I am running Plaguestone with a group starting this Sunday. This adventure is new to me, but that really isn’t the point. One of my players was thinking of playing an alchemist bomber, but was concerned about a lack of damage from bombs. I know there are threads on this, but help save me the digging.
Has bomber damage been an issue in your experience? If so, what measures if any have you and/or your group taken to “fix” it? I’ve considered upping their attack proficiency to master, or adding striking rune damage to the non-splash damage. Perhaps nothing needs done and appearances here are just an illusion.
Side note: the player is brand new to the system and is an army veteran who used to work (go figure) in explosives. There is a specific appeal that the class offers him and I would hate for him to feel underwhelmed with it or the game.
tl;dr:
Group 1: It's fine.
Group 2: Play a fighter with an alchemist dedication.
If your player wants to play an alchemist from level 1, you'll either have to believe Group 1, or give him a free dedication.
Fall of Plaguestone is Level 1-3, so giving them master proficiency is super disproportionate. Even expert would be mildly disproportionate (they would have better to-hits than other martials). Additionally, giving them the effects of striking runes (essentially moderate bombs) is disproportionate because nobody else does 2 dice damage until level 4.
The scenario is pretty deadly in general - I would encourage players not to get too attached to their characters. The small power difference between alchemists and martials (while real) is not going to be a huge determining factor in the enjoyment of the game. I would be more worried about your player putting in a bunch of emotional investment into a character that he thinks of as himself, and then having it die before it reaches level 2.
I would suggest no adjustments, but if you insisted on it, I would suggest allowing them to take DEX instead of INT as their key ability, so they can have the +7 to-hit at the cost of one fewer skill and a -1 to Arcana/Occultism/Crafting/Society (alchemists' INT to-damage won't factor in until level 4).
tl;dr:
Group 1: It's fine.
Group 2: Play a fighter with an alchemist dedication.** spoiler omitted **
If your player wants to play an alchemist from level 1, you'll either have to believe Group 1, or give him a free dedication.
Fall of Plaguestone is Level 1-3, so giving them master proficiency is super disproportionate. Even expert would be mildly disproportionate (they would have better to-hits than other martials). Additionally, giving them the effects of striking runes (essentially moderate bombs) is disproportionate because nobody else does 2 dice damage until level 4.
** spoiler omitted **
I would suggest no adjustments, but if you insisted on it, I would suggest allowing them to take DEX instead of INT as their key ability, so they can have the +7 to-hit at the cost of one fewer skill and a -1 to Arcana/Occultism/Crafting/Society (alchemists' INT to-damage won't factor in until level 4).
The master proficiency would be reserved for much later level. It’s more the carrot on a pole than a worry now. I expect the players to continue their characters well beyond this adventure.
I am generally for not changing things unless it causes considerable frustration among any or all of the players. I have just noticed plenty of complaints regarding DPR with alchemists and didn’t want the player feeling like they brought nerf bats to a gun fight.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have run plaguestone with a bomber alchemist as one of my players. Admittedly the player got frustrated with the prep aspect of the class and just made Alchemist’s Fire + Elixirs of Life for chapters 2 and 3.
This was before the errata, so that might help, but they weren’t very effective at all. Sharing the party with a greatsword strength fighter and (eventually) a strength champion might do that to you, but even absent that I can only remember one encounter where the alchemist was even moderately useful - the orcs in chapter 3 because splash dealt with ferocity handily.
Other than that encounter, their attacks seemed fairly ineffective (and much worse when they had to switch to a hand crossbow because they were out of bombs). In general i would not recommend Alchemist for any game below level 7-8.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The master proficiency would be reserved for much later level. It’s more the carrot on a pole than a worry now. I expect the players to continue their characters well beyond this adventure.
I am generally for not changing things unless it causes considerable frustration among any or all of the players. I have just noticed plenty of complaints regarding DPR with alchemists and didn’t want the player feeling like they brought nerf bats to a gun fight.
Well, I think one thing that alchemist defenders and attackers agree on is that alchemists aren't great at anything. I think in the last Great Alchemist Debate thread, I summed it along these lines: "alchemists can be a backup anything, whether you see that as a plus or minus probably determines what you think of alchemists."
If you intend for this group to play a long-term campaign together, there's a strong case for the alchemist's versatility not being as strong a plus and those little -1's adding up to long term frustration. You should consider a fighter/alchemist (probably more effective numberwise) or ranger/alchemist (probably more appropriate if your buddy was in the US Army) or empiricist investigator (fits well with FoP) as options, but straight alchemist isn't the end of the world.
