Hello all.
I know there have been other threads about whether or not Alchemist count as magical, along with the FAQ, but I am at a loss at to figure out why. It seems to me that Alchemist are getting shafted on both sides. Sometimes they are considered magic when it is bad and others they are not when it is good.
Alchemist are considered magical when it comes to their extracts and bombs. Quote: When an alchemist creates an extract or bomb, he infuses the concoction with a tiny fraction of his own magical power—this enables the creation of powerful effects, but also binds the effects to the creator. This is considered a negative because it "forces" you to spend a discovery on Infusion. With out it, your extracts are too magical to work on anyone else.
On the other hand, Alchemist are considered non-magical for the purposes of feats and item crafting. Quote: Is an alchemist a spellcaster for the purpose of crafting magic items other than potions?
As written, no, alchemists are not spellcasters, and therefore can't select feats such as Craft Wondrous Item. The design team is aware that this creates some thematic problems with the idea of an alchemist creating golems and so on, and plan to examine this in the future.
It seems to me that there is little consistency regarding this. If Alchemist are magical, why can't they create magical items? If they are not magical, why does it specifically say they use their magical aura? Generally, feats and class abilities are consistent. They are ether magical (or whatever) for better or for worse or they are not, for better or for worse. What is the reason for the Alchemist to be so flip-floppy?
No, it's very consistent:
Alchemy as Alchemists do it is always magical, and it is never spellcasting.
It's a supernatural ability with all that implies. Take a look at it.
Alchemists abilities are supernatural which is a form of magic but they are not spells or spell-like abilities and thus do not have caster levels. It is an important distinction.
In one respect an alchemist's extracts are better than any spell. They cannot be dispelled since they are supernatural and not spell or spell-like.
Heh not like it is a problem everybody and their mama can take master craftsman feat to create magical items. I suppose you are mostly hung up on the magical vs non magical.
The problem isn't really that, it's just that Alchemy that you see is mostly inspired from pulp alchemy. Stuffs like Faust who sells his soul to the devil to gain greater secrets of Alchemy, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, the Philosopher stone etc...
It's magical and it's not at the same time is the best way that you could describe it really.
Eltacolibre, an alchemist's Alchemy (su) ability is absolutely magical. There is nothing non-magical about their extracts, bombs, or mutagen. But supernatural abilities are not the same thing as spells or spell-like abilities.
Supernatural abilties are magical and are suppressed in an anti-magic field but they are not spells or spell-like abilities.
Ok, so it is a supernatural effect. It just seems very odd to me.
Considering that the Alchemist's extracts still require an AOO (or at least most GM's will rule it this way), they do not have extracts which require or even use spell resistance (as most are buffs), and the writers had to go out of their way to give the Alchemist pseudo-caster levels, it just seems like an unnecessary distinction. As far as I can see, all it does it make Alchemist less Alchemic-y. I understand it from a rules stand point (kinda), but I don't get the design decision or the flavor reasons behind it.
Bard (or druid or paladin or wizard): I use magic to do things and with a bit of training (AKA a feat) I can use that magic to enhance weapons.
Alchemist: I can use magic to do thing and that magic is by definition "a power or process of transforming something common into something special" but I can not use that magic to enhance weapons.
I think James Jacobs has stated that alchemists originally received spells, but that the flavor just didn't fit, so it was changed to extracts. Their differences weren't devised as a point of game balance but according to the theme of the class. If the Advanced Players Guide had a chapter on magic (as the Core Rulebook does), we might have gotten clearer, more elaborate rules on extracts, instead of it being crammed into a single class feature. I think the inconsistencies arose from the FAQ making rulings on a case by case basis, instead of looking at the class as a whole.
@Guass
Alchemy wrote: Extracts are the most varied of the three. In many ways, they behave like spells in potion form, and as such their effects can be dispelled by effects like dispel magic using the alchemist's level as the caster level. Yes, Alchemy is labeled as a supernatural ability and extracts are listed under that class feature, but that class feature is an overcrowded mess. It's really not the intent that you treat extracts like supernatural abilities, as suggested by them being treated like spells in most every way.
Thanks Rhatahema, I thought that was in there somewhere but not finding it I defaulted to the baseline supernatural rule.
Alright, thank you all who have posted and have gotten me to clarify my question. Let me see if I can rephrase it so it makes more sense.
While an Alchemist's spells have all of the negatives of being a spell (being dispellable, provoking AOO, being magical enough to not be able to be shared, and being buffs the spell resistance does not matter), why, from a design/flavor standpoint, do they also not some of the positives (specifically working with Arcane Strike and crafting feats) when they have pseudo-caster levels? As, by definition, alchemy is "a power or process of transforming something common into something special" why did they remove the ability to make something common special (aka caster levels)? It gives off the feeling of being very oddly nerfed because it does the exact same thing, just slightly worse.
As for the idea that the flavor does not fit, I would think that creating and discovering different formulas to use as extracts sounds a lot more similar to spells from a spellbook then a sorcerer's spells. If any deserved to be a (SU) it should be them and not the Alchemist.
But, oh well. It seems as though it is just another .. *Sigh* very odd design choice by the devs. Hopefully they come up with an idea to fix this (as the FAQ said a year ago), but, unless it its errata to the class, I doubt the fix will be satisfactory.
Alchemists are the only class in the game to be able to pass around effects with the target of "You"
Via Infusion, they can create "True Strike" Extracts, which can be passed to any melee characters, for example.
This is absurdly powerful.
Extracts also cost nothing to produce, save for some material component costs. And they can be up to 6th level, unlike a potion. And again, because of Infusion, you can therefore give the Fighter a Not-Potion that's a 6th Level buffing spell, that cost literally nothing and was prepared in 1 minute.
This is also absurdly powerful.
Additionally (there is debate over HOW exactly this is handled, though), they are slightly immune to the total penalties of Attacks of Opportunities vs. Casters.
Normally, if a Caster casts in melee, they suffer AoO's, and if they fail on their Concentration, their attempted Cast fizzles, along with now having a gaping hole in their stomachs.
Alchemists, however, have a workaround. Because Extracts are similar to Potions, and the rules say they are ingested LIKE Potions (they are not, however, but there are long flamewars, regardless of Word Of God rulings from the author of the class on the subject), this means that the attacker has two options:
1) hit the Alchemist but let them get the spell off without fail
2) hit the Extract's vial and cause it to fizzle, but leave the Alchemist unscathed.
Extracts also can be prepared at lightning speed.
A Wizard or other Prepared caster can leave spell slots open, but they require a minimum of 15 minutes to prepare even one spell on the fly; Alchemists, however, can prepare 15 Extracts in 15 minutes, putting even the most devoted Wizard to shame.
For buffing and healing characters, there really is no better class in the game than the Alchemist.
there is a certain alchemist in an AP that has a crapload of constructs in his castle if I remember well
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
