About the only use I can think of for Alchemical Alacrity would require a bit of GM buy-in. Personally, I figure if you can Stow the third item as a part of the Quick Alchemy action, handing off the third item should be essentially the same thing. Still not terribly exciting, but at least the third item could get used...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Note that the item bonus to attacks is to balance the fact the alchemist doesn't have master weapon proficiency.I always thought that these bonuses are a compensation for the lack of runes. I still don't understand why the alchemist not only perfected his "Trained in alchemical bombs" at least.Splash damage is actually incredibly strong. On the first attack, you're 95% likely to get at least splash damage, which goes down to a mere 75% on the second attack. Now consider that with the right feats, level 11 splash damage goes up to 8 splash. With martial proficiency, every throw from a base-level alchemist is almost akin to that of a maxed out damage bow champion.
The real problem, in my view, is that default alchemist bomb damage doesn't improve from 3 to 11. Unlike pure martials, which get a boost at 7 from weapon specialization, alchemists just keep chugging along on level 3 bombs until level 11, which really kinda sucks.
Sorry but I think you are giving too much value to splash damage.
In the first place the Alchemist have a limited amounts of bombs and usually it don't use all their reagents for bombs, probably they want some elixirs too.
So to trust that failure bombs will do the splash damage even adding Expanded Splash to it do an alchemist really use the bombs with map -5 and -10? Really worth has a high chance to lose such limited resource just to do the splash damage? And half of splash bombs have persistence damage, really worth waste these bombs to only do splash? And finally really worth heavily invest in splash feats that only add you Int in lvl 10? Where many opponents already has a hundred HP?
Thats one of the main problems of Alchemist, you waste a lot of resources to make it just OK!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Note that the item bonus to attacks is to balance the fact the alchemist doesn't have master weapon proficiency.I always thought that these bonuses are a compensation for the lack of runes. I still don't understand why the alchemist not only perfected his "Trained in alchemical bombs" at least.Splash damage is actually incredibly strong. On the first attack, you're 95% likely to get at least splash damage, which goes down to a mere 75% on the second attack. Now consider that with the right feats, level 11 splash damage goes up to 8 splash. With martial proficiency, every throw from a base-level alchemist is almost akin to that of a maxed out damage bow champion.
The real problem, in my view, is that default alchemist bomb damage doesn't improve from 3 to 11. Unlike pure martials, which get a boost at 7 from weapon specialization, alchemists just keep chugging along on level 3 bombs until level 11, which really kinda sucks.
Sorry but I think you are giving too much value to splash damage.
In the first place the Alchemist have a limited amounts of bombs and usually it don't use all their reagents for bombs, probably they want some elixirs too.
So to trust that failure bombs will do the splash damage even adding Expanded Splash to it do an alchemist really use the bombs with map -5 and -10? Really worth has a high chance to lose such limited resource just to do the splash damage? And half of splash bombs have persistence damage, really worth waste these bombs to only do splash? And finally really worth heavily invest in splash feats that only add you Int in lvl 10? Where many opponents already has a hundred HP?
Thats one of the main problems of Alchemist, you waste a lot of resources to make it just OK!
Quoting myself:
Hypothetical martial-proficiency scaling alchemist with no damage boosters:
Level 1: 16 Dex, 18 Int, trained; lesser fire for +6 (1d8, 1 persistent, 1 splash - 7.5 average on success) - averaging 5.5/3.4 damage
Level 5: 18 Dex, 19 Int, expert; moderate fire for +14 (2d8, 2 persistent, 2 splash - 15 average on success) - averaging 13.6/8.3 damage
Level 10: 19 Dex, 20 Int, expert; moderate fire for +19 (2d8, 2 persistent, 2 splash - 15 average on success) - averaging 8.95/6.05 damage
Level 15: 20 Dex, 21 Int, master; greater fire for +28 (3d8+3, 3 persistent, 3 splash - 25.5 average on success) - averaging 20.85/12.675 damageDamage-optimized bow champion:
Level 1: 18 Dex, 16 Str, trained; shortbow for +7 (1d6, deadly d10 - average 3.5 on success) - averaging 3.625/1.85 damage
Level 5: 19 Dex, 18 Str, expert; +1 striking composite shortbow for +14 (2d6+2, deadly d10 - average 9 on success) - averaging 9.2/4.775 damage
Level 10: 20 Dex, 19 Str, expert; +1 striking flaming composite shortbow for +20 (2d6+4+1d6, deadly d10 - average 14.5 on success) - averaging 10.7/6.075 damage
Level 15: 21 Dex, 20 Str, master; +2 greater striking flaming frost composite shortbow for +28 (3d6+8+2d6, deadly 2d10 - average 25.5 on success) - averaging 22.05/12.025 damageOptimized Bomber: (fixed numbers to account for double persistent on crit)
Level 1: averaging 5.5/3.4 damage
Level 5: averaging 12.9/8.4 damage
Level 10: averaging 14.45/9.8 damage
Level 15: averaging 20.5/13.525 damageCalculated Splash bomber with normal prof, sticky acid:
Level 10: 19 Dex, 20 Int, expert; moderate acid for +19 (2 damage, 2d6+7 persistent, 7 splash - 37 average on success) - averaging 24.65 damage
Level 15: 20 Dex, 21 Int, master; greater acid for +26 (5 damage, 3d6+8 persistent, 8 splash - 50 average on success) - averaging 32.8 damageCalculated Splash bomber with martial proficiency:
Level 1: 16 Dex, 18 Int, trained; lesser fire for +6 (1d8, 1 persistent, 1 splash - 7.5 average on success) - averaging 5.5/3.4 damage
Level 5: 18 Dex, 19 Int, expert; moderate fire for +14 (2d8, 2 persistent, 4 splash - 17 average on success) - averaging 15.5/10.5 damage
Level 10: 19 Dex, 20 Int, expert; moderate fire for +19 (2d8, 2 persistent, 7 splash - 20 average on success) - averaging 14.45/9.8 damage
Level 15: 20 Dex, 21 Int, master; greater fire for +28 (3d8+3, 3 persistent, 8 splash - 30.5 average on success) - averaging 25.6/16.925 damage
So yes, splash does account for a lot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, the most obvious improvement which addresses many valid concerns would be to make the Debilitating/Greater/True feat chain better.
