| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My DM says I am abusing Alchemical Allocation because I bought an Elixir of Shadewalking and am traveling across the planet to get to where the campaign is and am stealing away hostages and then vanishing from enemies with it and now he is pretty much making my use of it be only for traveling when there is no encounter during the travel, thoughts?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This sounds like more of a issue between you and the DM as individuals, as opposed to any mechanical angle. I suggest you two talk it out.
|
Several thoughts:
1. Why is your DM making you hike across the world to get to the game? That sounds like a waste of time.
2. Why are you dragging people into the Plane of Shadows? Lulz?
3. Alchemical Allocation can be stupid good when used correctly. It sounds like you're using it correctly.
4. At the end of the day he gets the final say. RAW he's wrong but what you're doing may be affecting game balance in some way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ask the GM to come here to present his side because honestly it does not matter to many GM's if a player replies with "Some people online said.....".
If he comes here it might help get to the root of the problem.
PS: I am not saying you were going to use us against the GM. I just wanted to say that in case you were thinking about it.
@ kestral on point two i think he means that he is saving the hostages by shadewalking in. I doubt someone being held captive would try to resist being freed.
The part that I don't understand is how you know exactly where the hostages are and how are you getting to a specific point.
Because of the blurring of reality between the Plane of Shadow and the Material Plane, you can't make out details of the terrain or areas you pass over during transit, nor can you predict perfectly where your travel will end. It's impossible to judge distances accurately, making the spell virtually useless for scouting or spying. Furthermore, when the spell effect ends, you are shunted 1d10 x 100 feet in a random horizontal direction from your desired endpoint. If this would place you within a solid object, you are shunted 1d10 x 1,000 feet in the same direction. If this would still place you within a solid object, you (and any creatures with you) are shunted to the nearest empty space available, but the strain of this activity renders each creature fatigued (no save).
So even with some strong divination and scouting etc, you still get shunted 1d10 X 100 feet in a random direction when you leave the realm of shadow.
Without more details there aren't a lot of thoughts to give. That said:
You have to use a new Allocation each time you want to use the elixir. Are you doing that?
Yes, but using it twice in one session was too much for him.
Stealing away hostages would be... difficult. How are you securing them? How are you effectively taking them with you without slowing you down? They get a Will save each time you drink; how do you ensure that they fail each one?
We had the hostage while the captor was being talked to, we were going to just get away fast before the captor could notice.
Several thoughts:
1. Why is your DM making you hike across the world to get to the game? That sounds like a waste of time.
Most campaign settings aren't in the same part of the world? My character has spent months upon months upon months combined at sea.
2. Why are you dragging people into the Plane of Shadows? Lulz?
To escape and for the 50 mph movement speed.
4. At the end of the day he gets the final say. RAW he's wrong but what you're doing may be affecting game balance in some way.
We tend to accidentally bypass all fights in these games, one time there was this shapeshifter that kept trying to get these kids captured but we didn't know that and we assumed he was just dumb and kept convincing him to stay hidden while traveling. It might be because this would help us continue to do just that.
Ask the GM to come here to present his side because honestly it does not matter to many GM's if a player replies with "Some people online said.....".
If he comes here it might help get to the root of the problem.PS: I am not saying you were going to use us against the GM. I just wanted to say that in case you were thinking about it.
I doubt he is going to ever change his mind, I just wanted to see if anyone else thought alchemical allocation was too powerful for a second level spell.
This posit, by another poster never got a reply.
1. Further, are you picking up hostages of opportunity or targeting specific people? In the latter case you're going to have difficulty because the Elixir is outright stated to be an imprecise tool, not useful for scouting or spying, so you'll need to find where the target probably is, get there, exit the Shadow Plane and be shunted 100-10,000 feet in a random direction, claim the hostage, drink the extract, then drink the elixir. Then go through all the difficulties mentioned above to keep the hostage secured.
Vanishing from enemies is equally difficult given that it takes you at least two rounds to teleport away.
With that aside I don't know what an Elixir of Shadowalking is nor do I see the rules text for Alchemical Allocation.
It may just be a problem of you having the perfect solution of this particular campaign or his style of GM'ing.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ahh, right, the Backwash extract.
