Alchemist Transcription


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 230 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

8 people marked this as a favorite.

I decided to be insane today and transcribe basically everything visible for the alchemist from the UK Games Expo video. Some of it was literally illegible - Elastic Mutagen being the big one that couldn't be referenced elsewhere - but I filled in what could be read for most of it.

Here it is.

Mega Bomb remains completely unreadable.


Alchemist seems fun, full of ways to inflict conditions, I can see Wizard being one popular multiclass for them.

Looking at the class features the light armor increase to expert increases unarmored defense as well so Champion armor proficiency will cost likely affect every armor below heavy too.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the little touches I like is that chirurgeon alchemists have to be trained in medicine before they can use their alchemical crafting skills for medical checks. You have to have at least a basic overview of medicine before you start messing around with the advanced stuff.


Ventnor wrote:
One of the little touches I like is that chirurgeon alchemists have to be trained in medicine before they can use their alchemical crafting skills for medical checks. You have to have at least a basic overview of medicine before you start messing around with the advanced stuff.

That's actually the line that makes me doubtful.

As it is, you still need to be Expert in Medicine to do Expert Treat Wounds. Makes it odd to see the benefit, unless you're not your party's primary healer?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Does anyone remember what the final "batch" size for crafting is? I feel like it might have been mentioned but I can't remember where.

The playtest used half batches for advanced alchemy, so you got 2 items for each reagent you spent. It would be cool if that increased. Edit: Yeah, it is still 4 per batch. Nice!

Double edit: Wait, the bomber 5th level field discovery seems to contradict this. "When creating bombs during daily preparations, you can spend one batch of reagents to create any three bombs instead of two of the same bomb." Actually all 3 research fields say something to this effect. What gives?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Up to four in the basic Crafting rules. We saw most of the Craft skill in the PaizoCon slides, and a user transcribed that one here.


Alchemical Weapon Expertise (7th level): Your proficiency with light weapons and alchemical bombs increases to expert.

What is a light weapon? Was that a thing in the playtest? Any chance this was actually Simple Weapons?

Starting to feel concerned here. Seems to be a lot of contradictions arising, some of which was flagged already in the playtest. I'm hoping that these error were in the transcriptions somehow rather than the actual book.


Light weapons don’t exist in the playtest that I can see. It is in D& D 5th ed though :P

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I assumed light weapons was meant to be simple weapons, but as OP said a lot of the slides were nearly illegible / very hard to read


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll fix it to be simple weapons. Someone mentioned it earlier and I never got around to fixing it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can't confirm regarding advanced alchemy. The spot where it'd be visible is specifically on the section of the curve facing away from the camera. The text that can be guaranteed confirmation is: "Your advanced alchemy level is equal to your...each batch of infused reagents you spend...alchemical item of your advanced alchemy...that's in your formula book, and make a...that item."

It is theoretically possible it's a half batch, but that part is partially unreadable. From spacing and what could be read, I assumed "a batch of" was the correct text.

I am 100% sure on the 5th-level Field Discovery though.


Double Brew seems really tricky to use. Both items must be used on the same turn, instantly after spending 1 action on Double Brew.

Edit: There's a TRIPLE Quick Alchemy? How the hell do you use that!?

Edit2: I guess if you grabbed the Enduring Alchemy feat, which is optional, you can then actually use Alacrity. This is really weird.


ChibiNyan wrote:

Double Brew seems really tricky to use. Both items must be used on the same turn, instantly after spending 1 action on Double Brew.

Edit: There's a TRIPLE Quick Alchemy? How the hell do you use that!?

Edit2: I guess if you grabbed the Enduring Alchemy feat, which is optional, you can then actually use Alacrity. This is really weird.

It would work if not you uses the items, I guess? Make three bombs, mutagens or silversheens at the start of a fight, use one and let 2 other party members grab and use the other 2. Might be useful when facing an enemy with a known weakness.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have to admit, I' not a big fan of how the Alchemist class feats are distributed. Almost every level consists of "Improvement to bombs, improvement to elixirs, improvement to mutagen" with a generic one as 4th every now and then.