Specifically, I suggest making their effects automatic from the first feat (or, like True Debilitating, avoidable only on Crit Success). PC attack roll plus enemy save is usually reserved for super nasty effects like instant death). Alternatively, make the inflicted conditions last longer (e.g., flat-footed until the end of the next round would allow an alchemist to benefit from their own debuffs), or by making Debilitating Bomb actually debilitate (e.g., blinded instead of dazzled). These aren't mutually exclusive: a Dazzling Bomb could be modeled after Glitterdust: Crit Success unaffected, Success dazzled for 1 round, Failure blinded for 1 round or dazzled for N rounds, Crit Failure blinded for N rounds or dazzled forever.
It's a feat chain that's obviously important to the alchemist design (3 feats over 8 levels!), so it's thematic, as well as useful.
A small change to accomplish that would be moving Enduring Alchemy to be a Feat 2 (rather than Feat 4). It would attack multiple fronts - 1. the (perceived) weakness of Level 2 class feats as is, 2. the perceived need to take a dedication at level 2 for better offensive options, and 3. allowing Debilitating conditions to be more slightly useful to the alchemist themselves at higher levels.
---
I think being able to recover Infused Reagents during Exploration is too big of a buff. That would be really good - too good IMO (since I don't think the alchemist needs that much help) but others may think the alchemist needs that much help.
My counterproposal: Allowing Advanced Alchemy during Exploration would be more balanced. One of the iconic things about PF1 alchemists was their ability to merge a prepared formula list with semi-spontaneous formulas (the 1 minute extract preparation). Allowing alchemists to start the day unprepared, and then be able to semi-spontaneously come up with 6 sea touch elixirs when they need to cross a boggard-infested river, would be both thematic and useful.
---
I agree the "item dispenser" play style isn't for everyone. But I remind everyone that there were a whole bunch of PF1 classes that were similar - the spellcasters that primarily "dispensed" haste or darkness or whatever and kind of stayed out of the fray. I think the complaint is less "I dislike handing out items full stop" and more "people tend to decline items because it sucks up their actions."
It sounds like an alchemist ability/feat to apply items using alchemist actions would be better. Basically, expand Healing Bomb to include all possible buffs, being able to Quick Alchemy an antidote and throw it at an ally would be pretty cool, plus thematic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Calculated Splash bomber with normal prof, sticky acid:
Level 10: 19 Dex, 20 Int, expert; moderate acid for +19 (2 damage, 2d6+7 persistent, 7 splash - 37 average on success) - averaging 24.65 damage
Level 15: 20 Dex, 21 Int, master; greater acid for +26 (5 damage, 3d6+8 persistent, 8 splash - 50 average on success) - averaging 32.8 damage
Thanks for re-posting that. I'll have to ask you to DM me some time; statistics were never a strong point of mine but I'd like to understand how the math works.
I just quoted this part because there's some small corrections to make. It's actually working off of Expanded Splash (Int mod + Normal Splash damage), not Calculated (Int Mod replaces Normal Splash.)
Acid Flasks never deal more than 1 pt of normal damage... the Persistent and Splash damage go up with tier, but not the normal. So the L10 should be 1 pt, not 2, and the L15 (which benefits from Weapon Specialization) should be 3 pts, not 5.
You have master proficiency listed for L15, but the +26 is based off of the normal expert (+5 Dex, +2 Item, +15 Level, +4 Expert Proficiency). (I'm pretty sure the normal expert is what you meant for this part anyways and master was just a cut&paste.)
I'm curious how the numbers would work out if we assumed the use of Quicksilver Mutagen by our Bomber. At L10 they would be +20; at L15 +27.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Enduring should just be the default state of quick alchemy. Maybe even Perpetual Breadth should be a baseline option too (perpetual bombs would feel really good on a chirurgeon which can sometimes feel a bit aimless when nobody needs healing at the moment).
I think the complaint is less "I dislike handing out items full stop" and more "people tend to decline items because it sucks up their actions."
I think it's a bit of both. You're right that the action economy can feel like a pain (especially for the chirurgeon), but there are also a lot of people I've run into who've been drawn in by the concept of things like the mutagenist and then really frustrated by its execution (i.e. really bad damage while also eating an AC and reflex penalty if you're a bestial alchemist or even worse damage if you're an energy alchemist).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just to lock down the accuracy problems, I'D like to stat them vs a standard (not fighter) martial.
Standard Martial starts at 18 str
Alchemist starts at 16 dex (because int is key stat and better for DC's and # of reagents)
So that means that they progress the following way:
Level - Penalty vs base
1 / -1
2 / -2 (+1 rune comes into play)
3 / -1
4 / -1
5 / -2 (dex goes to 18, martials go to expert)
6 / -2
7 / 0 (alchemist gets expert)
8 / 0
9 / 0
10 / -2 (Martial gets STR to 20, +2 rune comes into play
11 / -1 (bombs get +2)
12 / -1
13 / -3 (Martials get master)
14 / -3
15 / -2 (dex goes to 20)
16 / -3 (+3 rune kicks in)
17 / -3 (bombs become +3 BUT apex items come into play and alchemist apex goes to int)
18 / -3
19 / -3
20 / -4 (Martial gets +1 to STR)
So what we can see from this little progression comparison is that the alchemists really hurt.
