I have an Alchemist that just acquired 2nd level extracts, and I am contemplating the uses and limits of Alchemical Allocation. PFS rules require that you buy potions at minimum caster level, but is that for the spell or the effect?
For instance, could I buy a Barkskin +5 potion? Barkskin the spell can be cast by a Druid of 3rd level, so the minimum would be a +2 bonus for 30 Min. On the loot tables though, there is an entry for Potion of Barkskin +5 with a minimum caster level of 12. This is true of all spells that have a level based progression- the spell appears in multiple potions with different +X in the name. So, is it legal to buy a "Potion of Barkskin +5" at the minimum caster level (12), or would I be limited to a "Potion of Barkskin" at CL 3? I have seen a lot of arguments on this in the forums, but no real answer.
My guess is that I'll be stuck with the CL3 version, but that makes this ability pretty crappy in PFS. I would have to spend 2 rounds and a level 2 extract slot to get a really low powered and low duration effect. I would also risk provoking for both the extract and the potion.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless it appears on a chronicle, all potions and wands are at minimum caster level. There is at least 1 chronicle that has the Barkskin +5 potion on it, but specifying it for specific reasons like this or hunting that particular scenario just for it is considered cheating by the guys wearing the masks upstairs.
|
Consumables are purchased based on being created at the minimum caster level for the spell being used. So, your potion of barkskin would be CL3, as that is the minimum caster level that is able to cast the spell.
Yes, this instance it is not necessarily the best use of a your extract..in combat. However, at 30 minutes duration, you could easily do that before you entered combat if it was going to be a dungeon type setting, or before opening a door and save yourself some gold in terms of consumable expense.
How is it unreasonably good? As far as I can tell, it is pretty worthless in combat with the PFS rules. A Wand would be better for any level 1 spell and burning a level 2 extract (which you don't get till level 4) to emulate a low level wizard/cleric spell is very underwhelming. Especially given the limited selection of viable spells. It only seems useful for fixing bad conditions out of combat (lesser restoration, remove curse, remove disease, etc.) 30 min sounds like a long time, but there are too many parties where people do things like take 20 on perception for every single square they walk in.
|
How is it unreasonably good? As far as I can tell, it is pretty worthless in combat with the PFS rules. A Wand would be better for any level 1 spell and burning a level 2 extract (which you don't get till level 4) to emulate a low level wizard/cleric spell is very underwhelming. Especially given the limited selection of viable spells. It only seems useful for fixing bad conditions out of combat (lesser restoration, remove curse, remove disease, etc.) 30 min sounds like a long time, but there are too many parties where people do things like take 20 on perception for every single square they walk in.
Would a Cure Critical Wounds Wand be cheaper then using Alchemical Allocation? How about a Lesser Restoration Wand? Remove Disease? Restoration?
Would a Cure Critical Wounds Wand be cheaper then using Alchemical Allocation? How about a Lesser Restoration Wand? Remove Disease? Restoration?
You can only buy potions where the spell level is 3 or less, so no restoration. You can cure disease/curse/poison for 150 Gp or 1 PP after the adventure. The CSW is pretty useless in combat due to the "2 standard actions that both provoke" thing.
Out of combat, my CLW extracts and CLW wand are better for topping me off.
So again- seems only useful to "get rid of a bad thing between fights".
I know there are discoveries that can help here, but those are limited. Alchemists are already saddled with the infusion tax if they want to help anyone else and this just turns into additional taxes that have to be paid if you want to use AA in a PFS game.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Potion of fly
Potion of heroism
Potion of water breathing
Potion of water walk
All of those except fly are 50 minute potions. For the low cost of a second level extract you get to reuse that 750 GP potion. Alchemical allocation is not the "be-all, end-all" but it is circumstantially useful. Just like any other spell.
So, I just compared the potion list to the Extract Formula list. It looks like the "Remove" spells are the only thing on the list worth using AA for. Everything else is better when used from a wand or available as an actual Extract (so, higher CL, better benefits, and better action economy.)
I understand that you don't want a Hyde alchemist getting Barkskin +5 and multiple Greater Magic Fang +5, but the potion rules to prevent that make this a really hard nerf to AA. I would rather see something like "in PFS you can only have one effect from a AA potion at a time." That would stop OP Hyde builds without gimping the other alchemists. Just my 2 cents.
