I played my first game of pf2e today as a double flickmace fighter...


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

... and had a great time! We were playing abomination vaults and I joined on level 3. I have maxed intimidate and all the coercion feats as well as bard dedication.

We are a party of 4 but barbarian couldn't attend so we were 3: human fighter, (human looking) wizard medic (gave a hint he's not human but didn't want it to be revealed yet), goblin alchemist. Also there was a ghoul level 3 npc helping us. Goblin alchemist and I were new to the system.

The good: The encounters were varied and monsters interesting (1 haunt, one fight against +2 enemy and one fight against +3 enemy). I felt my character was effective and I could do a lot of stuff: double slice, intimidate, coerce, bull horn cantrip to boost intimidate and shield cantrip to defend myself. Risky surgery with assurance from wizard seemed really effective, healed me to full after going to half hp from haunt. In combat he couldn't really hit anything with produce flame though, he got one nice call from the grave off.

The bad: The alchemist and wizard were struggling.

spoilers:
Against +2 enemy lurker in light our party contribution to the fight was:
fighter: 37 + frightened 1
wizard: 5 + sickened 1
ghoul npc: 20 + paralyze
alchemist: 0 (didn't want to use splash since it would hit ally)

The +3 monster we encountered after this was a wood golem. Our alchemist was mvp here, doing (2d6) on miss. Once he ran out of reagents our GM allowed our wizard to fast-forward cheese the golem by opening door + produce flame + ally closes door to finish him off, since he wouldn't chase outside the room. All in all:
fighter: 11
alchemist: 42
ghoul npc: 6
wizard: 0 during actual combat, 36 over 4-5 rolls after GM allowed us to end combat and cheese using the door.

The alchemist didn't really seem to have any skill actions and even the second bomb throw each turn seemed a waste (except vs the golem), wizard had +1 striking crossbow but didn't hit with it once.

All in all I had a good time but I don't know if my allies did.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Sounds about right. I'm glad you had fun. Martials in general have a lot of variety in their combat actions. I'm sure people here will say that the Wizard needed to target the monster weakest save or some such nonsense and the Alchemist is there to give you healing potions or whatever.


Good to see new players having fun. Fighter will serve you well, especially with 2 flickmaces, you monster.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm just surprised the wizard was using the crossbow instead of the alchemist, and that the wizard didn't seem to have any slotted spells in the +2/+3 level encounters.


Cyouni wrote:
I'm just surprised the wizard was using the crossbow instead of the alchemist, and that the wizard didn't seem to have any slotted spells in the +2/+3 level encounters.

He used grim tendrils in the +2 fight for 5 damage and 1 persistent bleed. The haunt inflicted stupefy 2 on him so that probably influenced his decision to not use slotted spells against the wood golem (or maybe he just thought produce flame to trigger weakness was his best bet), I'm not sure.

The alchemist was new to the system and probably needed more help from GM to gear up (me and him got 75 gold to start with and buy whatever we want since we joined at level 3). Now that I think about it firing the crossbow at -5 MAP after throwing a bomb would have probably been even worse than wizard firing it after casting a save spell.


Was the Alchemist not a Bomber? Bomber Alchemists never have to worry about Splash hitting allies.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vodalian wrote:


The alchemist was new to the system and probably needed more help from GM to gear up (me and him got 75 gold to start with and buy whatever we want since we joined at level 3). Now that I think about it firing the crossbow at -5 MAP after throwing a bomb would have probably been even worse than wizard firing it after casting a save spell.

It's definitely worse, but it also means the alchemist wouldn't have had to burn reagents as much. That's really the purpose there, to save the alchemist's resources.

Wizard doesn't have to worry about that because cantrips.

Dark Archive

Cyouni wrote:
I'm just surprised the wizard was using the crossbow instead of the alchemist, and that the wizard didn't seem to have any slotted spells in the +2/+3 level encounters.

Wizard was planning to use animate dead + final sacrifice combo vs until I reminded him that the room with golem is a library with books to sell and then they went back to using produce flame.

