I'm unhappy about changes to Beastial mutagen / alchemist and wish to discuss this.


Rules Discussion

101 to 130 of 130 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
They both work.

Sure just not together: one lets you use quick alchemy without using reagents and one lets you spend an extra reagent when you spend 1 reagent... spending 0 reagents means you have no way to activate "instead of spending one batch of infused reagents": you bolded the wrong section of Double Brew: quick alchemy isn't the important part, the spending one batch is.


Squiggit wrote:

I'm not sure where the oddness is. Double Brew specifically says that if you spend one batch, you can instead spend two batches to make two items.

If you're using perpetual infusions you aren't using your infused reagents. So you can't go from spending one reagent to spending two.

More than that, the specific "instead of spending one batch" language seems written expressly to disable double crafting of perpetual infusions.

Quick Alchemy has the cost of 1 batch of regents to even use the ability. Infused also doesn’t say it reduces the cost to zero. By that logic you can’t even use quick alchemy on perpetual infusion to begin with, but the ability says you can. Also double brew specifically alters quick alchemy, so if you can quick alchemy perpetual infusion then you can double brew it. Simple :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
Infused also doesn’t say it reduces the cost to zero. By that logic you can’t even use quick alchemy on perpetual infusion to begin with, but the ability says you can.

I'm sorry I'm legitimately trying to understand where you're coming from but literally nothing in these two sentences makes any sense when looking at the rules as I'm reading them.

"using Quick Alchemy without spending a batch of infused reagents" is an exact quote from the rules of perpetual infusions and yet your argument seems to be that... it doesn't actually do any of that?


Squiggit wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
Infused also doesn’t say it reduces the cost to zero. By that logic you can’t even use quick alchemy on perpetual infusion to begin with, but the ability says you can.

I'm sorry I'm legitimately trying to understand where you're coming from but literally nothing in these two sentences makes any sense when looking at the rules as I'm reading them.

"using Quick Alchemy without spending a batch of infused reagents" is an exact quote from the rules of perpetual infusions and yet your argument seems to be that... it doesn't actually do any of that?

That’s exactly my point. If you can’t use perpetual infusion with double brew cause ‘it cost zero’, which both you and I have pointed out it specifically does not say, then by RAW you can’t use it with quick alchemy since QA ‘cost 1 infused regent’.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:


That’s exactly my point. If you can’t use perpetual infusion with double brew cause ‘it cost zero’, which both you and I have pointed out it specifically does not say, then by RAW you can’t use it with quick alchemy since QA ‘cost 1 infused regent’.

That doesn't follow at all. Like, even a little bit... plus it's kind of obnoxious to try to put an argument in someone else's mouth.


Squiggit wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:


That’s exactly my point. If you can’t use perpetual infusion with double brew cause ‘it cost zero’, which both you and I have pointed out it specifically does not say, then by RAW you can’t use it with quick alchemy since QA ‘cost 1 infused regent’.
That doesn't follow at all. Like, even a little bit... plus it's kind of obnoxious to try to put an argument in someone else's mouth.

I’m with you there, but that’s how you guys are saying it works.


My apologies if my explanations have sounded like jargon; it’s somewhat of a bad habit.

Quick Alchemy costs one Infused Regent to use.

QUICK ALCHEMY [one-action]
-Cost 1 batch of infused reagents

Double Brew alters how Quick Alchemy works. The line that people have been quoting out of context, ‘When using the Quick Alchemy action, instead of spending one batch of infused reagents to create a single item, you can spend up to two batches...’, is changing the cost for Quick Alchemy. Making it look like so:

QUICK ALCHEMY [one-action]
-Cost Up to two batches of infused reagents

It was never a line that said the item has to need the use of infused regents.

Lastly, Perpetual Infusion is the exception to this rule, cause it states, ‘You gain the ability to create two 1st-level alchemical items using Quick Alchemy without spending a batch of infused reagents.’

You all are free to not agree with me, but this is how it works. There is no contradiction in the wording or how it plays out. The best way to remember it is, ‘if you can Quick Alchemy it, you can Double Brew it’.

As a final note, i’m done discussing this. I have been adamant more for others that read this, cause the rule actually works. I’ve actually been wanting to talk about something i noticed with Bestial Mutagen, but i’ll create a seperate post for that. My apologies if i ever came off as childish or antagonistic. Feel free to respond; i just don’t care to sway people that won’t be swayed. :)


Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
It was never a line that said the item has to need the use of infused regents.