Even if you factor in quicksilver mutagen (which you shouldn't because that stuff is really a double edged sword, double your level less max HP is dire as f@%@, and the reduction in fort saves too) that only factors -1 behind, and that's not to include that they can just give quicksilver to their martial too.
The comparison would be similar but not as steep in comparisons vs caster DC's and attack checks.
My solution to this negative curve was to give alchemists Master proficiency at level 15. It's still a level after but that's when AC really starts kicking into high gear and you start feeling like you brought a water gun to a bazooka fight with an alchemist.
Calculated Splash bomber with normal prof, sticky acid:
Level 10: 19 Dex, 20 Int, expert; moderate acid for +19 (2 damage, 2d6+7 persistent, 7 splash - 37 average on success) - averaging 24.65 damage
Level 15: 20 Dex, 21 Int, master; greater acid for +26 (5 damage, 3d6+8 persistent, 8 splash - 50 average on success) - averaging 32.8 damage
Thanks for re-posting that. I'll have to ask you to DM me some time; statistics were never a strong point of mine but I'd like to understand how the math works.
I just quoted this part because there's some small corrections to make. It's actually working off of Expanded Splash (Int mod + Normal Splash damage), not Calculated (Int Mod replaces Normal Splash.)
Acid Flasks never deal more than 1 pt of normal damage... the Persistent and Splash damage go up with tier, but not the normal. So the L10 should be 1 pt, not 2, and the L15 (which benefits from Weapon Specialization) should be 3 pts, not 5.
You have master proficiency listed for L15, but the +26 is based off of the normal expert (+5 Dex, +2 Item, +15 Level, +4 Expert Proficiency). (I'm pretty sure the normal expert is what you meant for this part anyways and master was just a cut&paste.)
I'm curious how the numbers would work out if we assumed the use of Quicksilver Mutagen by our Bomber. At L10 they would be +20; at L15 +27.
Ah, thanks. I generally use Calculated Splash to assume the bomber is following both feats in an assumption of max damage, but it is technically true that they aren't linked.
I've never actually realized acid flask base damage doesn't scale. Huh.
Quick napkin math says that level 10 would average 24.05 -> 26.95, while level 15 averages 31.6 -> 35.6.
As a side note, martial prof (and specialization) with mutagen would average 27.65 at level 10, and 47.2 at level 15.
Feel free to DM me at any time to ask about the details.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Enduring should just be the default state of quick alchemy. Maybe even Perpetual Breadth should be a baseline option too (perpetual bombs would feel really good on a chirurgeon which can sometimes feel a bit aimless when nobody needs healing at the moment).
I think the complaint is less "I dislike handing out items full stop" and more "people tend to decline items because it sucks up their actions."I think it's a bit of both. You're right that the action economy can feel like a pain (especially for the chirurgeon), but there are also a lot of people I've run into who've been drawn in by the concept of things like the mutagenist and then really frustrated by its execution (i.e. really bad damage while also eating an AC and reflex penalty if you're a bestial alchemist or even worse damage if you're an energy alchemist).
My biggest hang-ups with the Alchemist have definitely been the lackluster performance of the Mutagenist. Feral Mutagen Alchemist was my favorite build in PF1, but such a character simply doesn't work with this edition's iteration of the class.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
This got better and better.
Alright, you need to stop trying to make changes unless you know what you’re complaining about. Either that or test by absurd, like this:
-make a lv1 alchemist
-remove all mutagens
-change bomb proficiency to legendary
Test: does this solve my issue?
Answer: no.
Significance: attack bonus is not my issue.
No joke, if you don’t know what the problem is then the only way you can find a change that works is by bringing it to the extreme. Make it painfully obvious.
No change will ever work unless it affects your issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even if you factor in quicksilver mutagen (which you shouldn't because that stuff is really a double edged sword, double your level less max HP is dire as f$#+, and the reduction in fort saves too) that only factors -1 behind, and that's not to include that they can just give quicksilver to their martial too.
Yes, it is a double-edged sword. However, it's a continually available option, and it seems obvious (to me at least) that the developers expect it to be used.
As for giving it to the martial... 1) it's a double-edged sword for Martials as well and 2) I fail to comprehend the argument that just because they *can* give an item to a colleague, that makes Alchemists worse. Only a Full-Class Alchemist can give on-level colleagues an advantage with Mutagens. Alchemist Dedication folks can only keep pace with Item Bonuses, not surpass them. So if the Alchemist keeps their Mutagens to themselves... well, what does that change, overall? The Alchemist has fun using their resources and the Martials carry on the same as before.
My solution to this negative curve was to give alchemists Master proficiency at level 15. It's still a level after but that's when AC really starts kicking into high gear and you start feeling like you brought a water gun to a bazooka fight with an alchemist.
And then the Martial ends up with a -1 compared to the Mutagen-Using Alchemist for Levels 15,17,18 & 19, catching up for good at L20. Given how many folks argue that the Alchemist sucks because it ends up with penalties compared to Martials, I can imagine that bit of math going over like the proverbial lead balloon.
Finally, I tend to disagree that an Alchemist will choose an Intelligence Apex item. An extra batch of Reagents at L17 is not going to set anyone's world on fire. The bonus to Alchemist DC is nice, but doesn't mean anything unless the Alchemist hits a target with something. Personally, if I had a Bomber, I'd be going Dex Apex.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even if you factor in quicksilver mutagen (which you shouldn't because that stuff is really a double edged sword, double your level less max HP is dire as f$#+, and the reduction in fort saves too) that only factors -1 behind, and that's not to include that they can just give quicksilver to their martial too.Yes, it is a double-edged sword. However, it's a continually available option, and it seems obvious (to me at least) that the developers expect it to be used.
