|
So I can't find a definitive answer and figured I'd ask here.
An alchemist starts play with 2 first level extracts plus bonus ones based on int.
Can these bonus ones be of any level? That is if you had 3 bonus extracts could you start play knowing 3 1st level extracts, 1 2nd level and 1 3rd level just to set up things for when you reach a high enough level to use them as you only get 1 per level on level up you've now doubled your options for when you can prepare them?
Alchemist use the same rules for their bonus Extracts as Wizards do their bonus spells... so, probably not. Unless Wizards can use their Intelligence modifier bonus spells to learn spells they cannot yet prepare... then, yes?
Well, written copies of 3 6th level extracts would sell for 780 gp, so I'm thinking that isn't reasonable and the bonus extracts should be 1st level.
And why would you want extracts in your formula book that you are several levels away from having slots to create?
But since the extracts you learn automatically at later levels must be of a level that you can create, I would infer that the same must be true of the bonus extracts gained at 1st level. Whether they match the base of two extracts or the rules for extracts gained at higher levels, the extracts would be 1st level either way.
|
|
And why would you want extracts in your formula book that you are several levels away from having slots to create?But since the extracts you learn automatically at later levels must be of a level that you can create, I would infer that the same must be true of the bonus extracts gained at 1st level. Whether they match the base of two extracts or the rules for extracts gained at higher levels, the extracts would be 1st level either way.
Because you only get 1 extract a level and being able to prebuy some later ones would be helpful. Especially since unlike a wizard you don't get a bunch of cantrips. What got me wondering this is the wording . . .
wizard
Starting Spells (See Spellbooks below): A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from his opposed schools, if any; see Arcane Schools) plus three 1st-level spells of his choice. The wizard also selects a number of additional 1st-level spells equal to his Intelligence modifier to add to the spellbook.
alchemist
An alchemist begins play with two 1st level formulae of his choice, plus a number of additional forumlae equal to his Intelligence modifier. At each new alchemist level, he gains one new formula of any level that he can create.
Its a very noticeable difference to me. The wizard description specifies their starting bonus spells must be first level, The alchemmist description specifies spells on level up must be a level they can create. Yet it doesn't mention the starting ones and for those its you get 2 1st level plus a number of bonus ones rather than you get 2 + int bonus 1st level spells. You can infer they work by the same rules, I do given the comma or you can infer they are different since there is no specification they must be 1st level like a wizard and having it placed after the bit talking about 2 first level can argue otherwise. Especially if you have a high int say 20 (near max or max for a starting char) that's 7 first level extracts. Not only is there not necessarily that many worth taking you'll have far more 1st level than any other level as this is equal to over a third of the amount of extracts you'll get by 20th level (7 vs 19) which have to be split up amongst the other 5 levels.
Which is why I'm hoping there's something official out there I've not seen e.g. an errata.
Let's assume you are free to pick extracts of any level for these bonus ones. I will choose a number of 6th level bonus extracts, which I will immediately tear out of my formula book and sell. For each of these I will be able to purchase and copy into my formula book 1 3rd, 2 2nd and 1 1st level extract.
Do you really think this is intended?
No.
There' a difference between having "0" second level extracts and having "-" second level extracts.
Look at Paladin and Ranger spells.
(Sorry I'm busy, you'll have to look up the rest yourself)
No.
There' a difference between having "0" second level extracts and having "-" second level extracts.
Look at Paladin and Ranger spells.
(Sorry I'm busy, you'll have to look up the rest yourself)
Great answer to the wrong question, this is concerning extracts in formula book, not extracts per day.
Oh right.
I went to read the topic and then had to go out, so I guess I missed the point I guess =P
I'll read the whole thread and try again =P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"An alchemist begins play with two 1st level formulae of his choice, plus a number of additional forumlae equal to his Intelligence modifier. At each new alchemist level, he gains one new formula of any level that he can create."
Important to note is that the additional formulae are described in the same sentence, which means the two parts are connected. True, the language used in that sentence is ambiguous about whether the "1st level" part applies to the additional formulae... until you look at the next sentence, which uses explicit language for when you can chose from different levels, which is in direct contrast to the previous sentence that has no such language. The Wizard description uses seperate sentences and explicitly say "1st level", because the previous sentences talked about two different spell levels.
This is one of these situation where I say this: Pathfinder rules are written by people for people, not by lawyers for lawyers. They aren't written like legal documents that have to be 100% loophole proof because otherwise the company can get sued for billions or a murderer gets free or something like that. They're written with the assumption that a human being interprets them using common sense.