You mean other than "instead of spending one batch of infused reagents to create a single item, you can spend up to two batches". It LITERALLY says you spend 2 instead of 1. The ability gives NO other options for numbers.

Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
You all are free to not agree with me

Good, so I'll say the same.


graystone wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
It was never a line that said the item has to need the use of infused regents.
You mean other than "instead of spending one batch of infused reagents to create a single item, you can spend up to two batches". It LITERALLY says you spend 2 instead of 1. The ability gives NO other options for numbers.

I’ve already said that alters the text for Quick Alchemy, which as you say says to spend regents. Perpetual Infusion says you don’t when it comes to Quick Alchemy. Thus the exception to the rule. I haven’t ignored that bit, but it looks like you did when i addressed it.


Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
graystone wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
It was never a line that said the item has to need the use of infused regents.
You mean other than "instead of spending one batch of infused reagents to create a single item, you can spend up to two batches". It LITERALLY says you spend 2 instead of 1. The ability gives NO other options for numbers.
I’ve already said that alters the text for Quick Alchemy, which as you say says to spend regents. Perpetual Infusion says you don’t when it comes to Quick Alchemy. Thus the exception to the rule. I haven’t ignored that bit, but it looks like you did when i addressed it.

I didn't ignore you, it's just that what you said made no sense. The text DOESN'T alter the text for Double Brew in the least.

The fact that some items can be made with no reagents has no impact on an ability that allows you to spend an extra reagent when you spend one: NOTHING in Perpetual Infusion allows the item made with 0 reagents to count as spending a reagent for Double Brew. Altering quick alchemy doesn't impact the Double Brew text requirements. Doubling 0 is still 0 and nothing you say is going to convince me that it's somehow 2...


graystone wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
graystone wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
It was never a line that said the item has to need the use of infused regents.
You mean other than "instead of spending one batch of infused reagents to create a single item, you can spend up to two batches". It LITERALLY says you spend 2 instead of 1. The ability gives NO other options for numbers.
I’ve already said that alters the text for Quick Alchemy, which as you say says to spend regents. Perpetual Infusion says you don’t when it comes to Quick Alchemy. Thus the exception to the rule. I haven’t ignored that bit, but it looks like you did when i addressed it.

I didn't ignore you, it's just that what you said made no sense. The text DOESN'T alter the text for Double Brew in the least.

The fact that some items can be made with no reagents has no impact on an ability that allows you to spend an extra reagent when you spend one: NOTHING in Perpetual Infusion allows the item made with 0 reagents to count as spending a reagent for Double Brew. Altering quick alchemy doesn't impact the Double Brew text requirements. Doubling 0 is still 0 and nothing you say is going to convince me that it's somehow 2...

No, you’re right. Quick Alchemy is the one being altered in the text of it’s cost. Double Brew is a part of Quick Alchemy. Perpetual Infution allows you to use Quick Alchemy for no cost where one would usually be required.

Double Brew page 75 wrote:
When using the Quick Alchemy action, instead of spending one batch of infused reagents to create a single item, you can spend up to two batches of infused reagents to make up to two alchemical items as described in that action.

It even references that it works the same way as Quick Alchemy, and that if it works for Quick Alchemy it works for Double Brew. This is why the wording says up to two batches. It allows for less than two when there is no other way to have less than two unless one or more cost nothing.

EDIT: Doubling Brew doesn’t ask the player to double the cost of regents. Matter of fact, it doesn’t even say ‘spend an additional regent.’ It just says you can spend up to two regents using one Quick Alchemy action. That last one i find interesting.


Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
It even references that it works the same way as Quick Alchemy, and that if it works for Quick Alchemy it works for Double Brew.

Sure it works for both, just not at the same time.

Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
This is why the wording says up to two batches.

No, it's just telling you that you have the option of spending one reagent to make one item or two reagents to make 2 items: Perpetual Infusion adds a new option, spend 0 reagents for 1 item but it doesn't interact with quick alchemy because of the wording "instead of spending one batch of infused reagents to create a single item". If this phrase is meaningless it's just there to take up more space.

As to "up to two batches" it's just to match up to "spend up to two batches of infused reagents": It's basically saying 'you can spend a reagent to make an item or spend 2 reagents for 2 items. IMO, it's not there for the specific reason of allowing Perpetual Infusion to work with Quick Alchemy.

