Alchemist Reality vs Theory

[RPGnoremac]

Exocist wrote:

Depends what level you're starting. Alchemist has 3 main issues IMO. In order of importance:

1) They run out of reagents quickly at low levels. Their main draw (additives through quick alchemy) is not really usable until you get to level 7 due to the cost of it relative to the amount of reagents you have (and the generally weak effect of additives until you get to sticky bomb/greater debilitating bomb).

2) They're boring. Not only are mutagens simply +1s here or there, which may be mathematically fine but are mechanically uninteresting, they also have an issue of things you look forward to. Even martials have cool new tricks at higher levels now days. Alchemist is like playing a wizard who only knows Hydraulic Push, Burning Hands and Magic Missile, and your only option for your higher level slots is to heighten those spells. All of their stuff is given to you in the first 4 levels, higher levels versions are just the same stuff with bigger numbers for the most part.

3) The feat list is full of math fixers. Quick Bomber, Calculated Splash, Expanded Splash (the damage portion), Powerful Alchemy, Potent Poisoner... all of these are things that should be in the base class.

Having said that, if you start at a high level (8+ is preferable) and build "correctly" (bomber, sticky bomb, splash enhancers, quick bomber is optional if you start at level 9+) then the alchemist is actually fine mechanically. Just might not be the most exciting gameplay.

Thanks for the reply, we will be starting level 1 until whenever. I don't really want to tell him to play a different class since that could give a negative feeling, also it seems rather complicated class for a new player.

[Aricks]

citricking wrote:

graystone wrote:

citricking wrote:

Bombs are a good bit better than cantrips though, and they even out perform fighters at level 3.

Are they? Same action to use as cantrips, similar damage to weapons [one to draw, one to throw], slight damage to friends and foes in an area... What's a "good bit better" and how is it "out perform fighters at level 3"?

Quick bomber to throw one at full attack bonus, one at -5. With burn it or a quick silver mutagen you do more expected damage than a d12 weapon using fighter making two attacks at level 3 (this is vs equal level moderate Ac with persistent damage counted as applying once, only damage to primary target counted)

And then the fighter gets a striking rune at level 4 and the alchemist falls way behind the curve again.

So, with a self-harming consumable or a specific race and ancestry feat, a class feat, a class focus, using limited per day items, an alchemist is on par with a fighter using no feats or special attacks, for one level of play.

Well, it all makes sense now.

[Cellion]

One thing I've noticed for bomber is that although in a white room it has damage on par with an archer Fighter, in practice it rarely feels that way in play.

A lot of the Alchemist's bomber damage output is tied up in splash damage, in persistent damage, and in getting some damage on a miss. All those instances of 2 damage here, 3 damage there, etc, all those add up to a lot of additional damage. But its the kind of damage that doesn't feel impactful, the kind of stuff that feels like you're just tickling your foe.

[Filthy Lucre]

Alchemist is to PF2e what Ranger is to 5e.

[Draco18s]

Cellion wrote:

A lot of the Alchemist's bomber damage output is tied up in splash damage, in persistent damage, and in getting some damage on a miss. All those instances of 2 damage here, 3 damage there, etc, all those add up to a lot of additional damage. But its the kind of damage that doesn't feel impactful, the kind of stuff that feels like you're just tickling your foe.

Persistent damage is worth (on average) about 2.33 times its listed value (so if it says "4 persistent" expect to see 9 damage on average) and it doesn't stack with itself.

Second, the damage-on-a-miss is so low as to be inconsequential. Yeah, you do 2 damage on a miss, but you're also not adding some value of +X when you hit (and you have to take another feat to boost this value).

Yeah, splash hits nearby things, but it also hits allies (unless you take a feat).

[Kerobelis]

Filthy Lucre wrote:

Alchemist is to PF2e what Ranger is to 5e.

I don't think Rangers in 5e are that bad. Maybe the 5e ranger is like the PF 2E wizard in terms of power.

[Squiggit]

Kerobelis wrote:

Filthy Lucre wrote:

Alchemist is to PF2e what Ranger is to 5e.

I don't think Rangers in 5e are that bad. Maybe the 5e ranger is like the PF 2E wizard in terms of power.

5e rangers aren't super terrible, but they do have a lot of the "Why did they do this?" type moments in their class features. An over reliance on concentration spells (or, one spell) that unnecessarily limits their options, class features that feel either too niche to use properly or simply don't work well at all.

Some real similarities to the alchemist there.

[Filthy Lucre]

Kerobelis wrote:

Filthy Lucre wrote:

Alchemist is to PF2e what Ranger is to 5e.

I don't think Rangers in 5e are that bad. Maybe the 5e ranger is like the PF 2E wizard in terms of power.

It's not a comparison to power, it's a comparison to failed execution. Both editions have exactly one class that a lot of people feel missed the mark, whereas all the others are (generally) agreed to be complete and sufficient.

[Squiggit]

Yeah, I'm agreeing with you.

[Exocist]

Draco18s wrote:

Persistent damage is worth (on average) about 2.33 times its listed value (so if it says "4 persistent" expect to see 9 damage on average) and it doesn't stack with itself.

It's 3.33 times, as you deal the persistent then make the check. Each check has a 30% chance to succeed, so on average they'll make 3.33 checks before they remove persistent, which means 3.33 instances of damage.

[Squiggit]

That assumes the target's alive for 3.33 rounds from when you apply the persistent damage. From my experience that's not super common.

[Draco18s]

That. I was knocking a round off to account for targets dying before they live for 3 rounds.