The crux of my question is this: Amazing Initiative allows a free action spending of mythic power to gain a standard action. It specifically calls out that it can not be used for the casting of a spell. Extracts however are not cast and are technically not spells. Is is legal to use the extract for drinking an extract allowing up to six extracts to be used in one round (Amazing Initiative standard action, regular standard action, Swift action with Assured Drinker and all either combined extracts or Adamixture Vialed)???
They are not spells so they don't have that limitation. That at least gets you 3. I don't know what combined extracts or Adamixture Vialed is so I can't comment on those.
Sure, it works. It's Mythic, shenanigans are the norm.
Now, as a GM I'd probably either say no to Amazing Initiative working with extracts or be okay with the caster finding a... let's call it 'creative' solution to that issue. There are a few out there, generally involving Coupled Arcana shenanigans.
Really though it's probably easier for Mythic to just treat extracts as spells for everything. Otherwise Alchs lose out on so much-- Mythic spells, most obviously.
Anyone else want to weigh in? And does anyone else have a way to get more than two buffs on them in a round?
Sure, cohorts, allies and familiars + quickened spells, and you can do it without being mythic. Mythic stuff gets wonky.
Great idea. I was already thinking of taking tumor familiar next level. Touch injection and a combined extract make 8. 8 Buffs ah ah ah.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Quote:
An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion
So there you go. Anything that will allow you to drink more potions will allow you to use more extracts.
Not really, some feats and items do not apply to extracts unless specifically noted. For example, the sipping jacket, which is another swift action consume, only applies to potions.
Now, a GM may rule that an infusion would work too, but by RAW I don't think so.
The quote you're referring to just describes the action of drinking an extract. The actions are the same, that doesn't mean an extract is the same as a potion for all other situations.
RJGrady wrote: Quote:
An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion
So there you go. Anything that will allow you to drink more potions will allow you to use more extracts. Incorrect.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Jeff Merola wrote: RJGrady wrote: Quote:
An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion
So there you go. Anything that will allow you to drink more potions will allow you to use more extracts. Incorrect. I can't explain that. Unless it's somewhere cited how drinking an elixir is and is not like drinking a potion, this seems like an inconsistent ruling.
Possibly because Accelerated Drinker is overpowered for a feat with no prereqs.
_Ozy_ wrote: The actions are the same, that doesn't mean an extract is the same as a potion for all other situations. True, but we are literally only talking about the action used to drink an extract. This ruling seems to parse this as "You may drink a potion" rather than "You may drink a potion" but that doesn't really change the basic problem. If you may drink an extract as if you were drinking a potion, and you can drink a potion as a move action, you should be able to drink an extract as a move action.
If a feat allows you treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability), you would expect the feat to work with the duelist's precise strike ability, wouldn't you?
The question is not "Am I doing it wrong", it is "Will my GM notices yes/no" if yes then ask him, if no then just do it.
RJGrady wrote: Jeff Merola wrote: RJGrady wrote: Quote:
An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion
So there you go. Anything that will allow you to drink more potions will allow you to use more extracts. Incorrect. I can't explain that. Unless it's somewhere cited how drinking an elixir is and is not like drinking a potion, this seems like an inconsistent ruling.
Possibly because Accelerated Drinker is overpowered for a feat with no prereqs.
_Ozy_ wrote: The actions are the same, that doesn't mean an extract is the same as a potion for all other situations. True, but we are literally only talking about the action used to drink an extract. This ruling seems to parse this as "You may drink a potion" rather than "You may drink a potion" but that doesn't really change the basic problem. If you may drink an extract as if you were drinking a potion, and you can drink a potion as a move action, you should be able to drink an extract as a move action.
If a feat allows you treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability), you would expect the feat to work with the duelist's precise strike ability, wouldn't you? Only if extracts and potions were the same things. They aren't, so abilities that allow potions will not necessarily apply to extracts.
If the feat allowed you to treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon, like a rapier, for all feats, it still wouldn't qualify for weapon focus (rapier).
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
_Ozy_ wrote:
If the feat allowed you to treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon, like a rapier, for all feats, it still wouldn't qualify for weapon focus (rapier).
True, but not relevant.
Alchemy says an extract is "as if" drinking potion, which in this example, would be like an ability that allows a scimitar to be used "as if" it were a rapier. In which case, Weapon Focus (rapier) would seemingly work.
If drinking an extract were merely "similar to" drinking a potion, then you would just list all the ways it is similar. But if it is "as if" drinking a potion, then you are saying, "In the case of drinking an extract, do things as though a potion were being drunk."
The ruling on Accelerated Drinker doesn't really give much guidance on to what extent drinking an extract is like drinking a potion. It specifies a limitation on Accelerated Drinker, basically in response to an unintended consequence. There is nothing in the feat or the alchemist class itself that suggest to me this ruling is logically "correct." The FAQ (reasonably) suggests the designer's intent. But it's not an erratum. It could be reversed at a later point, for instance. It's a specific ruling on a specific feat.
However, re-reading the OP, I'm wondering if "Assured Drinker" is related to the specific feat in question.