Honestly, I don't see what you could show/say that'd get me to see things your way: it seems pretty clear cut that don't work together.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wish double batched just said "double the cost." Would make life a lot easier. Would also future proof special alchemical items/feats that give items, that cost more than one batch.
(doens't exist yet. but taht would be neat design space to quick alchemy multiple reagents for a powered up version)

Paizo Employee Customer Service & Community Manager

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I have updated the thread title from *Is it me or they really did nerf Beastial mutagen/alchemist to oblivion and beyond?* to *I'm unhappy about changes to Beastial mutagen / alchemist and wish to discuss this.*

As you post your thoughts and opinions on paizo.com, please keep in mind that paizo.com isn't a forum where anonymous comments are thrown out into the void or are kept between a small social circle. The creators, authors, artists, developers, editors, and operations staff are frequently on our paizo.com forums as both participants in conversations and readers. Paizo and many other tabletop RPG companies are, from my perspective, very unique businesses in that there is substantial and meaningful opportunities for customers and fans to interact directly with the people involved in pretty much every aspect of production and operations. Calling products, storylines, etc, trash or garbage does not help foster an environment where this can occur. It doesn't create a welcoming space for creators to engage and it doesn't help with productive discussion. Critique is fine, insults are not.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I must agree with the consensus here, you cannot use Double Brew and Perpetual Infusions together RAW. It would be better if you could, but we have zero evidence that's even RAI.

shroudb wrote:
yes, obviously with feats.

My point wasn't mostly the Feats, it was that the vast majority of that combo only came online at 10th level.

shroudb wrote:
The "dps comparisson" that pulled Ranger ahead was without any feats at all.

Mine wasn't. It assumed Twin Takedown/Hunted Shot.

shroudb wrote:
My point was that someone who wanted to make a support ranger has better utility AND better damage than an alchemist.

I disagree.

shroudb wrote:
They are better in scouting, they can give +1 to all party members in both attack and saves for 1 round vs each opponent (vs +1 to some but for more than 1 round), they can give + to ally initiative, they are way ahead in monstr idendification, and etc.

It depends what you mean by scouting. And yes, they can provide a buff for one round of combat against one specific foe. That's actually a pretty limited buff. It's certainly good, but it's also 3 of your first 6 Feats to get going...while an Alchemist requires zero Feats of investment to be good at buffing.

But more importantly, combat buffing is not utility, and that's a pure combat buff.

shroudb wrote:
alternative they could have an Animal companion that also helps by adding additional bodies, hp in the the group, flanks, and etc while also being a damage increase.

And again, this is a combat buff, rather than the utility I've been talking about. Rangers have better DPR than Alchemists, I agree. That's not what I'm talking about.

shroudb wrote:
And they still have Edge+ a few combat feats to pull ahead in damage even with all the above.

And still we're on combat.

shroudb wrote:
Now look at alchemist feats that are mostly feats taxes just to make his ability even work (before level 12, after level 12 he actually gets some decent things, but playing 70%+ of your career with trash options is terrible)

Your Ranger 'buff combo' basically doesn't work until 10th level (it will very rarely kick in on a crit prior to that), but 12th is too high to count? Really?

I do agree that non-bomber Feats for low level Alchemists are pretty lacking, but there's always multiclassing and there will almost certainly be more Class Feats published as well. My issue, to be clear, is not that I think Alchemists are perfect. They are not, and I'm not super pleased with some of their limitations, but they're a lot better than you make them out to be.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
I must agree with the consensus here, you cannot use Double Brew and Perpetual Infusions together RAW. It would be better if you could, but we have zero evidence that's even RAI.

Then that means Perpetual Infusion can never be used. Double Brew isn’t a seperate ability like people have been treating it; it alters how Quick Alchemy works from that level on. If the understanding is it can not work with Double Brew then it can not work with Quick Alchemy. Where as Double Brew specifically says it works like Quick Alchemy which Perpetual Infusions says it can use freely.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
I must agree with the consensus here, you cannot use Double Brew and Perpetual Infusions together RAW. It would be better if you could, but we have zero evidence that's even RAI.
Then that means Perpetual Infusion can never be used. Double Brew isn’t a seperate ability like people have been treating it; it alters how Quick Alchemy works from that level on. If the understanding is it can not work with Double Brew then it can not work with Quick Alchemy. Where as Double Brew specifically says it works like Quick Alchemy which Perpetual Infusions says it can use freely.

give it a rest, you're the only one who believes that it can be used.

the wording is straightforward and simple:

you have 2 abilities both altering the same core ability in some way. That doesn't mean you can combine them.