Thanks for the quotes. I am sure there is a potion of elixir where this might be a problem, but the ability itself is not an issue. Even in this case just make sure all of the rules are enforced.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This posit, by another poster never got a reply.
1. Further, are you picking up hostages of opportunity or targeting specific people? In the latter case you're going to have difficulty because the Elixir is outright stated to be an imprecise tool, not useful for scouting or spying, so you'll need to find where the target probably is, get there, exit the Shadow Plane and be shunted 100-10,000 feet in a random direction, claim the hostage, drink the extract, then drink the elixir. Then go through all the difficulties mentioned above to keep the hostage secured.
Vanishing from enemies is equally difficult given that it takes you at least two rounds to teleport away.With that aside I don't know what an Elixir of Shadowalking is nor do I see the rules text for Alchemical Allocation.
It may just be a problem of you having the perfect solution of this particular campaign or his style of GM'ing.
Oh sorry let me explain further, in this instance we had freed a hostage, the person who was holding the hostage hostage was distracted a floor away. We wanted to flee to the next country about 500 miles away so the person who was holding the hostage hostage wouldn't have been able to find us.
And quite frankly it shouldn't. Players should not be getting the idea that this is a board of appeals for a Home GM's ruling they don't like.
As for the OP's case, The Shadowwalking spell and it's derivatives is not meant for precision placement, only the coverage of long distance travel. The rules don't cover corner uses of magic like this so it's up to the GM to make a call, and whatever call he makes is by definition, valid.
Yeah I know he won't change his mind I just never saw the spell as that OP, it is a class feature, it is one of the reasons the class is chosen for.
It is like saying a wizard is OP because they cast spells and a plain fighter can't.|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Several thoughts:
1. Why is your DM making you hike across the world to get to the game? That sounds like a waste of time.
Most campaign settings aren't in the same part of the world? My character has spent months upon months upon months combined at sea.
Oh, I misunderstood. I thought he was making specifically you catch up with the rest of the party across the world. I thought that was... odd.
2. Why are you dragging people into the Plane of Shadows? Lulz?To escape and for the 50 mph movement speed.
I thought you were kidnapping people into the Plane of Shadows, not rescuing hostages. That makes much more sense.
4. At the end of the day he gets the final say. RAW he's wrong but what you're doing may be affecting game balance in some way.We tend to accidentally bypass all fights in these games, one time there was this shapeshifter that kept trying to get these kids captured but we didn't know that and we assumed he was just dumb and kept convincing him to stay hidden while traveling. It might be because this would help us continue to do just that.
So, a few things. First, you can't use shadow walk to get into a secure location so you would have had to fight those guards to get to the hostages or found some means of sneaking around. Second, Alchemical Allocation takes 2 rounds and is not subtle so if an enemy is with you then they have time to disrupt what is going on. Finally, is the GM becoming distressed that you are using the same technique over and over again and it is becoming disruptive or because your party's cleverness is breaking his railroad. If it is the former, then you should definitely let it go especially if you are outshining the talents of the rest of the party on a consistent basis. If it is the latter, you might start thinking about finding another game.
Just kind of thinking out loud, but dimension door is a third level spell for summoners, and I think (not 100% sure) you could make a potion of it.
So for what it is worth I think you can use a fourth level spell as a second level... resource for an Alchemist.
The same thing that recommended I use the Elixir of Shadewalking also suggested the Dimension Door potion if you were strapped for cash so I imagine it is fine to use.
So, a few things. First, you can't use shadow walk to get into a secure location so you would have had to fight those guards to get to the hostages or found some means of sneaking around. Second, Alchemical Allocation takes 2 rounds and is not subtle so if an enemy is with you then they have time to disrupt what is going on. Finally, is the GM becoming distressed that you are using the same technique over and over again and it is becoming disruptive or because your party's cleverness is breaking his railroad. If it is the former, then you should definitely let it go especially if you are outshining the talents of the rest of the party on a consistent basis. If it is the latter, you might start thinking about finding another game.
No we didn't care where we ended up as long as it was about 500 miles that way.
I had only used it twice before he had a problem with it.
3.5k for a very specific kind of teleport that takes 2 rounds isn't that big of a deal. The GM is probably doing 2 things:
1. S/he's probably annoyed that you're skipping the "epic overland adventure" like if Gandalf had whistled up a few eagles and just flown straight to Mount Doom.