---
As for DPR, DPR is a terrible way to analyze utility. Pretty much ignore anyone who uses DPR as a metric to decide anything. DPR was popularized in PF1 because a full round action to attack was, by far, the best way to solve any problem; the damage that a character could put out in a full round action was then a good reason to evaluate a character. PF2 is pretty different, and a lot of people are doing stupid things with the alchemist like throwing 3 bombs/round, which misses a lot, leading to "ineffectiveness," and then running out of bombs.
I play a bomber in my group's Age of Ashes AP. While my bombs rarely make the huge damage numbers on a hit that our Barbarian knocks out, the persistent damage adds up.
At 12th level:
- Alchemical Familiar (for an additional reagent and other utility)
- Far Lobber
- Quick Bomber
- Calculated Splash (splash damage equal to Int. modifier)
- Sticky Bomb (add Splash + Int. modifier to persistent damage)
- Expanded Splash (add Int. modifier to splash damage)
- Uncanny Bombs (range is now 60')
Perpetual Potency:
- Moderate Acid Flask (for 2d6 persistent acid damage)
- Moderate Blight Bomb (for 2d6 persistent poison damage)
17 Infused Reagents per day.
Daily Prep: 2 Infused Reagents = 6 Bombs; 1 Infused Reagent = 2 Mutagens
- 3 Greater Acid Flask (3d6 persistent acid)
- 3 Greater Blight Bomb (3d6 persistent poison)
- 2 Greater Quicksilver Mutagens
So, unlimited Moderate Acid Flask and Blight Bomb and Double Brew Sticky bombs up to 7 times if I don't quick alchemy any other elixirs, mutagens, or tools.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the true TL;DR for any kind of Alchemist your player wants to use:
Craft your items and give them to the party. You're playing optimally already. You can even go beyond and use the Immortal Alchemist build, it's pretty easy, just don't show up at all in the fights, exploration or encounters, once you gave away all your items, your job is done. You can't die if you're not even there *Roll Safe taps head*.
Jokes aside, you should suggest your player to use something else. Maybe an investigator with alchemist path, once he gets his bearings on the game, he will know what to expect from an Alchemist.
Don't do it like my friend. She retired the character once the frustration got unbearable. Of course, you can always play the lenient GM and add weaknesses to the monsters in the adventure, so that the Alchemist can exploit them, that will definitely make the class look good.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Craft your items and give them to the party. You're playing optimally already. You can even go beyond and use the Immortal Alchemist build, it's pretty easy, just don't show up at all in the fights, exploration or encounters, once you gave away all your items, your job is done. You can't die if you're not even there *Roll Safe taps head*.
Brilliant! Lol I love it. Sadly, though, I’m pretty sure he would bored playing only the first half hour of every session.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Brilliant! Lol I love it. Sadly, though, I’m pretty sure he would bored playing only the first half hour of every session.Craft your items and give them to the party. You're playing optimally already. You can even go beyond and use the Immortal Alchemist build, it's pretty easy, just don't show up at all in the fights, exploration or encounters, once you gave away all your items, your job is done. You can't die if you're not even there *Roll Safe taps head*.
Apparently this is the optimal playstyle for Alchemists. If you're not doing it like that, you're playing the class suboptimally and your issues with the class' incapability of satisfying your character concept are invalid.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To the OP
Alchemists are less interesting in the first 5 levels before they get their first discovery and enough reagents to properly diversify their prep. But are quite versatile and useful at later levels, especially mid levels and higher.
Like any class they benefit from having varied encounter design, and alchemists who play against their class strengths will tend to feel super lackluster (like all those bomber alchemists who constantly decide not to deal splash damage because allies refuse to get resistance options or position to accommodate).
Dual weapon archetype + dual thrower is heaps of fun on an alchemist. It combines damage, so throwing out sticky acid bombs that do 4d6+7 persistent damage and 14 poison splash is quite normal 10+, especially fun when the second bomb is debilitating. By level 15 you can essentially guarantee one persistent damage type a round even against super hard to hit high level foes, but that is a long way into a game -laughs-
But yeah, an optimal alchemist will be supporting allies with elixirs and mutagens as well as playing their specialty/focus (they can be carried in advance by allies, are flexible and don't make sound like spells / aren't dispelled as easily).
