reason to go alchemist


Advice


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Maybe its just me and i could be totally wrong which is fine. But I cant find a real reason to go alchemist without some other dedication or visa versa. It seems to be better as a dedication for another class to pick up. This seemed like a longer thing till i typed it out but feel free to ask questions or for clarification.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Some folks have said that the alchemist class is weak, or that it doesn't scale well at higher levels. I have no idea if this is indeed true.

In our group there is one player with an alchemist character. He's having a great time. He's eager to discover what other cool things await at higher levels.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm... Well mostly if you like Alchemy items.
but yeah you will almost always end up with a dedication. The Alchemist' feat choices are mostly math fixers that aren't terribly "cool" extra numbers mostly. They' can be useful. But they aren't terribly interesting.

I don't really have a problem with that ultimately. I wish they were cool and useful. like I really wish they had gotten an "any item quick draw+use" feat instead of quick bombs. I also think they should've gotten Poison Weapon as well. Also quite a few skills that don't mesh (double brew/alche alacraty perpetual infusions and ssuch)

But ultimately what I am in for are the neat items. Which are prohibitively expensive over all. Early levels are hard though.

One thing I like about the Alch is they make fair decent gap fillers. Which are my favorite type of character. More so because P2 lets "jack of many trade" builds work slightly better. Also perpetual bombs can let you lay out a lot of debuffs if you can hit. (which yeah they need better weapon choices and profiency IMO. Either martial weapons or master. and master or legendary for alchemical weapons)

So..

I view alchemist as a nice structure for explolring some of the weirder dedications. LIke Pathfinder Agent adds nice spice.
Items + a cool thing. Where as the Alch dedication I don't really like unless you're mostly wanting healing or tools (antipoison/sick/sunrod etc) as it does not scale that well I think.

Ultimately alchemist are my favorite class. bEcause theyr'e the item class.
But I do really wish they had more "neat and useful" feats.
But I dont' think its bad or anything.
Its the class I'll play the most, and it can be built in such a variety.


Why wouldn't you go with any dedication in a system made for dedications?

However, alchemico is the only class which has the possibility to work toward his saving throws bevase of mutagens.

Which is definitely good.

Is like asking how can a champion be good in dps without barbarian or fighter dedication.

The answer is ''you can, but if you stick with your main class only you will lose useful perks from other classes''

Also you should probably be less strict in terms of interpretation.

Being able to make a lunge, using power attack or learn how to use a shield in a more efficient way doesn't make you an alchemist warrior, but simply an alchemist who learnt some moves

A little Edit.
I see now that mutagens are item and not status bonus, in terms of saving throws, so they won’t stack with armor runes. Saying this is totally non sense is being polite.


K1 wrote:

A little Edit.

I see now that mutagens are item and not status bonus, in terms of saving throws, so they won’t stack with armor runes. Saying this is totally non sense is being polite.

Actually, them being status would compete with buff spells. The fact that they are item bonuses means you can have a divine sorcerer and an alchemist work side by side without issue.

The real point here is that mutagen bonuses are higher than the ones gained via runes, so they don’t stack, but they still improve them.

Ultimately, it works in a way that allows alchemists to be relevant no matter the items or party members. That was not the case in playtest and I got quite annoyed at it for months, so it’s good to see that changed.


The problems with alchemists are the most at low levels, not with scaling. They just don't contribute as much as other classes in the early levels.

Sovereign Court

I think one of the big draws for alchemists would be adaptability. Run into an enemy with vulnerability to fire? Use firebombs. Run into an enemy with resistance to regular weapons? Use bombs that it's not immune to.

So against vanilla humanoids with neither vulnerabilities nor resistances, they're indeed a bit lackluster. As such, how good alchemists are will depend a lot on your campaign.

I think the safe way to build an alchemist is to rely for only half on bombs and also be decent with regular weapons, and use the bombs for when they'd be especially effective.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I can't get anyone in my parties to use mutagens due to the side effects. The elixirs are nice but until you get a few levels they don't last long enough. Plus, if you're a bomber you can't do much buffing as it eats into your bomb supply.

The "you can tailor your attacks to weaknesses" argument isn't bad, but the big issue I have with it are 1: not that many things have weaknesses at low levels and 2: if you're saving reagents to tailor your bomb attacks then you're throwing half as many bombs, specifically int mod plus level. You'd better hope that you're going to run into things with weakness otherwise you've made yourself even less effective.

I'm hoping my alchemist gets fun later because at level 2 it's really not. It doesn't help that many of the class feats are either boring math fixes or just so situational or clumsy as to be useless.

To list a few...

Alchemical savant
Smoke bomb
Efficient alchemy
Combine elixirs
Elastic mutagen
Extend elixir


4 people marked this as a favorite.

The big issue with Alchemist is it only allows one play style: cower in the back with the squishies and throw bombs. Except bombs are such a limited resource that you can't even do that well. Mutagen is garbage because unlike 1E, where it increased your AC, in 2E it decreases it, making you more vulnerable.

The only ways to make Alchemist work is to go MC Wizard for spells or MC Champion for heavy armor. RIP my old Beastmorph Alchemist who charged into melee and tore ass.

My personal view is the Alchemist is so awful that errata won't fix it. It needs to be completely redesigned from the ground up, like 5e did with the Ranger.