"Things should be the same, or they should be different. (...) if for some reason two things that seem almost the same (like "channel energy" vs. "channel" vs. "channel positive energy") shouldn't act exactly the same, count on us to tell you how it is different." Wizard, Witch, Arcanist, Magus, and even Living Grimoire all let you write additional 1st level spells in your book equal to your int mod. Does the somewhat ambiguous languange for Alchemist tell us allowing writing extracts of above 1st level for yoru startign additional spells equal in number to your int mod? No, it doesn't. And that itself answers the question.
|
|
"An alchemist begins play with two 1st level formulae of his choice, plus a number of additional forumlae equal to his Intelligence modifier. At each new alchemist level, he gains one new formula of any level that he can create."
Important to note is that the additional formulae are described in the same sentence, which means the two parts are connected. True, the language used in that sentence is ambiguous about whether the "1st level" part applies to the additional formulae... until you look at the next sentence, which uses explicit language for when you can chose from different levels, which is in direct contrast to the previous sentence that has no such language. The Wizard description uses seperate sentences and explicitly say "1st level", because the previous sentences talked about two different spell levels.
This is one of these situation where I say this: Pathfinder rules are written by people for people, not by lawyers for lawyers. They aren't written like legal documents that have to be 100% loophole proof because otherwise the company can get sued for billions or a murderer gets free or something like that. They're written with the assumption that a human being interprets them using common sense.
"Things should be the same, or they should be different. (...) if for some reason two things that seem almost the same (like "channel energy" vs. "channel" vs. "channel positive energy") shouldn't act exactly the same, count on us to tell you how it is different." Wizard, Witch, Arcanist, Magus, and even Living Grimoire all let you write additional 1st level spells in your book equal to your int mod. Does the somewhat ambiguous languange for Alchemist tell us allowing writing extracts of above 1st level for yoru startign additional spells equal in...
Makes sense still think you wind up with too many 1st level extracts but oh well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the RAI is pretty obvious that they're meant to be 1st level extracts. The RAW is a bit more questionable.
I always read "plus a number of additional forumlae" as meaning those formulae had to abide by the same rules as your original ones. Then the formulae learned on level-up must be "of any level that he can create". So it would be very weird to start with a bunch of forumulae that have to be first level, then some that Don't have to be first level, then when you level up your new extracts DO have to be first level . Pretty clearly against RAI.
Buuut ... yeah I can see how you could read it another way. It's also perfectly within the rules for a first level Alchemist to BUY higher level forumlae and add them to their forumla book. Yes they save some money by putting them in their book for free at first level, but they also can't use them, so that's the trade-off.
For those worrying about people simply taking higher level formulae, selling them, and then useing the cash to buy more low-level forumlae than they should start with , I'd just tell them it's not a good market for Alchemical formulae. If you're starting in Absalom maybe that's a hard sell, but how many 16th level Alchemists do you find in the average backwater where level 1 adventures take place? Not many, that's how many .
If I had a player who really wanted to "abuse" this, I'd just limit them to selling one forumla per level. They can have a little boost at level 1, the same boost at level 2, etc etc. It's not gonna break the game. If they want to keep them so that they have extra forumlae when they hit level 4 then I'm not too worried.
PS In the time it took me to look this up and lost this Derklord made a good argument for why it isn't allowed. I agree with Derklord, but I also don't see this as super broken as long as your player isn't trying to game the system too hard. If they accept some restrictions then it's unlikely to really hurt anyone.
|
|
So the RAI is pretty obvious that they're meant to be 1st level extracts. The RAW is a bit more questionable.
I always read "plus a number of additional forumlae" as meaning those formulae had to abide by the same rules as your original ones. Then the formulae learned on level-up must be "of any level that he can create". So it would be very weird to start with a bunch of forumulae that have to be first level, then some that Don't have to be first level, then when you level up your new extracts DO have to be first level . Pretty clearly against RAI.
Buuut ... yeah I can see how you could read it another way. It's also perfectly within the rules for a first level Alchemist to BUY higher level forumlae and add them to their forumla book. Yes they save some money by putting them in their book for free at first level, but they also can't use them, so that's the trade-off.
For those worrying about people simply taking higher level formulae, selling them, and then useing the cash to buy more low-level forumlae than they should start with , I'd just tell them it's not a good market for Alchemical formulae. If you're starting in Absalom maybe that's a hard sell, but how many 16th level Alchemists do you find in the average backwater where level 1 adventures take place? Not many, that's how many .
If I had a player who really wanted to "abuse" this, I'd just limit them to selling one forumla per level. They can have a little boost at level 1, the same boost at level 2, etc etc. It's not gonna break the game. If they want to keep them so that they have extra forumlae when they hit level 4 then I'm not too worried.