As for giving it to the martial... 1) it's a double-edged sword for Martials as well and 2) I fail to comprehend the argument that just because they *can* give an item to a colleague, that makes Alchemists worse. Only a Full-Class Alchemist can give on-level colleagues an advantage with Mutagens. Alchemist Dedication folks can only keep pace with Item Bonuses, not surpass them. So if the Alchemist keeps their Mutagens to themselves... well, what does that change, overall? The Alchemist has fun using their resources and the Martials carry on the same as before.
My solution to this negative curve was to give alchemists Master proficiency at level 15. It's still a level after but that's when AC really starts kicking into high gear and you start feeling like you brought a water gun to a bazooka fight with an alchemist.And then the Martial ends up with a -1 compared to the Mutagen-Using Alchemist for Levels 15,17,18 & 19, catching up for good at L20. Given how many folks argue that the Alchemist sucks because it ends up with penalties compared to Martials, I can imagine that bit of math going over like the proverbial lead balloon.
Finally, I tend to disagree that an Alchemist will choose an Intelligence Apex item. An extra batch of Reagents at L17 is not going to set anyone's world on fire. The bonus to Alchemist DC is nice, but doesn't mean anything unless the Alchemist hits a target with something. Personally, if I had a Bomber, I'd be going Dex Apex.
To adress quicksilve mutagen: I'm not saying the ability to give mutagen to ally is worse, i'm saying it's a non factor because it's a bonus that can give bonuses to both.
It's like saying: I'm not gonna use heroism in a comparison between cleric and martial because Heroism can be applied to both, and thus shouldn't factor in.
Also Quicksilver mutagen would take the alchemist with master proficiency at on par with a non quicksilver using martial compadre. (they are at -3 from 16 + and -4 after, even with quicksilver and master its at best on par, if you assume apex goes to secondary stat then ok that's a build choice and should be rewarded by having greater accuracy and lower DC's, then they're not superior to martial characters they are every way on par, except they get their proficiencies 2 levels later. Because once again, quicksilver mutagen can be applied to both).
As for bombers not needing the DC, their signature feat chain is debilitating bomb, toxicologists also benefit from it more. Chirurgeon don't need it any which way. The only place where your argument is the most valid for Apex at secondary stat is mutagenist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To adress quicksilve mutagen: I'm not saying the ability to give mutagen to ally is worse, i'm saying it's a non factor because it's a bonus that can give bonuses to both.
It's like saying: I'm not gonna use heroism in a comparison between cleric and martial because Heroism can be applied to both, and thus shouldn't factor in.
I completely disagree. Here's what it boils down for me: the presence of an Alchemist in a party does *not* mean the other members of the party automatically get access to everything the Alchemist can do.
When I compare an Alchemist to another party member, I am comparing what an Alchemist can do for themselves, compared to what the other party can do for themselves.
Sure, the other person could have their own source of at-level mutagens. Maybe. They probably won't. There's only one Class in this comparison that has a guaranteed, day in, day out source of at-level Mutagens. And it's not the Martial class.
Now, if your play style is that you want to share the wealth, hey, so be it, knock yourself out. However, just because it *can* happen that way doesn't mean it *has to* happen that way. Which is why I consider mutagen access to fall in favour of the Alchemist when you're comparing one class against another.
Also Quicksilver mutagen would take the alchemist with master proficiency at on par with a non quicksilver using martial compadre. (they are at -3 from 16 + and -4 after
Your math is off.
Alchemist Bomber at 15th level with Master Proficiency: Dex 20 (+5), Item Bonus +3 (Level 11 Quicksilver Mutagen), Proficiency +21 = +28.
Champion (as an example) at 15th level with Master Proficiency: Dex or Str 21 (+5), Item Bonus +2 (Striking Rune), Proficiency +21 = +27.
At 16th, they're at par, as the Striking Rune catches up to the Mutagen.
At 17th, the Alchemist is back at +1 again with Level 17 Quicksilver. The +1 stays that way through 19th. Then the Champion catches up again, for good, with a 22 Strength at L20.
I'm not counting the Apex, because, unlike the mutagens, access to an Apex Item is not a class feature. It's basically guaranteed that everyone's going to get the one of their choice (especially Alchemists, who can likely just craft the one they want given some Downtime.)
As for bombers not needing the DC, their signature feat chain is debilitating bomb, toxicologists also benefit from it more. Chirurgeon don't need it any which way. The only place where your argument is the most valid for Apex at secondary stat is mutagenist.
It depends, really. Debilitating Bomb and its followups are great, absolutely. However, they all suffer from the Disintegrate problem that Spellcasters have. First you have to succeed on the Attack roll. Then the result depends on the Saving Throw roll of the Target. So, it becomes a question of: Do I want to make the Attack Roll easier, or the Saving Throw harder? Considering that there is no Saving Throw without the Attack Roll succeeding, I tend towards the former.
Now Toxicologists, I concede that the balance will likely fall on the increased DC side.
Calculated Splash bomber with normal prof, sticky acid:
Level 10: 19 Dex, 20 Int, expert; moderate acid for +19 (2 damage, 2d6+7 persistent, 7 splash - 37 average on success) - averaging 24.65 damage
Level 15: 20 Dex, 21 Int, master; greater acid for +26 (5 damage, 3d6+8 persistent, 8 splash - 50 average on success) - averaging 32.8 damage
Thanks for re-posting that. I'll have to ask you to DM me some time; statistics were never a strong point of mine but I'd like to understand how the math works.