2. S/he's focusing too much on the fact that it is a 5/6th level spell that you are casting with a 2nd level spell. Sure it takes 2 rounds, but that means nothing when its most common use will be outside of combat anyway.
Entirely that second one, s/he even explicitly stated that.
It is primarily the second case. The impact of having (practically) limitless access to a 6th level spell in a 5th level adventure causes him some distress.
Woah, hey I know you.
Yeah... precision targeting with Shadow Walk is explicitly impossible, so while you're using Alchemical Allocation correctly you are not going to be able to cheat past an encounter with Shadow Walk. The spell shunts you 1d10*100 feet in a random direction when you exit it. To get in the right room then, you have to pick your spot somewhere between 100 and 1000 feet away on one of the eight available directions and then hope you make the 1/8 direction roll and the 1/10 distance roll. This is a 1.25% chance, assuming you actually went through all of that work on precise placement.
It'll get you to the right area, and it can be used to escape, but you're going to have to do some legwork the old fashioned way.
No precision targeting, we were running away from a potential battle.
Running from combat means not getting XP and munnies. If anything, the GM should be cackling gleefully at your foolishness.
He does remove rewards based off of whether or not we did everything available.
The only thing I see that could be a problem is that you may not be using the elixir correctly. Make sure you (and your DM) read through it and Shadow Walk (that it's based on) and understand it correctly.
Alchemical Allocation isn't the problem.
The elixir is being used correctly, the rules for it has been scoured and discussed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I agree that the ability to make infinite use of this sort of item is one of the key unique class features of the Alchemist/Investigator... I am reminded of exactly why it is that, in addition to restricting players from using 3rd party content, I also ban content from any module/adventure path we're not presently playing. If you actually are playing Curse of the Crimson Throne... well... you can thoroughly justify ownership of the item, and you'll have had the spell for re-using potions for three levels now. The GM should have considered this and planned accordingly.
While I agree that the ability to make infinite use of this sort of item is one of the key unique class features of the Alchemist/Investigator... I am reminded of exactly why it is that, in addition to restricting players from using 3rd party content, I also ban content from any module/adventure path we're not presently playing. If you actually are playing Curse of the Crimson Throne... well... you can thoroughly justify ownership of the item, and you'll have had the spell for re-using potions for three levels now. The GM should have considered this and planned accordingly.
I've been using alchemical allocation for flight previously.
Then yeah, I don't see what the problem is. Sure, it's a really powerful potion, but it's not like it's a third party item or something the designers wouldn't have been able to take into account when creating the spell. And you've only used it twice, which means it's still more expensive to date than a pair of scrolls of teleport, which would have accomplished pretty much the same thing in about the same amount of time. (would usually take 1-3 rounds for a level 5 rogue with 15 charisma to activate)
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I see what your problem is here.
That elixir (despite the name) isn't a potion. It's a wondrous item.
Your ability doesn't work with it.
While I agree that the ability to make infinite use of this sort of item is one of the key unique class features of the Alchemist/Investigator... I am reminded of exactly why it is that, in addition to restricting players from using 3rd party content, I also ban content from any module/adventure path we're not presently playing. If you actually are playing Curse of the Crimson Throne... well... you can thoroughly justify ownership of the item, and you'll have had the spell for re-using potions for three levels now. The GM should have considered this and planned accordingly.I would say that restricting its availability for that reason would be reasonable on the DMs part.
How would you have it restricted though?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alchemical Allocation is pretty powerful, in that it basically makes something free that would otherwise be living beyond your means (regular use of higher-level potions). I'm not convinced publishing it was a good move. Of course, now that it exists, I'm using it too.
And then there's this Elixir. I'm fairly confident that whoever wrote the elixir, and whoever wrote Alchemical Allocation, did not expect those two to be used. I mean, now that both of them exist, it makes sense to use it, but it's not likely something that the writer(s) planned. It's just an unexpected combination.
I can see how a GM would be frustrated that you bypassed an adventure. The first time, it'd be annoying but the right thing to do would be to say "well, I didn't see that coming.. you're not getting loot from the encounters you never ran into of course, but you're well on your way with your main mission". The second time, he could've been ready for it;
- You still actually need to get to the hostage. He could plan the challenge of the adventure more around getting in than around getting out.