PS In the time it took me to look this up and lost this Derklord made a good...
My main issue is as I said you do it with them required to be lvl 7 a huge amount of your extracts will be first level and there simply aren't that many which appeal to me. I'd happily take a lvl 6 even if I probably wont be able to ever use it with that character because it spreads out those 1st level bonus formulae and lets you actually pick ones you like as opposed to ones that are "meh I have to get something may as well get this then selling it because you don't actually want or intend to use it. I'm actually more likely to take extracts just to sell if I have to buy 1st level ones only till lvl 4 than if I could nab any level to start with.
Why would levels 2-20 require the Extracts to be of a level you can create, yet level 1 just says screw it and lets you choose all willy-nilly? I honestly do not see the logic in that conclusion.
I can see why one might WANT it to be that way... free late level Extracts known, sweet. I do see the logic in grabbing higher level Extracts early since your starting allotment is larger than the following allotments... as soon as you hit, say, level 7, you have TWO 3rd level Extracts instead of the one you get for leveling up. Makes sense, to a degree.
Except, it would immediately turn into a WBL issue, because they would be torn out and sold by 99% of everyone.
You will find a billion spellbooks by the time you get to, say, level 7... you will have stuffed your formula book full by then, and that 3rd-level Extract you grabbed as a bonus at level 1 is completely irrelevant by now. Well, the fact that you learned it early is completely irrelevant by the time you can use it because you probably have other 3rd-level Extracts stolen from spellbooks or borrowed from other Alchemists along the way.
If you were to find literally nothing else to add to your formula book between now and then, yes, the starting bonus Extracts trick would be worth it... but chances are you will have found plenty of materials to have more than just the one Extract you get when you get a new level.
My main issue is as I said you do it with them required to be lvl 7 a huge amount of your extracts will be first level and there simply aren't that many which appeal to me.
Remember that preparing Extracts doesn't work like spells. Each Extract takes 1 minute to mix, which lets you be a pseudi-spontaneous caster, but with a spellbook.
So you can take a bunch of mostly-useless-but-sometimes-clutch formulae, and leave some extract-slots unprepared.
Take Crafter's Fortune, Negate Aroma or Recharge Innate Magic, they're usually pretty useless but that one time ...
|
An alchemist can also add formulae to his book just like a wizard adds spells to his spellbook, using the same costs, pages, and time requirements. A formulae book costs as much as a spellbook. An alchemist can study a wizard’s spellbook to learn any formula that is equivalent to a spell the spellbook contains. A wizard, however, cannot learn spells from a formula book. An alchemist does not need to decipher arcane writings before copying them.
So you can buy and copy new formulae (Latin plural and singular) for a cost that is negligible when you get them at the correct level:
1st level 15 gp2nd level 60 gp
3rd level 135 gp
4th level 240 gp
5th level 375 gp
6th level 540 gp
Just spending 10% of your WBL, at level 4 you can have 10 2nd level formulae, at level 7 you could add 4 level 2 formulae and 10 level 3, at level 10 you can add another 15 level 4 formulae, at level 13 you can add more than 20 level 5 formulae and at level 16 more than 40 level 6 formulae. Without considering what you can copy from wizards spellbooks, found scrolls, or exchange with your party members.
Sure, 10% of your WBL isn't a small sum, but you really don't need to get that many formulae. It is possible that you will spend something close to 10% of your WBL in formulae at level 4, as you could feel the need to increase your repertoire, but after that, I doubt you will want to buy more than half a dozen formulae when you get a new threshold of spells.
Seems like everyone posting is in agreement that an alchemist cannot choose higher level extracts using the bonus from intelligence. The only one in disagreement is Senko.
I would not allow this in a game I run, and I don’t think any GM I know would. Senko good luck convincing your GM, in all honesty that is the only who’s opinion matters.
|
My main issue is as I said you do it with them required to be lvl 7 a huge amount of your extracts will be first level and there simply aren't that many which appeal to me.
If you can't find at least 11 1st-level extracts that might be useful on occasion, you're not playing in a very complex campaign.
Bomber's Eye
Comprehend Languages
Crafter's Fortune
Cure Light Wounds
Disguise Self
Endure Elements
Enlarge Person
Heightened Awareness
Identify
Longshot
There's 11 I would certainly take and I'm not even halfway through the alphabet.
But overall I think you are parsing the language way too fine if you are reading that as allowing you to start with extracts above 1st level.
An alchemist begins play with two 1st-level formulae of his choice, plus a number of additional forumlae equal to his Intelligence modifier. At each new alchemist level, he gains one new formula of any level that he can create.