HeHateMe wrote:

The big issue with Alchemist is it only allows one play style: cower in the back with the squishies and throw bombs. Except bombs are such a limited resource that you can't even do that well. Mutagen is garbage because unlike 1E, where it increased your AC, in 2E it decreases it, making you more vulnerable.

The only ways to make Alchemist work is to go MC Wizard for spells or MC Champion for heavy armor. RIP my old Beastmorph Alchemist who charged into melee and tore ass.

My personal view is the Alchemist is so awful that errata won't fix it. It needs to be completely redesigned from the ground up, like 5e did with the Ranger.

Yep, until you get your 'cantrips' at 7th, you're a dude with a crossbow most times...

Myself, that MC Wizard made an alchemist workable: pass out healing items at the start of the day and use cantrips [electric arc/shield].

PS: If you can roll your begging DC for an Alchemical Crossbow, that can be a viable way to extend your bombs as each one lasts for 3 attacks with it: add in a MC ranger for hunt prey, crossbow ace, Running Reload, ect and it gets even better


Ascalaphus wrote:
I think one of the big draws for alchemists would be adaptability.

Not valid at low levels, because of the lack of reagents and formulas.

But at high level, the Alchemist becomes the only "caster" able to "memorize" any spell from his whole class spell list as a single action for just twice the resource cost of choosing it beforehand. I really think the biggest issue of the Alchemist is his early levels. Once the number of reagents gets high enough, you always have what you need in your pocket.


SuperBidi wrote:
for just twice the resource cost of choosing it beforehand.

3 times: Field Discovery, level 5.


graystone wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:
for just twice the resource cost of choosing it beforehand.
3 times: Field Discovery, level 5.

Well, as you'll have roughly a third of your reagents used in your chosen field, it's closer to 2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Does really make me wish that perpetual infusion worked with double batch.
also makes me wish that they removed Alchemical Alacraty. and instead gave Alchemist Master and Legendary in "alchemy weapons"
Alchemy Weapons to future proof--for Liquid Blades, Alchemcial snares, alchemical caltrops, and other not-bomb alchemy weapons

Even Churri or Mutis would use Alchemical Weapons once in a while. More so when or If Liquid Blade comes out.
Which would be pretty awesome balance honestly. Having to use infusions to create a weapon that you're better at. Flavorful too. Would work fine with Quick Alchemy because the blade woudl be the "effect" and not the item. (like smoke sticks vs the smoke, or bombs vs the persistent effects or debuffs like tanglefoot. Antipoison/dieseases effects as well The item innerts but if you use the effect it persists)
==================================

Just a few slight changes to the class--mainly adding in several Class Feats as class abilities instead, and making some flavorful class feats to replace. AND. adding some overlap feats ---Rogue's Poison Weapon line, and Ranger's Snare line, would make the Alchemist absolutely pefect. Adding in Up to Legendary in Alchemical Weapons and either expanding their weapons to martial, or up to Master in simple.

Alchemical Items are powerful and neat. But the problem with Alch class is they overvalued the items while making the class (also playtest era issues). So they ended up useless without a large supply of them. Which prevents them from being an effective class supporter which is half of what they value in them.
Alchemists are the Item Lords. But they're not a caster and not a martial.
They're a weird off martial. I love them, so close to being wonderful. Just a few tweaks.

let them be the jack of All trades class. Even with the changes above they won't be better than any of the other classes in their tasks, and it will let them gap fill well enough, While also giving them the ability to make the other classes/players shine--while not making the alchemist/their player feel useless.

Sovereign Court

SuperBidi wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
I think one of the big draws for alchemists would be adaptability.

Not valid at low levels, because of the lack of reagents and formulas.

But at high level, the Alchemist becomes the only "caster" able to "memorize" any spell from his whole class spell list as a single action for just twice the resource cost of choosing it beforehand. I really think the biggest issue of the Alchemist is his early levels. Once the number of reagents gets high enough, you always have what you need in your pocket.

Yeah I'll have to see how it pans out in practice, so far I've only played the L5 pregen during Origin of the Open Road, and he had enough cash to buy some extra bombs so I did alright. But in general I think you need to also work with a weapon to last through a longer adventuring day.

So I think you should always prepare some bombs (to efficiently use reagents) and keep some reagents (to adapt to field conditions) and also use another weapon on enemies where your bombs don't have much special effect.

I guess it's a harder class to play than some others.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SuperBidi wrote:
graystone wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:
for just twice the resource cost of choosing it beforehand.
3 times: Field Discovery, level 5.
Well, as you'll have roughly a third of your reagents used in your chosen field, it's closer to 2.

For myself, I didn't see that happen: If you can make 3 instead of 2, the 3 tends to get much more with bombs or healing: when you have the option to make 10 or 15 of an item it's a big difference when you're looking at a limited resource.

This is from me playing 2 Chirugeon's and 1 bomber and seeing another bomber: from my experience I'm always finding myself running out of items and that's with leaning HEAVILY into making Field Discovery items. This might get better after you get perpetuals, but I don't ever see myself ever making an even split of items.

Another reason I'd don't think I'd do an even split is I've not seen a lot of demand for mutagens: When you balance the +1 you get from them over the normal bonus you get vs the awful drawbacks, it's unusual for anyone to ask for them to be made. I've had more requests for things like Eagle-Eye/Comprehension Elixir that don't fall into a field.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Advice / reason to go alchemist All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.