I just quoted this part because there's some small corrections to make. It's actually working off of Expanded Splash (Int mod + Normal Splash damage), not Calculated (Int Mod replaces Normal Splash.)
Acid Flasks never deal more than 1 pt of normal damage... the Persistent and Splash damage go up with tier, but not the normal. So the L10 should be 1 pt, not 2, and the L15 (which benefits from Weapon Specialization) should be 3 pts, not 5.
You have master proficiency listed for L15, but the +26 is based off of the normal expert (+5 Dex, +2 Item, +15 Level, +4 Expert Proficiency). (I'm pretty sure the normal expert is what you meant for this part anyways and master was just a cut&paste.)
I'm curious how the numbers would work out if we assumed the use of Quicksilver Mutagen by our Bomber. At L10 they would be +20; at L15 +27.
Ah, thanks. I generally use Calculated Splash to assume the bomber is following both feats in an assumption of max damage, but it is technically true that they aren't linked.
I've never actually realized acid flask base damage doesn't scale. Huh.
Quick napkin math says that level 10 would average 24.05 -> 26.95, while level 15 averages 31.6 -> 35.6.
As a side note, martial prof (and specialization) with mutagen would average 27.65 at level 10, and 47.2 at level 15.
Feel free to DM me at any time to ask about the details.
is that math also assuming that:
a)you're playing with -4...
It assumes that an enemy that's the same level as the party lives for 2 rounds. Is that an unrealistic assumption to you?
Funnily enough, this doesn't require anything from the bomber path at all, so a mutagenist is totally free to also drink a Juggernaut Mutagen to offset those penalties. Does mean you then exchange it for Will saves, which isn't great either (especially since Will is actually a bad save for alchemists), but you can't have everything.
To adress quicksilve mutagen: I'm not saying the ability to give mutagen to ally is worse, i'm saying it's a non factor because it's a bonus that can give bonuses to both.
It's like saying: I'm not gonna use heroism in a comparison between cleric and martial because Heroism can be applied to both, and thus shouldn't factor in.
Also Quicksilver mutagen would take the alchemist with master proficiency at on par with a non quicksilver using martial compadre. (they are at -3 from 16 + and -4 after, even with quicksilver and master its at best on par, if you assume apex goes to secondary stat then ok that's a build choice and should be rewarded by having greater accuracy and lower DC's, then they're not superior to martial characters they are every way on par, except they get their proficiencies 2 levels later. Because once again, quicksilver mutagen can be applied to both).
As for bombers not needing the DC, their signature feat chain is debilitating bomb, toxicologists also benefit from it more. Chirurgeon don't need it any which way. The only place where your argument is the most valid for Apex at secondary stat is mutagenist.
Do you also not use inspire heroism in a comparison between bard and another class because that affects the entire party?
Bombers' signature feat chain is not debilitating bomb. That's an option, and one that literally every alchemist can take.
|
I suppose one way to help out, at least the bomber, would be more ways for bombs to still do stuff on a miss. Like if the Alchemist got a bunch of class feats that rode along on miss effects (unless all those additive feats for bombs already do affect target just hit with the splash damage, in which case nevermind).The way I do all splash damage is 1 degree less damage than the main hit. So if the main target suffers 2d8+2 in a failed save, anyone in the blast area would suffer half that damage on a failed save, and nothing on a successful one. This goes for spells with splash effects, alchemist bombs, etc.Why would you nerf bombs by giving splash damage a save?
Edit: I ask because that limits the utility of any suggestion you make, as at that point your numbers are aimed at a completely different mechanic. I'm not surprised you increased splash damage so much; I haven't done the math, but I assume you'd almost have to just to keep up with the CRB alchemical bombs after you nerfed bombs that hard.
Because I treat bombs like a more focused fireball. There is no attack roll, the Alchemist just chooses a target in range and throws it. When you attack with a thrown alchemical bomb, there is no attack roll; instead, the main target must make a Dex save: double damage on a crit fail, full damage on a fail, half on a success; any targets in the splash area take full damage on a crit fail, half damage on a fail and no damage on a success. Furthermore, as a bomber you add your Int mod to the damage, and you can choose to deal damage to only your primary target, with no splash area.
Yes, if you typically play that targets in the splash area get no save or way to avoid the damage, it is a bit more lenient because they have a chance to avoid the damage, but they also have a chance to take the full bomb's damage on a crit fail, so it's not entirely dependent on hitting a target's vulnerability in order to do more than a few points of damage (if they even have any vulnerability, which many enemies don't.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To adress quicksilve mutagen: I'm not saying the ability to give mutagen to ally is worse, i'm saying it's a non factor because it's a bonus that can give bonuses to both.
It's like saying: I'm not gonna use heroism in a comparison between cleric and martial because Heroism can be applied to both, and thus shouldn't factor in.
Also Quicksilver mutagen would take the alchemist with master proficiency at on par with a non quicksilver using martial compadre. (they are at -3 from 16 + and -4 after, even with quicksilver and master its at best on par, if you assume apex goes to secondary stat then ok that's a build choice and should be rewarded by having greater accuracy and lower DC's, then they're not superior to martial characters they are every way on par, except they get their proficiencies 2 levels later. Because once again, quicksilver mutagen can be applied to both).
As for bombers not needing the DC, their signature feat chain is debilitating bomb, toxicologists also benefit from it more. Chirurgeon don't need it any which way. The only place where your argument is the most valid for Apex at secondary stat is mutagenist.
Do you also not use inspire heroism in a comparison between bard and another class because that affects the entire party?
Bombers' signature feat chain is not debilitating bomb. That's an option, and one that literally every alchemist can take.
Inspire Courage (which is what I'm assuming you're talking about) affects everyone, so the Barbarian isn't missing out on it if the Bard decides to use it to shoot arrows a bit better.