At fourth level the alchemist can learn 1st or 2nd level spells but when he just finishes his studies he can have 6th-level spells? And wizards don't get to do that?
|
|
Seems like everyone posting is in agreement that an alchemist cannot choose higher level extracts using the bonus from intelligence. The only one in disagreement is Senko.
I would not allow this in a game I run, and I don’t think any GM I know would. Senko good luck convincing your GM, in all honesty that is the only who’s opinion matters.
Oh I'm not in disagreement I accepted the consensus awhile ago and would play like that. I'm just debating what you'd do with that many 1st level extracts due to a combination of them not having some fun options that aren't adventuring related and my own perseonal tastes that have mechcanically good options like invisibility ward not make sense as something you drink.
Personally I don't think it'd break the game to allow someone to take higher level extracts at first level - with caveats about selling them . Does this give a player an advantage? Sure, but hardly a game-breaking one. Even if a player starts the game at a higher level all they're getting is a little money saved, and the higher the level the less impactful the money is.
Having said that, I also don't think this would be something worth arguing about. If you get "stuck" with more first level extracts than you want in your formula book .... well whoop-di-doo. If that's the worst thing about the class then it's not worth writing home about.
I get it. Wasted class abilities always seem a little annoying, but this is such a minor problem that I wouldn't even consider it a problem. If you have a permissive GM then great. If not, just remember to buy formulae ahead of time for when you level up.
|
|
The alchemist has an easier access to all the alchemical items, as they get their class level as a bonus to the skill and at third level they get swift alchemy.
Generally, there is no problem convincing the GM to allow you to start playing with several alchemical items made by yourself, and so at 1/3 of the price. Later, with a bit of downtime, you can craft a plethora of alchemical items.
That is where you get your fun options. And there are way more alchemical items than cantrips.
|
|
The alchemist has an easier access to all the alchemical items, as they get their class level as a bonus to the skill and at third level they get swift alchemy.
Generally, there is no problem convincing the GM to allow you to start playing with several alchemical items made by yourself, and so at 1/3 of the price. Later, with a bit of downtime, you can craft a plethora of alchemical items.
That is where you get your fun options. And there are way more alchemical items than cantrips.
I see, only just started considering the alchemist so my opinion of it is not based on playing it mainly just making test characters to test options.
The alchemist can prepare an extract in one minute, so should leave some empty to adapt to situations. In that way, having some niche extracts that only fit specific circumstances is still useful.
|
|
I'm playing an alchemist now, and I'd completely missed that detail. Thank you Melkiador.
@Senko, what aspects of the alchemist are drawing you in? The extracts/potions were the more important part of the class to me, so the variety of level one options was great. I think I know at least 10. Are you more interested in the bombs?
More the discoveries actually and the things you can do with them. Bombs and extracts are more something I"m currently looking at.
I guess it is going to depend on what sources you have available. The original list in the Advance Players Guide only has about 20 1st level formulae. If that is all you have access to I can understand your feeling of being constrained. In Hero Labs I counted near 70 1st level formulae. By 4th level an alchemist could have as many as 10 free formulae’s which is about half the original list.
The only reason the language doesn't limit it to 1st-level Extracts, is some campaigns/characters start beyond level 1... so you can still get relevant bonus Extracts. I very seriously doubt it was deisgned for your average over-prepared Alchemist worried about having "too many" low level Extracts and not "enough" high(er) level Extracts.
Most Alchemists also get Brew Potion... so all those low level, oddball Extracts you end up learning as bonuses upon leveling up turn into income with literally any downtime. You can also had out TONS of potions to the party, greatly increasing the overall utility of the party.
|
|
I guess it is going to depend on what sources you have available. The original list in the Advance Players Guide only has about 20 1st level formulae. If that is all you have access to I can understand your feeling of being constrained. In Hero Labs I counted near 70 1st level formulae. By 4th level an alchemist could have as many as 10 free formulae’s which is about half the original list.
Ah yes I was using the advanced players guide I'll have to have a look into these other options as 70 make it much less of an issue.
That is one reason I am avoiding second edition. With all the supplements out for 1st edition pathfinder there is enough source material it makes it easier to create a more versatile character. In the early days creating a unique character was more difficult because of the limited amount of resources. Try playing a druid with only the core rule book. Their spell selection is even more limited than the alchemist with only the Core rule book and APG.
Now after more than a decade and hundreds of dollars in Hero Lab I have enough options.
|
|
Try playing a druid with only the core rule book.
I did that in the Baba Yaga AP. My poor Animal Companion was moved down by rifle fire (it attacks touch AC and a mob does a lot of damage). And the GM limited the replacements to what is available in Russia. The last levels AP decidedly hard for a druid with only the CRB options.