- You might have encounters on the shadow plane. And given how you're getting there at relatively low level, that could be scary.
- Since you don't have a lot of control on where you exit, you might stumble into a random encounter on exit. That could just be a fight, but it could also be something more creative, like in the middle of a tense negotiation between two organized crime cartels. Who now both think the others hired the PCs for a double-cross, so there's this confusing three-way battle.
I see what your problem is here.
That elixir (despite the name) isn't a potion. It's a wondrous item.
Your ability doesn't work with it.
No, Alchemical Allocation states it works with elixirs.
All elixirs are wondrous items.Alchemical Allocation is pretty powerful, in that it basically makes something free that would otherwise be living beyond your means (regular use of higher-level potions). I'm not convinced publishing it was a good move. Of course, now that it exists, I'm using it too.
And then there's this Elixir. I'm fairly confident that whoever wrote the elixir, and whoever wrote Alchemical Allocation, did not expect those two to be used. I mean, now that both of them exist, it makes sense to use it, but it's not likely something that the writer(s) planned. It's just an unexpected combination.
I can see how a GM would be frustrated that you bypassed an adventure. The first time, it'd be annoying but the right thing to do would be to say "well, I didn't see that coming.. you're not getting loot from the encounters you never ran into of course, but you're well on your way with your main mission". The second time, he could've been ready for it;
- You still actually need to get to the hostage. He could plan the challenge of the adventure more around getting in than around getting out.
- You might have encounters on the shadow plane. And given how you're getting there at relatively low level, that could be scary.
- Since you don't have a lot of control on where you exit, you might stumble into a random encounter on exit. That could just be a fight, but it could also be something more creative, like in the middle of a tense negotiation between two organized crime cartels. Who now both think the others hired the PCs for a double-cross, so there's this confusing three-way battle.
We got the hostage. We also ran away with our own various abilities, expeditious retreat, mounts, and reduce person to shrink down people to be more easily carried. So we still got away without fighting.
The shadow walk spell isn't exactly on the shadow plane, it is between the two planes?
Alchemical Allocation is pretty powerful, in that it basically makes something free that would otherwise be living beyond your means (regular use of higher-level potions). I'm not convinced publishing it was a good move. Of course, now that it exists, I'm using it too.
And then there's this Elixir. I'm fairly confident that whoever wrote the elixir, and whoever wrote Alchemical Allocation, did not expect those two to be used. I mean, now that both of them exist, it makes sense to use it, but it's not likely something that the writer(s) planned. It's just an unexpected combination.
I can see how a GM would be frustrated that you bypassed an adventure. The first time, it'd be annoying but the right thing to do would be to say "well, I didn't see that coming.. you're not getting loot from the encounters you never ran into of course, but you're well on your way with your main mission". The second time, he could've been ready for it;
- You still actually need to get to the hostage. He could plan the challenge of the adventure more around getting in than around getting out.
- You might have encounters on the shadow plane. And given how you're getting there at relatively low level, that could be scary.
- Since you don't have a lot of control on where you exit, you might stumble into a random encounter on exit. That could just be a fight, but it could also be something more creative, like in the middle of a tense negotiation between two organized crime cartels. Who now both think the others hired the PCs for a double-cross, so there's this confusing three-way battle.
Have to agree with this. Part of the GM's job is to roll with the punches when your players come up with something legitimately clever.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And then there's this Elixir. I'm fairly confident that whoever wrote the elixir, and whoever wrote Alchemical Allocation, did not expect those two to be used. I mean, now that both of them exist, it makes sense to use it, but it's not likely something that the writer(s) planned. It's just an unexpected combination.
Actually, the elixir in question predates Pathfinder, and was grandfathered in due to being included in the Curse of the Crimson Throne Adventure Path.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have to agree with this. Part of the GM's job is to roll with the punches when your players come up with something legitimately clever.Alchemical Allocation is pretty powerful, in that it basically makes something free that would otherwise be living beyond your means (regular use of higher-level potions). I'm not convinced publishing it was a good move. Of course, now that it exists, I'm using it too.
And then there's this Elixir. I'm fairly confident that whoever wrote the elixir, and whoever wrote Alchemical Allocation, did not expect those two to be used. I mean, now that both of them exist, it makes sense to use it, but it's not likely something that the writer(s) planned. It's just an unexpected combination.
