| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like I must be missing something, here, but isn't the 1st level portion of the Mutagenist Research Field kind of useless, until you reach at least 7th level? Let's break this down:
1) You get two extra formulae. Good, but they all get that, so it's a wash, comparison-wise.
2) You can safely use mutagens that were not specifically brewed for you. Uh.... can't everyone? I know that non-tailored mutagens in 1st edition could make you sick, but I can find no sign that this is true in 2nd. Check out page 546, for example. No hint of it. So, this seems to be a non-ability.
3) Your unarmed proficiency keeps pace with your simple weapon proficiency. Okay, this is a lot more useful... but only at 7th level. Until then it does absolutely nothing. Isn't that like giving a 1st level Wizard an ability that only works on 4th level and higher spells? Or a 1st level Fighter an ability that enhances Weapon Specialization? Wouldn't it make a LOT more sense to grant this feature at a level where it would actually do something? Otherwise, if I never make it to 7th level, I effectively never have any ability, at all.
As near as I can see, when compared to the 1st level Bomber and Chirurgeon options, this just seems sad. The Chirurgeon ability isn't that big of a deal, but at least it lets you use your (presumably higher) Intelligence for Medicine, instead of Wisdom, right away, while having it improve with your Crafting, later. And the Bomber option... well, it's just better than both of them. Protect your allies from your splash damage, while harming your foes. That is going to come up all the time - and long before 7th level.
Again, am I missing something, here?
I agree that the research fields are poorly balanced. The right answer is to pick bomber but diversify in what you're actually using your feats and reagents for.
I agree that the research fields are poorly balanced. The right answer is to pick bomber but diversify in what you're actually using your feats and reagents for.
Yeah, that was the feeling I was starting to get. But am I right or wrong about #2? Can anyone safely use mutagen, now? Because it sure looks that way. But the Mutagenist ability seemed to imply that I'm wrong, so...?
|
I agree that the research fields are poorly balanced. The right answer is to pick bomber but diversify in what you're actually using your feats and reagents for.Yeah, that was the feeling I was starting to get. But am I right or wrong about #2? Can anyone safely use mutagen, now? Because it sure looks that way. But the Mutagenist ability seemed to imply that I'm wrong, so...?
Anyone can use Mutagens that were made for them. As an Alchemist you can key a mutagen to a certain person when you're creating it. The class ability is kind of dead though unless you find yourself encountering a lot of Alchemists who've crafted real Mutagens and not just the daily ones.
|
|
Anyone can use Mutagens that were made for them. As an Alchemist you can key a mutagen to a certain person when you're creating it. The class ability is kind of dead though unless you find yourself encountering a lot of Alchemists who've crafted real Mutagens and not just the daily ones.I agree that the research fields are poorly balanced. The right answer is to pick bomber but diversify in what you're actually using your feats and reagents for.Yeah, that was the feeling I was starting to get. But am I right or wrong about #2? Can anyone safely use mutagen, now? Because it sure looks that way. But the Mutagenist ability seemed to imply that I'm wrong, so...?That limitation was actually removed.
I can't find anywhere stating that each Mutagen is brewed for a specific person like it did in the playtest.
You're totally right. I just control F'd through the pdf and found nothing about Mutagens being keyed to a person anymore. This is really baffling. I hope the people at Paizo are checking out these threads because Alchemist is one of my favorite classes and I really have not been enjoying what I've seen of it in 2e.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I really don't get the point of the Mutagenist at this point. Mutagens don't actually give a larger bonus to attack than Bless/Inspire Courage/other magic buffs when you remember mutagens don't stack with your magic weapon. The out of combat buffs can be good, but I don't think they're good enough to justify being such a weak contributor in the most lethal part of the game.
Like, if I want somebody to be amazing at skills, I can just pick a Rogue and still be very good when Initiative gets rolled.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're totally right. I just control F'd through the pdf and found nothing about Mutagens being keyed to a person anymore. This is really baffling. I hope the people at Paizo are checking out these threads because Alchemist is one of my favorite classes and I really have not been enjoying what I've seen of it in 2e.
I second that. Since posting my original two threads, I've done more digging, and it seems like all of my concerns were valid. I was just hoping I had missed... several... somethings. I had heard from a reliable and very Pathfinder-savvy source that the new Alchemists - especially, Mutagenists - were underwhelming and kind of boring to play (vis-à-vis getting to enjoy any limelight, in a typical group), at least at low level, but I was hesitant to believe that, without a thorough examination, of my own. At this point, I'm afraid I couldn't argue the point.
BTW, there are more Alchemist oddities here. Would have been better if I'd kept them together, to begin with. Should probably be under rules questions, too. Oh, well.
So, does anyone know if there is some sort of "future errata" section? Because the Mutagenist thing really feels like a mistake. The automatically-encumbered thing has that feel, too.