|1 person marked this as a favorite.|
So I had an idea for a feat while writing another post about Advanced Alchemy and Daily preperation. I'm curious what folks thoughts about this kind of thing for a future book would be. Honestly I think it would've been a great lv 3 or 4 innate class ability rather than afeat. That way it would be restricted to the class itself and make a real difference between the Dedication and the Class.
Basically a feat--preferably a lower level one because it would really help the low lv situation--that would let the Alchemist break up their reagent batches into different items.
Currently 1 reagent =1 batch of 2 of one specific items (such as two Antiplagues). While the Alchemist can certainly hand them out, there is no real gurantee the other players don't have an item or inclass solution for similar things. Plus if the alchemist also wants an antidote. Well that is 2 ragents for 4 items, 2 of which may not be used. It really eats into the supplies.
I would love afeat in the future that would let you break it up. I.e.
1 reagent = 1 batch of two items. So an Alchemist could make 1 antiplague and 1 antidote with 1 reagent during Daily Preperation. Or a sunrod and a Eagle Eye Elixir.
MANY items are the type you don't really need two of. That you'd really not use that often. Sunrods and Eagle Eyes are good examples. They last a very long time-and sunrods aren't something that can be quick alchemed. Eagle Eye lasts 1hr for instance. Several mutagen's time table raises up as you level up as well.
As you level up, many of the buff items last very long, so you rarely need more than 1. Depends on groups of course. But these really eat into your daily reagents and thoroughly restrict what the alchemist can actulaly bring to the table. There are so many items that can be useful, but often aren't always useful. That just feels strange to prepare "in case" But also either can't work with Quick Alchemy (sunrods, etc), or just feels like it c osts too much for Quick Alchemy in comparison to other choices.
If you could more readily tailor the daily prepration alchemy like that. Then that means you could save more for Quick Alchemy and actually feel good about using that class feature for non standard situations.
I really feel like this one little change would very much be an amazing quality of life change.
Well I'd love folks thoughts on this kind of idea.
Thanks for reading
That isn't really the same kind of concept. That I was attempting to get around. (Thank you for the answer though! I appreciate input)
Double Brew. and AA both just let you use Quick Alchemy more than once for less actions. Stil the same Reagent Cost so it doesn't really offer any functional flexability. Except for taking half the actions. It still costs the same functionally.
I like double brew over all. AA though I just can't see its use. It eats almost a 6th of your daily limit, and has some weird rule interactions with hands, and lack of actions to use all 3 items realistically. (I suppose unless one multiclassed to throw 2 with 1 action)
I do wish those both affected quick alchemy and advanced alchemy. That would be pretty spiffy.
(still not sure why this was moved to rules discussion hum)
Check out the Alchemist abilities Double Brew and Alchemical Alacrity. These let you create more items, and it specifically says they don't need to be the same.
They only apply to the Quick Alchemy action and even then they don't help with ressource management since they double/triple the cost for two/three times the items thus making them on-par with the base Quick Alchemy.
The only benefit of Double Brew is action economy, thus making it a pure combat option that eats up daily ressources too fast.
Also, Alchemical Alacrity doesn't do anything unless an ally walks up to you and use the third item created by Alchemical Alacrity because the third item will decay before you could use it. Having any ally use two actions to use the third item is not a great solution thought because it doesn't help much with action economy. There is a feat that somewhat fix it, but needing a feat to make a base class feature works properly doesn't seems like a good design to me...