Alchemical items are consumables and potentially mutually exclusive with giving one to the Alchemist or the full-time DPR character. Higher level Alchemists have an abundance of infused reagents to work with though so I don't think it's appropriate to assume the Alchemist doesn't have access to them unless you're specifically talking about low levels (and low levels being particularly rough IS a recurring theme for this class).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Low level resources are generally rough but not really for the mutagenist. Even level 1 mutagens are one minute durations, which means you're really looking at one mutagen per combat. One single reagent's worth gets you four uses (three from signature and one from flashback), which will cover a lot of typical adventuring days. Contrast with the chirurgeon, toxicologist or bomber who can easily go through that many items in a single combat.
By level 3 you're up to a 10 minute duration which potentially means multiple encounters (but only two mutagens per reagent so a little bit of a loss if your encounters are spaced out).
It's one reason I thought flashback was kind of a weird thing to give the mutagenist, since mutagens are by far the most resource efficient type of alchemical consumable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, if you typically play that targets in the splash area get no save or way to avoid the damage, it is a bit more lenient because they have a chance to avoid the damage, but they also have a chance to take the full bomb's damage on a crit fail, so it's not entirely dependent on hitting a target's vulnerability in order to...
That actually wasn't what I meant. I thought you were saying you make alchemical bombs require both a save and an attack roll, which is a fairly strong nerf. Making bombs Ref Save AoE instead of an Attack item is much more reasonable.
But that only highlights the other part of my comment; it is difficult to quantify any suggested modifications you have for the class, as you are basically talking about a completely different game than the rest of us, given the number of changes you've made to other parts that your modifications take into account.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Low level resources are generally rough but not really for the mutagenist. Even level 1 mutagens are one minute durations, which means you're really looking at one mutagen per combat. One single reagent's worth gets you four uses (three from signature and one from flashback), which will cover a lot of typical adventuring days. Contrast with the chirurgeon, toxicologist or bomber who can easily go through that many items in a single combat.
By level 3 you're up to a 10 minute duration which potentially means multiple encounters (but only two mutagens per reagent so a little bit of a loss if your encounters are spaced out).
It's one reason I thought flashback was kind of a weird thing to give the mutagenist, since mutagens are by far the most resource efficient type of alchemical consumable.
I think flashback is more about action economy than resource renewal. Which is really something the alchemist could use a buff on in general. DMW has a house rule that they can draw and use ANY Alchemical item as one action, not just bombs. I like it from a balance perspective but I do find it a little immersion breaking, especially when you can technically feed an ally an elixir as an action midcombat.
To adress quicksilve mutagen: I'm not saying the ability to give mutagen to ally is worse, i'm saying it's a non factor because it's a bonus that can give bonuses to both.
It's like saying: I'm not gonna use heroism in a comparison between cleric and martial because Heroism can be applied to both, and thus shouldn't factor in.
I disagree, because the point of comparison shouldn't be "what is the other guy in my party doing?", but "what can a baseline martial accomplish?" when we are talking about potential class buffs. As in, are you the alchemist keeping up with the expected math of the game? Assuming you'll be using a mutagen to help reach the expected attack and damage bonus is thus relevant, because you can guarantee access to it for yourself but no one else can.
That you can pretty easily maintain access to mutagens while simultaneously making enough for the whole party means you can share AND do at least a competent job, and you don't have to make the same trade off as heroism, as you probably have plenty of top level mutagens to go around.
doesnt give anything... apart from only having a LOT less rounds of combats/day due to not being a bomber tht is.
Even with ALL those stipulations:
what's the harm in them actually doing on par damage with a martial IF several simultaneous conditions need to apply and they also need to prebuff themselves AND they can only do so for a few rounds per combat AND doing so also means they have not enough reagents to actually support AND have severely diminished stats somewhere else like -4 to CON in order to do so?
That actually sounds like a balanced deal to me.
To be clear, I don't think Cyuoni was saying that the Alchemist did too much damage. It seemed more they were just answering YuriP's comment that we were overvaluing splash (I say "we" since I made the same argument regarding splash being valuable).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can only comment by way of anecdote. My player in AoA book 1 felt frustrated and unrewarded with his bomber alchemist and quickly switched classes before the end of the book. It didn't look like alchemists have a strong start. The wizard was likewise dejected, but not so much so that he had to switch classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can only comment by way of anecdote. My player in AoA book 1 felt frustrated and unrewarded with his bomber alchemist and quickly switched classes before the end of the book. It didn't look like alchemists have a strong start. The wizard was likewise dejected, but not so much so that he had to switch classes.
OK, GOOD! See? This one is onto something. He points to a problem.
Changes to lv15+ won’t do anything. Your problem is early on.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
What if there was a "half-alchemist" that could only do bombs OR mutagens OR potions, and was balanced on that restriction?
A constant refrain I hear is that people get dissatisfied with the class after being drawn to it for one of those three things, and then finding out that they have to do a bit of all of them to be effective. Just seems like the class works for those who want to be versatile but doesn't work for people looking for a specific theme.
It could be a class archetype that puts severe restrictions on the other two pillars of the class, maybe removing them as options entirely.
What if there was a "half-alchemist" that could only do bombs OR mutagens OR potions, and was balanced on that restriction?
A constant refrain I hear is that people get dissatisfied with the class after being drawn to it for one of those three things, and then finding out that they have to do a bit of all of them to be effective. Just seems like the class works for those who want to be versatile but doesn't work for people looking for a specific theme.
It could be a class archetype that puts severe restrictions on the other two pillars of the class, maybe removing them as options entirely.
Class archetypes might be the way to go there, yeah. Though investigator already gets close to that and archetypes allow most any classes to at least do a watered down version of it.