I'll give you Heroism- that may be the one exception since it is 50 min. Fly isn't very practical since it takes 2 rounds to spin up and is so short lived. WW and WB are almost never needed and there are typically potions of it lying around if it is really needed for the scenario.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
How is it unreasonably good? As far as I can tell, it is pretty worthless in combat with the PFS rules. A Wand would be better for any level 1 spell and burning a level 2 extract (which you don't get till level 4) to emulate a low level wizard/cleric spell is very underwhelming. Especially given the limited selection of viable spells. It only seems useful for fixing bad conditions out of combat (lesser restoration, remove curse, remove disease, etc.) 30 min sounds like a long time, but there are too many parties where people do things like take 20 on perception for every single square they walk in.
Heroism, Righteous Vigor, Water Walk, Tongues, Shield of Fortification, Remove Disease, Resist Energy, Remove Curse, Remove Blindness/Deafness,
Protection from Energy, Nondetection, Magic Circle......|
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
AA's biggest benefit is its versatility. My alchemists have a bunch of potions and AA lets me basically spontaneous cast those spells and use spells that aren't on his list. Most of my Alchemist have all their 2nd level slots filled with AA because of that. There are also many scenarios, especially newer ones, that have higher level potions on them.
I know of one that has a 15th lvl caster stoneskin potion on it. I won't tell which one, and it probably won't do you much good by the time you can get it. My friend happened to be able to play that module back when you could make an appropriately leveled copy of a character to play in it and apply it to the lower level character. So his low level Alchemist is very careful with his stoneskin potion and usually drinks it with AA at the start of every scenario.
There are also alchemist discoveries that let you be affected by a potion as if it were made at your level. That would allow you the higher bonuses than minimum as well.
Every time you use AA to drink a potion/elixir is more gold that you're not having to shell out to replace a potion.
Alright- I'm going to take this as settled with the "minimum caster level for the SPELL" ruling. That makes sense, but I really wish I hadn't picked AA as my first level 2 extract. :(
One thing though- does anyone know why this restriction is in place? If your Fame level is high enough to buy really powerful magic weapons, armor, and wondrous items- why are you still limited to gimped potions, wands, and scrolls?
Is it because they are cheap relative to items that generate the effects permanently? It seems that could be solved by only making items available at your character level or lower, altering the formula to make high level P/W/S cost a lot more, or setting a separate Fame threshold for non-minimum. As it is, the restriction seems a bit arbitrary.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Alright- I'm going to take this as settled with the "minimum caster level for the SPELL" ruling. That makes sense, but I really wish I hadn't picked AA as my first level 2 extract. :(
One thing though- does anyone know why this restriction is in place? If your Fame level is high enough to buy really powerful magic weapons, armor, and wondrous items- why are you still limited to gimped potions, wands, and scrolls?
Is it because they are cheap relative to items that generate the effects permanently? It seems that could be solved by only making items available at your character level or lower, altering the formula to make high level P/W/S cost a lot more, or setting a separate Fame threshold for non-minimum. As it is, the restriction seems a bit arbitrary.
The restriction seems to limit items, that are very very good deals, a level 1 wand with a high caster level is very good value for money.
Another reason for the ban, could be to prevent players from overpowering scenarios, that are supposed to be challenging, by throwing money at the problem.
EDIT: It isn't as much an infusion tax, its a pretty good way to give your shield spell to the monk.
Hex Ward, Invigorate, Mage Armor, Pass without Trace, Lesser Restoration, Sanctuary, Shield of Faith, Youthful Appearance, Bestow Grace....
I could go on, and of course some of these will be better at a higher CL, but the spell offers quite a bit of versatility.
Versatile yes. Useful- rarely. Spending 2 standard actions that provoke in combat is never useful.
Buying and carrying around a potion for a situational level 1 spell that costs you a level 2 extract and 2 provoking standard actions- also never useful. Forgo the opportunity or buy a wand.
Buy 4 potions of resist energy 10 (one for each type), or just make a resist energy extract in that AA slot. The extract will be at your CL, so it will last longer, you get to type it when you drink it, and it will do more then 10 as you level.