Bomber can do decent damage and is excellent at hurting high AC targets, weaknesses and bypassing resistances/immunities but won't ever be a single target monster. Oh and things like dread ampoules are great debuffing tools.
Given what plaguestone is I would just chat with the player directly and say "the bomber alchemist won't be a massive damage dealer during early levels and this adventure has a reputation for being quite deadly. Are you sure you wish to play it?"
Also, remember to compare their damage to other ranged options, not melee. At level 3 they get their moderate bombs, make sure to give various moderate alchemical formula as recipes and they will generally be quite happy, maybe make sure they have access to alchemist goggles and know that they exist (for the limited perpetual bombs they can make for free post errata changes)
Thanks to the changes even at low levels they aren't so weak that it will be detrimental for a bomber, as long as they don't picture themselves the primary damage dealer of the group.
Quickbomber is a must have feat early on though, if you play with free archetype rules familiar master is a great option for the alchemist (manual dexterity and independent to retrieve and administer elixirs/mutagens)
Early levels the massive disadvantage of the bomber is that he really doesn't have enough reagents to do anything. His bombs are akin to a normal martial strike (much lower damage, less accuracy, but some carry a debuff).
even with the errata, a level 1 bomber would usually have like 9 weak bombs or so, which means 9 strikes per day before he's relegated to wizard-strength crossbow attacks or something.
So if you want to houserule something i think that giving him Perpetual from level 1 won't break anything. It's 2 actions for 1 level 1 bomb Strike which is about the same level as him casting a cantrip.
At level 1 a blight bomb does 1d6+1 damage, 1 damage to all creatures within 5ft and 1d4 persistent poison damage. Admittedly it is the best balanced damage bomb.
An alchemist fire does 1d8+1, 1 splash to foes within 5ft and 1 persistent fire.
It doesn't come out as "much" worse than other ranged options, worse than some for sure, better than others in other scenarios.
But yeah only having 15 bombs max at first level, even with the new change can sting. Depends on how many fights the party gets into though, at low levels I wouldn't waste bombs on second attacks though and just carry a sling/whip. (The latter lets you flank at 10ft)
that's my entire point.
if the whole class mechanics are 15 attacks that are basically equal to any normal attack, then giving the alchemist for free the ability to keep chucking them for free at the cost of double the action cost is not going to break anything.
normally you would spent like 1 reagent for 2 potions, which is worse than having a healing focus power or something in the course of the day, but still helpful.
so you only really have 9-12 bombs, which are like 2-3 fights.
allowing them to have the same "normal" attack at the cost of double the action cost (Perpetual) seems balanced to me.
Yeah I have no complaints with your houserule (it would make them outshine other ranged attackers in many scenarios but not by any massive margin), I am just saying the damage isn't "much lower".
You have an ex-military explosives person who wants to enjoy himself hurling bombs at the table top. Encourage him to do his thing. Alchemist fire sounds right up his alley.
There are lots of ways to spruce up the class. If damage is his thing, go Beastmaster L2 and pick up a bird. For 1 Action, he can send his bird to a foe up to 60' away to Support right away. Then 2nd Action, hurl a bomb at that foe. Even on a miss, you will deal 1 splash damage triggering the bird's Support power: 1d4 Bleed + Dazzled that lasts until the Bleed persistent damage ends. You still have a 3rd Action left for more shenanigans.
You have an ex-military explosives person who wants to enjoy himself hurling bombs at the table top. Encourage him to do his thing. Alchemist fire sounds right up his alley.
There are lots of ways to spruce up the class. If damage is his thing, go Beastmaster L2 and pick up a bird. For 1 Action, he can send his bird to a foe up to 60' away to Support right away. Then 2nd Action, hurl a bomb at that foe. Even on a miss, you will deal 1 splash damage triggering the bird's Support power: 1d4 Bleed + Dazzled that lasts until the Bleed persistent damage ends. You still have a 3rd Action left for more shenanigans.
Can animal companions deliver bombs? An eagle acting as a B2 could add a fantasy take on modern tactics.
Btw, thank you everyone for you advice and opinions on the matter. I do appreciate the help. The more minds to process ideas, the better. :)
Can animal companions deliver bombs? An eagle acting as a B2 could add a fantasy take on modern tactics.
The bear can but only in the woods.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have an ex-military explosives person who wants to enjoy himself hurling bombs at the table top. Encourage him to do his thing. Alchemist fire sounds right up his alley.