I can see how a GM would be frustrated that you bypassed an adventure. The first time, it'd be annoying but the right thing to do would be to say "well, I didn't see that coming.. you're not getting loot from the encounters you never ran into of course, but you're well on your way with your main mission". The second time, he could've been ready for it;
- You still actually need to get to the hostage. He could plan the challenge of the adventure more around getting in than around getting out.
- You might have encounters on the shadow plane. And given how you're getting there at relatively low level, that could be scary.
- Since you don't have a lot of control on where you exit, you might stumble into a random encounter on exit. That could just be a fight, but it could also be something more creative, like in the middle of a tense negotiation between two organized crime cartels. Who now both think the others hired the PCs for a double-cross, so there's this confusing three-way battle.
Yup, too often GMs use "No" as their answer to rolling with the punches or they just plain ban stuff. I can understand that they don't want to be steamrolled but a good GM would find a countermeasure and use it sparingly to show that there is some risk to using a certain action....not that they should constantly use the countermeasure but slip it in enough that the PC knows that the exploit isn't free and without risks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ask the GM to come here to present his side because honestly it does not matter to many GM's if a player replies with "Some people online said.....".
If he comes here it might help get to the root of the problem.PS: I am not saying you were going to use us against the GM. I just wanted to say that in case you were thinking about it.
Oddly enough, when my table has a question that we can't immediately resolve, we usually see what the Paizo forums say about it after the game. My players ask me about something and I don't knownit and don't have the time to research it, I just check the forums to see what y'all have to say.
So some GMs do listen to what random people online say. :)
(I know, you said "many")
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's the GM's job to roll with the punches... but that's a hard job. It's made harder when a character somehow gains early access to an ability that they're not supposed to have until later. Just like the ability to fly at level 1 would trivialize low-level adventure designs that feature cliffs or pits as obstacles, teleportation effects make it much harder to design adventures that rely on accessing or escaping from secure areas.
The GM shouldn't dismiss things out of hand, but if he has honestly looked at the implications of this ability and said "I'm not able to adjust the campaign to deal with this while still keeping it challenging for you and fun for me," that's fair. GMs aren't perfect - even good GMs can have a hard time with some parts of the game. Running a game is significant mental work and if it's too hard for you to keep ahead of the PCs you can burn out.
And if it's "stupid good when used correctly" it's perfectly fair to nerf it a bit.
How would you have it restricted though?
Options:
1) Limit the character's ability to purchase expensive elixirs. The Elixir of Shadewalking costs 3,500gp. A village won't have that kind of item, and towns would only contain a handful of magic items of that power. The highest-value items in a settlement are unlikely to be elixirs because most people spend most of their wealth on durable items - you won't find a $10,000 bottle of wine in a town where most people don't own $10,000 cars.
2) Limit the substances Alchemical Allocation can affect:
2a) Only potions, which are more limited in effect than elixirs.
2b) Only if your CL is at least equal to the CL of what you're allocating.
2c) Potions, or any elixir with CL < 5
I personally might go with allowing Alchemical Allocation to work automatically on potions or elixirs with CL equal to or lower than yours. Higher CL potions or extracts require a caster level check (d20 + caster level) against DC of 10 + Caster level of the item. If you fail, Alchemical Allocation is expended to no effect and you waste the action used to gargle the potion/elixir, but do not expend the potion/elixir. This means you have a chance of using it on more powerful effects but might waste time and extract slots (with 2nd level extracts being fairly valuable at low levels where over-reaching is most dramatic).
While I agree that the ability to make infinite use of this sort of item is one of the key unique class features of the Alchemist/Investigator...
Since when is a single second-level extract a key feature?
I still think that something is being left out or that I'm missing something.
Is this how it happened?
You shadow walk near the enemy base.
You somehow move by all of the enemies without being detected.
You secure the hostages and then shadow walk out?
Basically I am asking you to spell out the exact sequence of events which lead to the reaction by the GM.
The way that I see it you could have only skipped over...like random encounters from traveling or something.