The end result is that most alchemist of any given path are gonna have the exact same build. They can only pick 1 path at the start and from there on there is 1 feat per 2 levels tailored to them. You gotta multiclass to actually get more than 1 relevant option most of the time.

I realize this is a result of space considerations, but it is what happens when you have too many paths: Can't fit variety for all of them.

Dataphiles

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChibiNyan wrote:
I realize this is a result of space considerations, but it is what happens when you have too many paths: Can't fit variety for all of them.

Which is probably why the poisoner path went away.

Also, you can take things from multiple paths. You have access to all the things, it's just a matter of how much you specialize in any given thing.


ChibiNyan wrote:

I have to admit, I' not a big fan of how the Alchemist class feats are distributed. Almost every level consists of "Improvement to bombs, improvement to elixirs, improvement to mutagen" with a generic one as 4th every now and then.

The end result is that most alchemist of any given path are gonna have the exact same build. They can only pick 1 path at the start and from there on there is 1 feat per 2 levels tailored to them. You gotta multiclass to actually get more than 1 relevant option most of the time.

I realize this is a result of space considerations, but it is what happens when you have too many paths: Can't fit variety for all of them.

This is an understandable point, but from what I saw in my quick read nothing stops you from taking the feats for other paths. So if you aren't set on everything for your path you can easily dabble. It's kinda like Druids and how you can take feats for any order but your order feats get a boost, though here off-path Alchemist feats have the same effect regardless of path. It's just that on-path Alchemists have a couple extra things that synergize with their path feats.

Though it sounds like you're also saying more feats for each path would be nice so you have more choices if you want to spend every feat on your path, which I understand, though I expect that's only a temporary problem as more is surely to be published.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have a little concern here myself as the Alchemist... Doesn't seem to get Master in simple weapons and bombs. They do get Master in armor though. Seems weird. Especially since they get E weapons at 7, E armor at 13, then M armor at 19. There's just a conspicuous lack of following up on the weapon boost. Any chance that got missed?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Edge93 wrote:
I have a little concern here myself as the Alchemist... Doesn't seem to get Master in simple weapons and bombs. They do get Master in armor though. Seems weird. Especially since they get E weapons at 7, E armor at 13, then M armor at 19. There's just a conspicuous lack of following up on the weapon boost. Any chance that got missed?

Speaking of this... Do bombs target full AC? They are the Alch's bread and butter attack but they aren't expected to have 18DEX and their proficiency is nothing special. Bombs are a pretty limited resource too.... How reliably are they landing?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think that they target full AC but they always cause the splash damage even on a miss.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Card Game, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
ChibiNyan wrote:
Speaking of this... Do bombs target full AC? They are the Alch's bread and butter attack but they aren't expected to have 18DEX and their proficiency is nothing special. Bombs are a pretty limited resource too.... How reliably are they landing?

Touch AC isn't a thing anymore, so it's the only AC *to* target. Spellcasters now get to use their casting stat to make spell attacks, so they're not too worse off from that change, though.


Wonder how well Mutagenist will do with going into monk dedication, since should be able to take advantage of your mutagens.


Edge93 wrote:
I have a little concern here myself as the Alchemist... Doesn't seem to get Master in simple weapons and bombs. They do get Master in armor though. Seems weird. Especially since they get E weapons at 7, E armor at 13, then M armor at 19. There's just a conspicuous lack of following up on the weapon boost. Any chance that got missed?

I'm pretty unclear on the attack proficiency distribution. What is an "expected" attack proficiency as you go up in levels?

Of course, you're only down 4 if you're an Expert in a party with a Legend. And I guess that isn't that bad if we're comparing to PF1 with its 3/4 v. full-BAB.

But I don't have a good enough sense of PF2 math to know whether we should be concerned that Alchemist only gets up to Master, or if it actually works out fine.