There are lots of ways to spruce up the class. If damage is his thing, go Beastmaster L2 and pick up a bird. For 1 Action, he can send his bird to a foe up to 60' away to Support right away. Then 2nd Action, hurl a bomb at that foe. Even on a miss, you will deal 1 splash damage triggering the bird's Support power: 1d4 Bleed + Dazzled that lasts until the Bleed persistent damage ends. You still have a 3rd Action left for more shenanigans.
That doesn't work, the splash damage on a fail triggers from the splash trait, not from the strike. It works on a success though.
Can animal companions deliver bombs? An eagle acting as a B2 could add a fantasy take on modern tactics.
I would allow it, it is certainly a houserule and I would require the train animal feat. I would only allow 1 bomb while the animal is small, two when medium.
Look at the bombers saddle magical item for inspiration.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have an ex-military explosives person who wants to enjoy himself hurling bombs at the table top. Encourage him to do his thing. Alchemist fire sounds right up his alley.
There are lots of ways to spruce up the class. If damage is his thing, go Beastmaster L2 and pick up a bird. For 1 Action, he can send his bird to a foe up to 60' away to Support right away. Then 2nd Action, hurl a bomb at that foe. Even on a miss, you will deal 1 splash damage triggering the bird's Support power: 1d4 Bleed + Dazzled that lasts until the Bleed persistent damage ends. You still have a 3rd Action left for more shenanigans.
That doesn't work, the splash damage on a fail triggers from the splash trait, not from the strike. It works on a success though.
It's a strike that does damage. That's the trigger listed in the bird's support description. The splash trait is on the martial weapon (bomb) you just performed the Strike with. Weapons do damage on unsuccessful strikes from other traits like Forceful. I've never read anywhere that "traits" are an entity that inflicts damage as opposed to the weapon with that trait and thus the Strike. Can you quote a rule to support your statement?
I would allow it, it is certainly a houserule and I would require the train animal feat. I would only allow 1 bomb while the animal is small, two when medium.
For an alchemist a familiar can do the job easily.
It's a strike that does damage. That's the trigger listed in the bird's support description. The splash trait is on the martial weapon (bomb) you just performed the Strike with. Weapons do damage on unsuccessful strikes from other traits like Forceful. I've never read anywhere that "traits" are an entity that inflicts damage as opposed to the weapon with that trait and thus the Strike. Can you quote a rule to support your statement?
Have a read of the strike action, alchemical item and the splash trait. The strike action is clear what it does and the splash trait is clear what it does.
The trait is triggered into effect by a strike for sure, but the strike is not doing the splash damage itself and thus not triggering the support action.
For an alchemist a familiar can do the job easily.
I thought about the homunculus, but he may want the flexibility of not just painting the target but also air support for his howitzer. The familiar would only be good for the former.
It's a strike that does damage. That's the trigger listed in the bird's support description. The splash trait is on the martial weapon (bomb) you just performed the Strike with. Weapons do damage on unsuccessful strikes from other traits like Forceful. I've never read anywhere that "traits" are an entity that inflicts damage as opposed to the weapon with that trait and thus the Strike. Can you quote a rule to support your statement?Have a read of the strike action, alchemical item and the splash trait. The strike action is clear what it does and the splash trait is clear what it does.
The trait is triggered into effect by a strike for sure, but the strike is not doing the splash damage itself and thus not triggering the support action.
Ok, I'm familiar with those. I thought you might have something more specific. Nothing you quote says "the trait does the damage not the Strike." I interpret the Splash entry as saying the opposite:
If an attack with a splash weapon fails, succeeds, or critically succeeds, all creatures within 5 feet of the target (including the target) take the listed splash damage.
"If an attack with a splash weapon fails" <- that's a Strike doing damage. Our bomber in the example used a ranged Strike and failed.
Here's the relevant Bird Support quote from CRB p215:
your Strikes that damage a creature that your bird threatens
A thrown bomb via a Strike that damages your foe triggers Bird Support. Same could be said for a Fighter using the L10 Certain Strike feat with a scimitar via the Forceful trait. Nowhere does it say the Splash trait or the Forceful trait become a separate entity from the Strike that inflicts the damage. I get what you're saying, nowhere does it say the Strike via martial thrown weapon bomb inflicts the damage either, but that doesn't have to be said. It's the default understood state. If you swing a longsword on a normal attack and hit for 5 damage, the Strike caused the damage, and although that's not stated anywhere, it's accepted and a default, understood component of hundreds of entries of feats and spells that operate on this correlation.