As for the +2 enemy, that one was pretty unlucky and got repeatedly stun locked by ghoul's paralyze ability. So there wasn't really need for them to use stronger spells more than once.

ottdmk wrote:
Was the Alchemist not a Bomber? Bomber Alchemists never have to worry about Splash hitting allies.

And to clarify: Alchemist is a bomber yeah and he just misunderstood how the bomber's ability to choose to deal splash damage worked. He DID have just as awful dice luck as the wizard did with produce flame later on (alchemist rolled attacked total of 4 times, first one nat 1 with hero point reroll to non nat 1 critical failure, another nat 1 later on and other two were misses) so only damage they could have dealt would have been splash damage.

Alchemist stated they'd rather not deal splash damage at all to fighter and while I did think it was bit odd, I didn't think of questioning it right then to keep things moving.(I have practice to avoid asking "Are you sure you remember how your character works?" unless success of players hinges on it right then. This was the enemy that had gotten stunlocked so it wasn't as important, I would have asked about it at the golem encounter had it come up again)

Anyway, speaking of forgetting, remembered to ask player about it now thanks to this thread x'D Well would probably have remembered when I check through their sheet(alchemist finished with character right before start of session and I did tell new players I do allow them do changes to character as they were playing game on first time on level 3 if they felt their character was off.)


5 people marked this as a favorite.
rnphillips wrote:
Sounds about right. ... I'm sure people here will say that the Wizard needed to target the monster weakest save or some such nonsense and the Alchemist is there to give you healing potions or whatever.

This sounds about right. A wizard goes around shooting a crossbow and a bomber forgets the main class feature, and haters blame a poorly-designed class.

To be clear, I'm GMing Malevolence and I would absolutely steer characters away from alchemist (unless I wove in some Crafting subplots or homebrewed in better alignment damage). I also don't think new players should play alchemists.

But as soon as I saw 0 damage from the alchemist I lolled because I knew it was an exaggeration or a rules problem.

Dark Archive

Watery Soup wrote:
rnphillips wrote:
Sounds about right. ... I'm sure people here will say that the Wizard needed to target the monster weakest save or some such nonsense and the Alchemist is there to give you healing potions or whatever.

This sounds about right. A wizard goes around shooting a crossbow and a bomber forgets the main class feature, and haters blame a poorly-designed class.

To be clear, I'm GMing Malevolence and I would absolutely steer characters away from alchemist (unless I wove in some Crafting subplots or homebrewed in better alignment damage). I also don't think new players should play alchemists.

But as soon as I saw 0 damage from the alchemist I lolled because I knew it was an exaggeration or a rules problem.

Fun fact, I did warn them and they said if character dies they will just make new one :D (that and part of why I offered players free rebuilds is if they notice the build/class they chose doesn't work like they thought or is way different from 1e version, so if on level 4 they don't feel happy with choice of class, that offering is still open)

That said I'm not too worried about alchemist. They will learn to use their sling more in time and abomination vaults as mega dungeon doesn't really have time pressure in same way as typical adventures do, so players tend to rest everytime dungeon throw something really bad in their way and exhausts their resources. (that and I find them to be easiest type of adventure archetype to adjust what dungeon locals do in day while players are resting :D)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
CorvusMask wrote:
Watery Soup wrote:
rnphillips wrote:
Sounds about right. ... I'm sure people here will say that the Wizard needed to target the monster weakest save or some such nonsense and the Alchemist is there to give you healing potions or whatever.

This sounds about right. A wizard goes around shooting a crossbow and a bomber forgets the main class feature, and haters blame a poorly-designed class.

To be clear, I'm GMing Malevolence and I would absolutely steer characters away from alchemist (unless I wove in some Crafting subplots or homebrewed in better alignment damage). I also don't think new players should play alchemists.

But as soon as I saw 0 damage from the alchemist I lolled because I knew it was an exaggeration or a rules problem.

Fun fact, I did warn them and they said if character dies they will just make new one :D (

I think your player may be overlooking something there. A character who deals zero damage isn't very likely to die because any enemy with a survival instinct won't bother targeting them. A poorly built/played melee character will probably be killed, but an alchemist not so much. You're more likely get your allies killed.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / I played my first game of pf2e today as a double flickmace fighter... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.