Folks who have paid more attention to the math than I have probably have a better sense of it here.


Edge93 wrote:
I have a little concern here myself as the Alchemist... Doesn't seem to get Master in simple weapons and bombs. They do get Master in armor though. Seems weird. Especially since they get E weapons at 7, E armor at 13, then M armor at 19. There's just a conspicuous lack of following up on the weapon boost. Any chance that got missed?

I checked the class advancement chart to confirm. That is correct.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
First World Bard wrote:
ChibiNyan wrote:
Speaking of this... Do bombs target full AC? They are the Alch's bread and butter attack but they aren't expected to have 18DEX and their proficiency is nothing special. Bombs are a pretty limited resource too.... How reliably are they landing?
Touch AC isn't a thing anymore, so it's the only AC *to* target. Spellcasters now get to use their casting stat to make spell attacks, so they're not too worse off from that change, though.

You can target saves, skills and all sorts of stuff in this edition. Anything that you can add proficiency to is able to compete vs each other reasonably fairly.

For sure some stuff that affects "Passive Fortitude" has been shown.


tqomins wrote:
Edge93 wrote:
I have a little concern here myself as the Alchemist... Doesn't seem to get Master in simple weapons and bombs. They do get Master in armor though. Seems weird. Especially since they get E weapons at 7, E armor at 13, then M armor at 19. There's just a conspicuous lack of following up on the weapon boost. Any chance that got missed?

I'm pretty unclear on the attack proficiency distribution. What is an "expected" attack proficiency as you go up in levels?

Of course, you're only down 4 if you're an Expert in a party with a Legend. And I guess that isn't that bad if we're comparing to PF1 with its 3/4 v. full-BAB.

But I don't have a good enough sense of PF2 math to know whether we should be concerned that Alchemist only gets up to Master, or if it actually works out fine.

Folks who have paid more attention to the math than I have probably have a better sense of it here.

I guess it's more a concern for the attack v defense standard. If it's like the PT where everything essentially has a mirror with accuracy vs defense (both add level, one is 1d20 where the other is 10, one is Str/Dex and the other is armor+Dex, both add proficiency), and their was some interplay between things where armor was higher than attack mod early on but then attack proficiency increases faster than defense proficiency than most and TL;DR looking at this if this is normal (because I could've sworn it has been confirmed that Rogues get Legendary in light armor) then the to-hit on PC vs. PC at equal level would be low at later levels (and this is from someone who thinks that 50% hit rate at equal level is appropriate if attacking someone equally invested in defense as you are in offense) since defense proficiency is higher than attack proficiency and Dex+Armor for defense is likely slightly above Str/Dex for attack (and both add level and item bonus so that cancels), UNLESS there's something we are missing which of course is ENTIRELY possible and why this is only a vague concern.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Powerful Alchemy/Powerful Poisons still being a thing is disappointing. Why are Alchemists the only class that has to spend a feat to use their Class DC for their primary class feature? :/


Mutagenists probably have the most build versatility as the only mutagen abilities which do not care which mutagens you use are : Revivifying Mutagen, Persistent Mutagen (which requires extend elixir), and Prefect Mutagen. You can grab all of the mutagen effects, but I think you only need two to make full effect of your mutagenist subclass so it is just an option. You should be able to make a mutagenist that is fairly good at something else.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
MaxAstro wrote:
Powerful Alchemy/Powerful Poisons still being a thing is disappointing. Why are Alchemists the only class that has to spend a feat to use their Class DC for their primary class feature? :/

If I had to guess, it’s offsetting being the equivalent of a “caster” that can spend all their “slots” on top-level “spells”. In exchange for being able to get everything at max level, the lower level stuff doesn’t scale for free to cut the versatility back down a bit. It still strikes me as odd.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

There are no feats to add to or advance the Alchemical Familiar? That makes the familair pretty weak no?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Looking at the list of Alchemical Items in the playtest this only affects poisons and Thunderstone, so most alchemists will not care about the "Powerful" feat anyway.