What if you put two combined extracts in an Admixture Vial? Four extracts, one action.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote: What if you put two combined extracts in an Admixture Vial? Four extracts, one action. Combine Extracts doesn't let you combine things more than once, if memory serves, and the Vial is just the discovery in item form.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote: What if you put two combined extracts in an Admixture Vial? Four extracts, one action. Wouldn't it only be 3 if it worked? Combined extracts lets u 2 in 1 then the vial would take one of those 2 and let u combine that 1 with another 1 which makes 3?
It's not really clear. The vial is a bit different than the feat, it doesn't need a higher slot, can only be used once a day, and only works on extracts 3rd level and lower. Furthermore, the feat 'puts two formulae' into one extract, whereas the vial combines two extracts.
That said, the limits on recombination with the vial are as follows:
Quote: Extracts combined with an admixture vial cannot be combined again using this item or the combine extracts discovery. So it's not at all certain that you couldn't use the vial to combine extracts that had first been combined by the feat. That said, the 3rd level limitation would mean you could only combine 1st level formula that had been combined into a 3rd level extract.
Still, that would give you 4 1st level formula in one shot, probably not a good idea to allow even if RAW isn't clear on the subject.
Redneckdevil wrote: Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote: What if you put two combined extracts in an Admixture Vial? Four extracts, one action. Wouldn't it only be 3 if it worked? Combined extracts lets u 2 in 1 then the vial would take one of those 2 and let u combine that 1 with another 1 which makes 3? Combine Extract A and Extract B via Discovery (or feat? Whichever)
Combine Extract C and Extract D via Discovery
Combine Extract AB and Extract CD via item
Drink Extract ABCD
Four Extracts. You'd need a really permissive GM to pull that off though.
Yup, combine with a preserving flask for extra fun action.
A = B = C = D = cure light wounds
single potion 4d8 + 20 hps healing, not bad.
Speaking of a preserving flask, has anyone else caught on to the fact that a preserving flask and a boro bead mean a once a day extract that can be used forever.
? The boro bead can only be used to recreate an extract that has been brewed and consumed that same day, so the alchemist would have had to use a normal extract slot for that particular extract.
Goddity wrote: The question is not "Am I doing it wrong", it is "Will my GM notices yes/no" if yes then ask him, if no then just do it. Seems like a great way to create a huge argument halfway through a game, and/or potentially base your whole build on something the GM then proceeds to invalidate.
Always check things with your GM before you play. Always.
_Ozy_ wrote: The vial is a bit different than the feat, it doesn't need a higher slot _Ozy_ wrote: the feat 'puts two formulae' into one extract, whereas the vial combines two extracts. I don't think so. Because it says it specifically works like the Combine Extracts feat, it would still use a 3rd level slot. The feat is called "combine extracts" despite the fact that it is combing 2 formulas. The words are used interchangeably.
_Ozy_ wrote: So it's not at all certain that you couldn't use the vial to combine extracts that had first been combined by the feat. That said, the 3rd level limitation would mean you could only combine 1st level formula that had been combined into a 3rd level extract. Considering that the words tend to be used interchangeably, it would imply that that wouldn't work either, since a combined extract from admixture vial is not a formula, and admixture vial says it works like combine extracts which combine only formulas.
SuperUberGeek wrote: Speaking of a preserving flask, has anyone else caught on to the fact that a preserving flask and a boro bead mean a once a day extract that can be used forever. Why do you mention this? Boro beads and preserving flasks can be used forever individually as well, what's the point of mentioning them together?
Are you suggesting to use a dead ally/NPC/enemy's spells long after they're dead, or what? That's the only application I see. As was mentioned, by RAW it wouldn't work.
By "forever" you didn't mean "unlimited per day", did you? I don't see how you could interpret the mechanics to get that effect.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Joesi wrote: _Ozy_ wrote: The vial is a bit different than the feat, it doesn't need a higher slot _Ozy_ wrote: the feat 'puts two formulae' into one extract, whereas the vial combines two extracts. I don't think so. Because it says it specifically works like the Combine Extracts feat, it would still use a 3rd level slot. The feat is called "combine extracts" despite the fact that it is combing 2 formulas. The words are used interchangeably. No, the words are not used interchangeably, because different things are happening. With the feat, you are combining two memorized formula into one extract that takes a higher slot.
With the vial, you already have the extracts, you've already spent the two slots. When the extracts are mixed together, it doesn't take up a 'higher slot', you've already spent the slots on the original extracts and you don't need to spend another one.
Quote: _Ozy_ wrote: So it's not at all certain that you couldn't use the vial to combine extracts that had first been combined by the feat. That said, the 3rd level limitation would mean you could only combine 1st level formula that had been combined into a 3rd level extract. Considering that the words tend to be used interchangeably, it would imply that that wouldn't work either, since a combined extract from admixture vial is not a formula, and admixture vial says it works like combine extracts which combine only formulas.
Nope, the admixture vial specifically combines existing extracts, not formula. A formula is the 'spell' that is turned into an extract by spending an extract slot. The extract is the final result, a finished product that can be handed off to someone else (with the infusion discovery), drunk for an effect, or combined with an admixture vial.
The feat 'Combine Extracts' works on formula, not extracts, the admixture vial works on extracts, not formula. Two different things.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