I see your point that it provides flexibility and gives you options outside the class. But carrying around a large sack full of rarely useful low-level items that are extremely difficult to use- it just isn't very practical.
|
I'd say the majority of my characters carry around random consumables. It's always great when you get to the Kellid Warchief, try to broker a peace deal, realize nobody speaks Hallit, and you happen to have a scroll of Tongues packed away for just such an occasion.
I forget the exact percentage, but something like 10% of your WBL should usually go towards consumables.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Go to Enhance Potion it seems amazing for your intention.
No idea how Dilution, works in PFS especially if you want to dilute other players potions.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Neocrates, your issue is that you are trying to make alchemical allocation into a combat extract. It's not. Search around and you'll find many lists of items that every pathfinder should have. These aren't necessarily for combat.
-Potion of fly is for when you are exploring and come to a sheer cliff (or 100' wide gap).
-Elixirs of various types (+10 on acro, stealth, percep, or swim)
-The entire remove x line.
-Want to talk to the NPC from beyond the Inner Sea? Potion of tongues.
-Leaving aside the metagame implications of your statement I can think of at least three scenarios off the top of my head where water walk or water breathing would be exceptionally useful but aren't provided.
That's just a small part of the list. Every Pathfinder should carry around a way to deal with those situations (as well as darkness, invisible creatures, etc.). The difference is that with alchemical allocation an alchemist only has to buy each once.
Alchemical allocation is a money-saver, not a combat mechanism.
The CSW is pretty useless in combat due to the "2 standard actions that both provoke" thing.How does CSW provoke twice?
Once when you drink the Extract and once when you drink the potion.
Mike- I didn't realize that you could use these with elixers. I'll have to read up on those.
Belafon- I'm not saying that it is completely useless. It's just that the PFS rules remove it's viability as a combat buff and severely gimps it's use outside of combat due to durations.
Sabastian- Yeah, and there is a discovery that doubles the duration of potions. The problem is that you really need both discoveries to make AA shine and there are much better discoveries no matter what your Alchemist play style.
It is what it is and I will use it for the Remove X potions. Thanks to everyone for the input.
|
Alchemical Allocation is still, hands down, the best 2nd level extract an alchemist can take. Potions that come to mind that I have used with it include Fly, Gaseous Form, Protection From Energy. I also intend to get potions of Tongues, and the various "remove" spells. I also just got access to that sweet CL12 potion of Shield of Faith and it is pretty high on my list of purchases for next adventure.
While it shines most outside of combat, there have been times that it made sense for me to use it for a fly potion in combat.
|
|
there are too many parties where people do things like take 20 on perception for every single square they walk in.
I know this is off topic, but this isn't a thing anymore. Perception isn't limited to a certain volume of squares. You roll perception (or take 10, or take 20) and the GM tells you what you see/find modified by distance.
|
|
there are too many parties where people do things like take 20 on perception for every single square they walk in.I know this is off topic, but this isn't a thing anymore. Perception isn't limited to a certain volume of squares. You roll perception (or take 10, or take 20) and the GM tells you what you see/find modified by distance.
My DM has me checking for traps in a 10' radius. Where is the RAW about that? I want range modifiers but my DM is unaware.
|
|
You necro'd a 3 year old thread about potion rules to ask about Perception?
When using Perception to search for Traps, you may only search a 10 foot square area.
The Core Rulebook doesn’t specify what area a PC can actively search, but for a given Perception check it should be no larger than a 10-foot-by-10-foot area
Perception modifiers for distance are for other uses of the Perception skill beyond searching for traps, such as spotting creatures using Stealth.
|
|
My DM has me checking for traps in a 10' radius. Where is the RAW about that? I want range modifiers but my DM is unaware.there are too many parties where people do things like take 20 on perception for every single square they walk in.I know this is off topic, but this isn't a thing anymore. Perception isn't limited to a certain volume of squares. You roll perception (or take 10, or take 20) and the GM tells you what you see/find modified by distance.
This rule was introduced in Ultimate Intrigue, I believe after Mystic Lemur's post.
|
|
You answered your own question: the person applying an oil is the "caster".
And since you are the one applying the oil, it's more economical to use oils anytime you'd rather have the recipient of the oil using their actions for other purposes.
Say you're a Druid riding your dino-death-beast. You probably want your Animal Companion using its actions to clear the field of enemies. All the better for you to apply that oil of Barkskin rather than have Mr. Toothy spend a standard action to drink it.