To adress quicksilve mutagen: I'm not saying the ability to give mutagen to ally is worse, i'm saying it's a non factor because it's a bonus that can give bonuses to both.
It's like saying: I'm not gonna use heroism in a comparison between cleric and martial because Heroism can be applied to both, and thus shouldn't factor in.
Also Quicksilver mutagen would take the alchemist with master proficiency at on par with a non quicksilver using martial compadre. (they are at -3 from 16 + and -4 after, even with quicksilver and master its at best on par, if you assume apex goes to secondary stat then ok that's a build choice and should be rewarded by having greater accuracy and lower DC's, then they're not superior to martial characters they are every way on par, except they get their proficiencies 2 levels later. Because once again, quicksilver mutagen can be applied to both).
As for bombers not needing the DC, their signature feat chain is debilitating bomb, toxicologists also benefit from it more. Chirurgeon don't need it any which way. The only place where your argument is the most valid for Apex at secondary stat is mutagenist.
Do you also not use inspire heroism in a comparison between bard and another class because that affects the entire party?
Bombers' signature feat chain is not debilitating bomb. That's an option, and one that literally every alchemist can take.
I Would not, because it affects both equally, therefore is a non-factor.
If one of them uses it, the other will. I could put inspire heroics as a +2 on both sides, or quicksilver mutagen on both sides, it'd come out the same.
Just like I could assume that a local halfling orphan does aid another in both sides, it would be kinda silly.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What if there was a "half-alchemist" that could only do bombs OR mutagens OR potions, and was balanced on that restriction?
A constant refrain I hear is that people get dissatisfied with the class after being drawn to it for one of those three things, and then finding out that they have to do a bit of all of them to be effective. Just seems like the class works for those who want to be versatile but doesn't work for people looking for a specific theme.
It could be a class archetype that puts severe restrictions on the other two pillars of the class, maybe removing them as options entirely.
This is how my fiancée felt even about the 1e alchemist. She loved having bombs and a bit of magic but she thought mutagens were gross and refused to use them.
And me personally I miss all the discoveries from 1e. Tentacles, tumor familiars, simulacrum ect.
What if there was a "half-alchemist" that could only do bombs OR mutagens OR potions, and was balanced on that restriction?
A constant refrain I hear is that people get dissatisfied with the class after being drawn to it for one of those three things, and then finding out that they have to do a bit of all of them to be effective. Just seems like the class works for those who want to be versatile but doesn't work for people looking for a specific theme.
It could be a class archetype that puts severe restrictions on the other two pillars of the class, maybe removing them as options entirely.
I'm not sure class archetype is wholly needed. A bomber or mutagenist archetype along the lines of the herbalist/poisoner archetypes might work well enough, if it is able to infuse full level items.
But that isn't to say a class archetype wouldn't work, because I think it would indeed. In fact, why not hope for both?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The biggest issue I have with the alchemist is that it's the only class that, coming into 2e, absolutely CANNOT be the same character from 1e without significant issues. It breaks the fundamental rule of 2e which was 'continue telling the same stories as 1e' because there is no way a bomber focused alchemist from 1e could function in 2e the same way at ALL, not to mention all the other alchemist styles.
All in all, it should have been an archetype as-is. After having played one for a significant amount of in-game time, it actually makes me MORE disappointed than I was before, lol. My opinion on the alchemist got WORSE having played one from levels 1-7, not better. Those levels make up a significant portion of most players adventuring experience (most games never make it to high level) and if you don't feel validated by your class SEVEN LEVELS IN you've got an issue.
Note, I am playing in two simultaneous AV campaigns, and I went alchemist in both to try and test it out. First one I swapped to Investigator with Alch Science and the second I stayed alchemist, and even KNOWING WHAT EACH ENCOUNTER WAS and actually metagaming a bit, I still didn't matter in-game. Even with full foresight, the prep meant so little.
Investigator however is always useful, every round, every day.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What if there was a "half-alchemist" that could only do bombs OR mutagens OR potions, and was balanced on that restriction?
A constant refrain I hear is that people get dissatisfied with the class after being drawn to it for one of those three things, and then finding out that they have to do a bit of all of them to be effective. Just seems like the class works for those who want to be versatile but doesn't work for people looking for a specific theme.
It could be a class archetype that puts severe restrictions on the other two pillars of the class, maybe removing them as options entirely.
Focused alchemist is how 1e did archetypes, so it would make sense.
That said, I'm not sure at the moment there needs to be that trade off. The attack routines we're talking about are genuinely terrible and don't compare favorably to much of anything. Issues about what you're doing in combat if you aren't distributing potions or throwing bombs has been a fairly common general complaint too.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
And me personally I miss all the discoveries from 1e. Tentacles, tumor familiars, simulacrum ect.
God I miss those feats. Extra arm would be lit, even it was restricted to only hold/activating items, and can't be used for shields, weapons, etc. Tentacle would be so much fun, especially if it retained it's grapple trait.
It's also peeves me that the alchemist has no in class feats for upgrading their familiar. Alchemist had arguably the best familiar in 1e due to how much crazy stuff you could get it, and now I have to take familiar master if I want my little lab grown homunculus to be able to valet my items and be able to use quick alchemy; and I really hate this because that archetype is mostly geared towards casters until mid level, which locks me out of multiclassing
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My counterproposal: Allowing Advanced Alchemy during Exploration would be more balanced. One of the iconic things about PF1 alchemists was their ability to merge a prepared formula list with semi-spontaneous formulas (the 1 minute extract preparation). Allowing alchemists to start the day unprepared, and then be able to semi-spontaneously come up with 6 sea touch elixirs when they need to cross a boggard-infested river, would be both thematic and useful.