1) Limit the character's ability to purchase expensive elixirs. The Elixir of Shadewalking costs 3,500gp. A village won't have that kind of item, and towns would only contain a handful of magic items of that power. The highest-value items in a settlement are unlikely to be elixirs because most people spend most of their wealth on durable items - you won't find a $10,000 bottle of wine in a town where most people don't own $10,000 cars.
Bought it from a wondrous item crafting player.
I still think that something is being left out or that I'm missing something.
Is this how it happened?
You shadow walk near the enemy base.
You somehow move by all of the enemies without being detected.
You secure the hostages and then shadow walk out?
Basically I am asking you to spell out the exact sequence of events which lead to the reaction by the GM.
The way that I see it you could have only skipped over...like random encounters from traveling or something.
No, we went to a place someone was held hostage, we freed the prisoner, we wanted to shadow walk with the prisoner far, far, away.
From what I gather, it was:
"We ran into a fight, and just teleported (effectively) away from it, as well as teleporting PAST a whole bunch of scripted encounters and ambushes.
Not a whole bunch, it was just one, also we found other means to get away anyways.
as well as: "Then later when we were in a Bad Guy's home and had distracted him, we rescued the hostage that the Bad Guy had taken. Instead of fighting our way back out of the Bad Guy's home (and past the Bad Guy himself) we just teleported (effectively) away with the hostage. I haven't mentioned how we got in, but presumably it involved sneaking, fast-talking, or similar shenanigans."
No sneaking, also there was an open window, the bad guy was supposed to chase us and fight us I guess?
And quite frankly, given how despicable Escort Quests are, I can't blame the PCs for spiriting that hostage away. I'd do it even if I planned on taking the stairs back down and stomping the Bad Guy's face.
lol well said.
Since when is a single second-level extract a key feature?
Since it tends to fill up every single 2nd level extract slot for so many Alchemists and is often regarded as their best spell for precisely this reason? They're alchemists, and this is the one spell that they uniquely get which is most inherently keyed to their class. It's every bit as iconic to their class as mutagens and bombs.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So basically you were saying that not only did you use shadowwalk to eliminate the distance to the hideout, you used it to circumvent the hideout itself rescue the fair maiden and escape, pretty much negating the entire adventure?
I'm with your GM on this one.
Only because the hideout was apparently set up so they could get in and get to the hostages, but were then expected to fight their way out.
Bet that doesn't happen again. :)
Indeed. If the GM designs an encounter with such an obvious and easily exploitable flaw, the PCs can't be blamed for using it.
Actually I don't see anything wrong with the tactic then. As a GM you should be able to deal with the items that you make available... I would have handled it premptively:
"You want to purchase an "elixer of shadwalking? ... ok let me look that up... we don't seem to have that available for direct purchase. You can requisition one but blah blah blah..."
Since he seems to feel like it's upsetting the balance of the game I would approach him and ask about switching it out for a different elixer or item of equivalent value.
|
|
Indeed. If the GM designs an encounter with such an obvious and easily exploitable flaw, the PCs can't be blamed for using it.Only because the hideout was apparently set up so they could get in and get to the hostages, but were then expected to fight their way out.
Bet that doesn't happen again. :)
There are plenty of flaws that are obvious in hindsight or to an outsider. Some of these flaws are much easier to exploit if the party has access to abilities like pseudoteleportation much earlier than expected. This is not to say that the PCs should be blamed, simply that if an unexpectedly powerful PC ability is making it hard for the GM to run a fun game, that ability should be moderated, hopefully through group consensus.
Since it tends to fill up every single 2nd level extract slot for so many Alchemists and is often regarded as their best spell for precisely this reason? ... It's every bit as iconic to their class as mutagens and bombs.
If it's good enough to not only be the best 2nd level extract, but good enough to fill every 2nd level extract slot, it needs to be nerfed. Single spells, unlike major class features, aren't supposed to be good enough to define a class.
They're alchemists, and this is the one spell that they uniquely get which is most inherently keyed to their class.
False. Alchemists, and only alchemists, get:
Affecting potions: Transmute Potion to Poison, Amplify Elixir, Alchemical Allocation
Affecting extracts: Universal Formula, Delayed Consumption
Affecting mutagens: Orchid's Drop, Mutagenic Touch
Affecting bombs: Bomber's Eye and the Targeted, Shadow, Lightning Lash, Viper, Languid, and Caging Bomb Admixtures.