I think that this is there more for Multiclass balance


Nicolas Paradise wrote:
There are no feats to add to or advance the Alchemical Familiar? That makes the familair pretty weak no?

Well, in the playtest there was only one feat to improve familair's anyway. And in the familiar rules that were previewed, there were actually a LOT of new options you could tack onto your familiar that were alchemist specific.


MaxAstro wrote:
Powerful Alchemy/Powerful Poisons still being a thing is disappointing. Why are Alchemists the only class that has to spend a feat to use their Class DC for their primary class feature? :/

Yeah, I'm still not a fan of that one. You're spending the same resource cost to create with Quick/Advanced Alchemy whether it's a level 1 or level 20 item, and higher level items are naturally stronger, so it seems like that should be enough incentive to use higher level items.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As an aside, I like how it says your Advanced Alchemy level is equal to your level and then the feats key off of that. It keeps the language clearer for Multiclass since it will probably say "your advanced Alchemy level is equal to x" or equal to your level/2 or something like that, and it avoids any potential confusion on how your level interacts with feats and abilities.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Edge93 wrote:
As an aside, I like how it says your Advanced Alchemy level is equal to your level and then the feats key off of that. It keeps the language clearer for Multiclass since it will probably say "your advanced Alchemy level is equal to x" or equal to your level/2 or something like that, and it avoids any potential confusion on how your level interacts with feats and abilities.

ALCHEMIST DEDICATION (Feat 2)

Your advanced alchemy level is 1 and doesn't increase on its own.

EXPERT ALCHEMY (Feat 6)
Your advanced alchemy level increases to 3. At 10th level, it increases to 5.

MASTER ALCHEMY (Feat 12)
Your advanced alchemy level increases to 7. For every level you gain beyond 12th, your advanced alchemy level increases by 1.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My primary hope for alchemical familiar is that you can (or at least can eventually build into) crafting a homunculus. Can you truly be an alchemist without bringing profane life into the world for science. (The answer is probably yes, but still)

Though, I would like to see where you found the familiar rules preview, that seems interesting and I think I missed it.


Wait...there were alchemist specific familiar options?


https://imgur.com/a/ZOD1t56

Near the back of these images, yes.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:

https://imgur.com/a/ZOD1t56

Near the back of these images, yes.

There seem to only be 2 options for the alchemist. And unlike the wizard in the playtest they have no feats to increase the number of familiar features they get. Unless that has changed and how many features they get scales with level. I mean I am sure in the future there may be a class archetype or new feats that can allow stuff like a 1e promethean alchemist. Heres hoping an actual homunculus is a option for creation from the bestiry or a magic item.


Guessing by two you mean manual dexterity and lab assistance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well there's also the one that gives you an extra reagent. Lots was the wrong word to use, I'll admit, but between that and the standard options like giving it language the alchemist doesn't feel lacking in abilities to give to the familiar. And having less Master abilities to pick from does severely reduce the need to expand the number you can pick. Shrug city P.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nicolas Paradise wrote:
And unlike the wizard in the playtest they have no feats to increase the number of familiar features they get.

They can always multiclass into wizard and poach a wizards feats for familiars.


I just read part of the transcription

Quote:
Perpetual Infusions (7th level): You can use Quick Alchemy to create specific alchemical items for free. This depends on your research field, and you must have the formulas in your formula book.

Since quick alchemy already omits the monetary costs...does that mean you always can do those without even spending a batch or do I misunderstand something here?


Seisho wrote:

I just read part of the transcription

Quote:
Perpetual Infusions (7th level): You can use Quick Alchemy to create specific alchemical items for free. This depends on your research field, and you must have the formulas in your formula book.
Since quick alchemy already omits the monetary costs...does that mean you always can do those without even spending a batch or do I misunderstand something here?