This is definitely a good idea.
I agree the "item dispenser" play style isn't for everyone. But I remind everyone that there were a whole bunch of PF1 classes that were similar - the spellcasters that primarily "dispensed" haste or darkness or whatever and kind of stayed out of the fray. I think the complaint is less "I dislike handing out items full stop" and more "people tend to decline items because it sucks up their actions."
You can already apply potions/elixirs/oils to willing allies using your own actions, 2E made that action economy much smoother.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely think alchemist could use an action enhancer similar to Doctor's Visitation, and others would definitely be nice too. The fact that they basically get Quick Bomber and nothing else, in a game where even casters get to play with the action economy more, is brutal.
Calculated Splash bomber with normal prof, sticky acid:
Level 10: 19 Dex, 20 Int, expert; moderate acid for +19 (2 damage, 2d6+7 persistent, 7 splash - 37 average on success) - averaging 24.65 damage
Level 15: 20 Dex, 21 Int, master; greater acid for +26 (5 damage, 3d6+8 persistent, 8 splash - 50 average on success) - averaging 32.8 damage
Thanks for re-posting that. I'll have to ask you to DM me some time; statistics were never a strong point of mine but I'd like to understand how the math works.
I just quoted this part because there's some small corrections to make. It's actually working off of Expanded Splash (Int mod + Normal Splash damage), not Calculated (Int Mod replaces Normal Splash.)
Acid Flasks never deal more than 1 pt of normal damage... the Persistent and Splash damage go up with tier, but not the normal. So the L10 should be 1 pt, not 2, and the L15 (which benefits from Weapon Specialization) should be 3 pts, not 5.
You have master proficiency listed for L15, but the +26 is based off of the normal expert (+5 Dex, +2 Item, +15 Level, +4 Expert Proficiency). (I'm pretty sure the normal expert is what you meant for this part anyways and master was just a cut&paste.)
I'm curious how the numbers would work out if we assumed the use of Quicksilver Mutagen by our Bomber. At L10 they would be +20; at L15 +27.
Ah, thanks. I generally use Calculated Splash to assume the bomber is following both feats in an assumption of max damage, but it is technically true that they aren't linked.
I've never actually realized acid flask base damage doesn't scale. Huh.
Quick napkin math says that level 10 would average 24.05 -> 26.95, while level 15 averages 31.6 -> 35.6.
As a side note, martial prof (and specialization) with mutagen would average 27.65 at level 10, and 47.2 at level 15.
Feel free to DM me at any time to ask about the details.
I've been alerted that I have been shorting the alchemist a round of persistent damage (thanks ottdmk!) and should rectify that.
For explanation, I've been taking the average number of checks (2) for the amount of time it'd take persistent to burn out, but failed to account for the fact that it's rolled afterwards, thus making 1 turn guaranteed, 2 turns 70%, and 3 turns 50%.Thus, a level 10 sticky acid flask with mutagen would average 36.75 damage over 3 turns, while without mutagen would average 32.45.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My counterproposal: Allowing Advanced Alchemy during Exploration would be more balanced. One of the iconic things about PF1 alchemists was their ability to merge a prepared formula list with semi-spontaneous formulas (the 1 minute extract preparation). Allowing alchemists to start the day unprepared, and then be able to semi-spontaneously come up with 6 sea touch elixirs when they need to cross a boggard-infested river, would be both thematic and useful.
Yeah, that was proposed during playtest. While a lot of those ideas went in, a lot didn't, including this one. I still think there's some space for it, perhaps as a feat or archetype.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely think alchemist could use an action enhancer similar to Doctor's Visitation, and others would definitely be nice too. The fact that they basically get Quick Bomber and nothing else, in a game where even casters get to play with the action economy more, is brutal.
This would be a big help. Maybe move some of the math-fixing feats into the base chassis and fill the spots in the feat list with action-fixing feats that give you a choice of what you want to be most efficient in.
For action economy, we use the bandolier rule: If you have an item in your bandolier, you can interact with it as a free action when you use the item.
What I have questions for is poisons mutagens quick alchemy and durations.
Quick Alchemy Single Action
AlchemistManipulate
Cost 1 batch of infused reagents
Requirements You have the formula for the alchemical item you're creating, and you're either holding or wearing alchemist's tools.
You swiftly mix up a short-lived alchemical item to use at a moment's notice. You create a single alchemical item of your advanced alchemy level or lower that's in your formula book without having to spend the normal monetary cost in alchemical reagents or needing to attempt a Crafting check. This item has the infused trait, but it remains potent only until the start of your next turn.
So what happens if my toxicologist crafts a poison as 1 action, applies it to his crossbow as 1 action and shoots the bolt as 1 action and hits? If the enemy fails his save, is he under the effect of the poison only until the beginning of the toxicologist's next turn ? Then the poison loses potency?
My Mutagenist uses quick alchemy to make a serene mutagen on the fly because they're fighting a vampire. He uses 1 action to craft it, 1 action to ingest it, and 1 action to throw holy water at the vampire. Is the Serene Mutagen in effect only until his next turn?
So far I have ruled it that the effect remains ''potent'' until you ''activate'' it, which for poisons means applying it on a weapon or having someone ingest it for ingestion poisons, and then mutagens last their full duration if you quick alchemy them. But that very well may be a house rule...
Guns and Gears could be a good place to put an alchemist class archetype if they wanna try a different approach with the class
Yes, but only in their attack proficiency. They should get to master rank.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, but only in their attack proficiency. They should get to master rank.
Time to repeat myself.
Ever heard of ad absurdum? Try this out:
Give your Alchemist Legendary proficiency in bombs at lv1. See if your playstyle works.
If the answer is no, proficiency is not your issue.