpowered the gunslinger and the alchemist are! Load each with potions of Owl's Wisdom and Cat's Grace, a ring of protection and then watch those touch attacks go wide of the mark, and see that evasion kick in ... then the fighting types can kick **** and feel good about themselves.
have you considerd....punpun?
They want him to wake up to the idea that different classes excel at different challenges, not persuade him to give up DMing altogether! <rolls eyes>
Alchemist bombs are nice, but honestly the damage isn't that great against the big beefcake monsters, and the number of bombs per day is VERY limited. You're aces for a couple rounds per day, then not so much.
The nastier alchemist bombs are being able to mix up damage with various kinds of status effects, but that's no different from casters and spells, except that you get far fewer of them.
Rakshasas happen to be a perfect monster for an alchemist (vs. other classes) - modest touch AC, big SR to screw spellcasters, big DR to screw meleers, but not great hp. Certain classes match up well with certain creatures. Against creatures with energy resistance, or against large numbers of enemies that are not tightly bunched for your convenience, the alchemist looks a lot wimpier.
As stated upthread, your DM needs to give you a longer work day. If you only have 1-2 combats per day, the alchemist will look great.
There are too many 1-2 combat days in Kingmaker! <shakes fist impotently> :p
I run a game where the 8th level Alchemist did 160 points of damage to a group of monsters because they missed their refelex saves. The point for the GM is the Alchemist is not even a spell caster and all he does is chuck bombs. That is fine but in order to hit his foes all he needs is to beat their touch AC. Touch AC is a joke against a ranged touch attacks when you have 14 bombs to throw every session. I have used undead monsters such as Ghosts (touch AC 17) so it is not a hit 100% of the time. I can't recall any character that hits 99% of the time and is not engaged in direct melee. Please don't use magic missle as an example, that does not do 160 points of damage. Also, if you can get the Alchemist in hand to hand combat they are toast.
Hey guys-
I play in the same group as DD-Rex and I wanted to add my comments.
I don't think the issue that the DM has is so much about the newer classes being overpowered in and of themselves. I think that a couple of the other players feel that their core-class characters are overshadowed by some of the newer ones that we have in the group.
The classes in the group are as follows (all started as 8th level):
- Fighter 8 (classic STR build with power attack, cleave, etc)
- Oracle 8 (mystery is battle, I believe)
- Ranger 8 (Infiltrator)
- Ranger 8 (Dual wield build)
- Alchemist 8 (feated out to maximize the number of bombs/day and number he can throw/round)
- Sorceror 8 (fire bloodline)
- Magus 8
- Gunslinger 8
- Fighter/Rogue 5/3 (Dex build, geared toward sneak attacks and crits, with a high CON to help tank)I believe that the issue lies mostly with how well some of the players have built their characters.
Seeing this list, do you guys see anything that would indicate that the Gunslinger, Magus, Alchemist, or Oracle would have such strong advantages over the other characters?
I'm personally playing the last two characters, the gunslinger and the fighter/rogue....and although the gunslinger can deal some solid damage with his pepperbox, I think the fighter/rogue is the more effective character.
Let me guess the Battle Oracle is feeling over shadowed in combat? Hard to play that class and measure up in party of combat classes like that. I find the Battle Oracle the worst of the all the Mysteries. Every time I've seen a player play one it's be disappointing. The comments are all the same, not effective in combat.