Yes. I'll clarify that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

OH! That's why it's "perpetual". Because you can perpetually create those items. That makes sense! The name was confusing me before... Wow, that actually makes that feat really good.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:
OH! That's why it's "perpetual". Because you can perpetually create those items. That makes sense! The name was confusing me before... Wow, that actually makes that feat really good.

Yeah, it's HECKIN for bomb spam, since the splash damage on miss isn't reduced by the bomb being weaker, and it gives you infinite use of the Debilitating Bomb debuff machine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:
OH! That's why it's "perpetual". Because you can perpetually create those items. That makes sense! The name was confusing me before... Wow, that actually makes that feat really good.

It's class feature, so no cost, so Bomber and Mutagenist always have alchemy stuff to use in battle.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Kyrone wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
OH! That's why it's "perpetual". Because you can perpetually create those items. That makes sense! The name was confusing me before... Wow, that actually makes that feat really good.
It's class feature, so no cost, so Bomber and Mutagenist always have alchemy stuff to use in battle.

Which interestingly makes me want to go Bomber or Mutagenist if I'm going healer Alch. Chi means I spent all my reagents on making Elixers and then have a near useless Perpetual Infusion. Bomber I can spent all my reagents on Elixers and then still have half decent alchemy bombs with Perpetual.


Malk_Content wrote:
Kyrone wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
OH! That's why it's "perpetual". Because you can perpetually create those items. That makes sense! The name was confusing me before... Wow, that actually makes that feat really good.
It's class feature, so no cost, so Bomber and Mutagenist always have alchemy stuff to use in battle.
Which interestingly makes me want to go Bomber or Mutagenist if I'm going healer Alch. Chi means I spent all my reagents on making Elixers and then have a near useless Perpetual Infusion. Bomber I can spent all my reagents on Elixers and then still have half decent alchemy bombs with Perpetual.

This big advantage is that if your allies suffer from the applicable condition a healer alchemist can always give them at least a little something to clear up the condition, not as useful as bomb span or always an mutagen at hand, but no doubt (depending on the gm) still a nice extra


4 people marked this as a favorite.

really dissapointed from this, it's almost as if they ignored most of the concerns about Alchemist class being written as an afterthought.

I mean, there's still a class feature (i.e. ALL alchemists get it) that requires you to have grown two extra arms somehow (create 3 items with 1 hand free... i like to see how you're holding them)

There's still class features that simply don't work unless you pick up specific high level feats (sure, create 2/3 items at once, but they spoil before you can use them, genious indeed)

The language for the Bulk is actually worse, since it adds a (l) bulk ON TOP of all the bulk your actual complete alchemical items costs, meaning we still require from alchemists hulk levels of strength just to carry around their daily spells.

The majority of the feats read as stuff that other classes get for free baseline or just stuff that you HAVE to pick "just to make the class work" instead of being cool extra things you can do.

Unless there's a MASSIVE remake on alchemical items, and i mean MASSIVE, Alchemist just reads "bad" at this point.

Probably won't be buying till i actually playtest the class.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I keep looking this over and hoping something's wrong or missing from this transcription. As it stands, Alchemists are gonna be hurting on resources. I was hoping they'd at least get some sort of focus ability balance out their lack of anything like cantrips. I'm hoping they errata Advanced Alchemy creating half batches and just up it to a whole batch so an Alchemist can at least use their creations in battle all day.

Edit: Being able to make 4 items for every infused reagent may seem like a lot but if the Alchemist's thing is creating items to hand out then it would be nice to be able to hand out your focus items and still be able to function in your role without resorting to your weapons.

Also the specificity in the class features is worrying me too. I wish they'd use something like 'lesser bomb' 'lesser curative' and 'lesser mutagen' while adding those tags to the corresponding items to ensure future expansion of alchemical items. As it stands, you're only really going to have a few items in the Alchemist's arsenal.

And I'm really hoping the Chirugeon can toss healing bombs or gets a syringe gun or something to provide ranged curing.

1 to 50 of 230 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Alchemist Transcription All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.