Base ability is Spend one, get one.
1st ability is "you no longer spend one for x and y"
2nd ability is" instead of spending one, you may spend up to two to make up to two"

there's zero ways those two combine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A actually think Pumpkinhead is right, but this is really something that we need a developer to chime in on. I greatly look forward to PF2e's FAQ thread.


shroudb wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
I must agree with the consensus here, you cannot use Double Brew and Perpetual Infusions together RAW. It would be better if you could, but we have zero evidence that's even RAI.
Then that means Perpetual Infusion can never be used. Double Brew isn’t a seperate ability like people have been treating it; it alters how Quick Alchemy works from that level on. If the understanding is it can not work with Double Brew then it can not work with Quick Alchemy. Where as Double Brew specifically says it works like Quick Alchemy which Perpetual Infusions says it can use freely.

give it a rest, you're the only one who believes that it can be used.

the wording is straightforward and simple:

you have 2 abilities both altering the same core ability in some way. That doesn't mean you can combine them.

Base ability is Spend one, get one.
1st ability is "you no longer spend one for x and y"
2nd ability is" instead of spending one, you may spend up to two to make up to two"

there's zero ways those two combine.

I’ve given up on trying to convince people; i really have. I’ll still point out the inconsistency when i see it though.

I understand where you’re coming from with your explanation, i have since the beginning. They don’t both alter Quick Alchemy in the same way; matter of fact, Perpetual Infusion only alters the Formula you choose, not Quick Alchemy; and they don’t contradict one another.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

FWIW I too agree that RAI is likely both working together.

Current RAW does not support it alas.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Back on topic:

There was something i noticed when looking over Bestial Mutagen and Mutagenist in general. There’s a LOT of overlap with hand wraps and BM in terms of item bonus. I think someone pointed out that you could get basic hand wraps and just upgrade the Striking Rune; but that means if you want to use other property runes with a bestial mutagenist you’re sinking it more money with less benefit than other classes.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If there’s one thing I can agree with in this thread, it’s that I wish Mutagenist got a better feature for level 1. Yes, being able to become expert in unarmed at level 7 is good, but it does basically nothing until then (the rules don’t even spell out mutagens can’t be used by someone they aren’t made for), and even when it comes online, it feels like it is just playing catch-up for the Alchemist not being expert in unarmed as part of their class.

Paizo Employee Customer Service Representative

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Removed some posts and the replies to them. The bickering needs to stop. Likewise personal attacks are never acceptable on our forums. This thread is getting close to needing to be closed. When you write a post, step away to cool down and reread it before you post it. If you can't write it in a way that isn't aggressive to other posters you probably need to step away from the thread for a while.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

After having just made my first alchemist character and really getting to study that section of the rules, I see absolutely nothing preventing Double Brew and Perpetual Infusions from working together, simultaneously.

I disagree with the notion that you MUST use Double Brew though. Its text clearly says "can," as in optional.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alchemist, particularly Mutagenist, is trash in 2e. That seems to be the consensus anyway. The issue is that the 2e design philosophy seems to be that each class can only do one thing. Alchemists have been relegated to a support role by the developers, which basically means they're weak in combat.

The only thing 2e Alchemist can do well is craft stuff. If you were thinking about creating a 2e version of your Mutagen-chugging melee monster from 1e, forget it. Play a Barbarian instead.


Anyone got a link to this new stuff?
Didn't see alchemist got changes :o


Corvo Spiritwind wrote:

Anyone got a link to this new stuff?

Didn't see alchemist got changes :o

This thread is back from launch, they're talking about Playtest to launch. Then it got Necro'd. (Unless you're talking about the errata from last month, in which case here you go.)


After reading it over I can see 3 possible options for combining the two.
1. No interaction
2. Works by reducing the total cost by 1 meaning you could create 2 bombs with quick alchemy by spending 1 reagent.
3. No cost to make 2 perpetual items.

For the time being I'd likely rule in favor of 2 or 3 if it comes up in my games.

101 to 130 of 130 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / I'm unhappy about changes to Beastial mutagen / alchemist and wish to discuss this. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.