Alchemist 2.1 suggestions.

[shroudb]

I don't see how an absolutely massive difference in survivability isn't taken into account when comparing martial capabilities.

If you choose to make a character made out of wet tissue paper it should be different than an extremely more durable character.

When you don't reach, even if barely, the same offence, while you also have half the melee survivability of a character, I wouldn't call them "almost equal" in martial capabilities.

Especially if you count the massive downside of the dual wielding alchemist that he can no longer draw any of his potions without sheathing/unsheathing weapons.

And that's without counting the actual features of the actual martial (2 AoOs plus feats at that level, so you should add a few nonMAP attacks in there for the fighter)

[JiCi]

Have Mega Bomb deals 4 times the bomb's damage...

Seriosuly, if you're gonna make that feat into a Fireball, give it the proper heightening equivalent...

[SuperBidi]

shroudb wrote:

I don't see how an absolutely massive difference in survivability isn't taken into account when comparing martial capabilities.

If you choose to make a character made out of wet tissue paper it should be different than an extremely more durable character.

When you don't reach, even if barely, the same offence, while you also have half the melee survivability of a character, I wouldn't call them "almost equal" in martial capabilities.

Especially if you count the massive downside of the dual wielding alchemist that he can no longer draw any of his potions without sheathing/unsheathing weapons.

And that's without counting the actual features of the actual martial (2 AoOs plus feats at that level, so you should add a few nonMAP attacks in there for the fighter)

Most of your post is just hyperbole. I feel that your are biased against the Alchemist, like if nothing could be done with the class as it's riddled with crippling drawbacks.

You have slightly less survivability than the Fighter, something like 80% of it. And you have equivalent, even potentially higher damage potential once you take poison into account. It's true that the Fighter has a better feat support for a pure martial, though. But considering that you will make multiple AoOs per round on average is, well, hyperbole.

[shroudb]

SuperBidi wrote:

shroudb wrote:

I don't see how an absolutely massive difference in survivability isn't taken into account when comparing martial capabilities.

If you choose to make a character made out of wet tissue paper it should be different than an extremely more durable character.

When you don't reach, even if barely, the same offence, while you also have half the melee survivability of a character, I wouldn't call them "almost equal" in martial capabilities.

Especially if you count the massive downside of the dual wielding alchemist that he can no longer draw any of his potions without sheathing/unsheathing weapons.

And that's without counting the actual features of the actual martial (2 AoOs plus feats at that level, so you should add a few nonMAP attacks in there for the fighter)

Most of your post is just hyperbole. I feel that your are biased against the Alchemist, like if nothing could be done with the class as it's riddled with crippling drawbacks.

You have slightly less survivability than the Fighter, something like 80% of it. And you have equivalent, even potentially higher damage potential once you take poison into account. It's true that the Fighter has a better feat support for a pure martial, though. But considering that you will make multiple AoOs per round on average is, well, hyperbole.

At level 13 you get at least 1 AoO per round, sometimes indeed 2 but not often.

As for defences:

You are -3 AC, 80% of the hp (12 hp/level instead of 15hp/lvl), -1 reflexes (minimum, probably more), weakness to the vast majority of elements, no armor spec.

If you think that's just "80% less defences" I can't even.

The -3 to AC alone is way more than the 20% you cite.

If there's someone who's absolutely biased that's you.

[SuperBidi]

shroudb wrote:

You are -3 AC

-3 AC? Where does that come from?

You have -1 due to the Mutagen. You should be able to grab Heavy Armor if you want it. So it's -1 at level 13+. Armor spec is close to nothing and comes late. -2 to Reflex at level 13+. And 2 hp/level. And the weakness is easily avoidable as you choose when the combat starts if you take the Mutagen or not. Also, it's compensated by a resistance.

shroudb wrote:

At level 13 you get at least 1 AoO per round, sometimes indeed 2 but not often.

If you get one every other round, it's great. It's roughly one AoO every 3 to 4 rounds.

[shroudb]

SuperBidi wrote:

shroudb wrote:

You are -3 AC

-3 AC? Where does that come from?

You have -1 due to the Mutagen. You should be able to grab Heavy Armor if you want it. So it's -1 at level 13+. Armor spec is close to nothing and comes late. -2 to Reflex at level 13+. And 2 hp/level. And the weakness is easily avoidable as you choose when the combat starts if you take the Mutagen or not. Also, it's compensated by a resistance.

shroudb wrote:

At level 13 you get at least 1 AoO per round, sometimes indeed 2 but not often.

If you get one every other round, it's great. It's roughly one AoO every 3 to 4 rounds.

You have - 2 from Mutagen, titanic fury is both an untyped - 1 and Clumsy 1.

-1 more from heavy vs medium.

If you want to grab heavy you have already spent 5/7 feats for the dual wield+sentinel.

Your combat stats are lower due to having to pump int that fighter doesn't have to.

So if you go with a 14 starting con your will is now just 14 at level 13 and your dex is 10, you also are only human to grab heavy armor prof before you can get to sentinel.

Meanwhile, the fighter has the same dex but not Clumsy, and not an extra -2 so he's +3 ahead in Reflex.
He's +2 ahead in will with extra bonuses vs fear.
He's still 2 points ahead in AC.
He's ahead in hp.
He still does at minimum +1 attack at full map since level 13 is well beyond the time where fighters keep knocking down things every round.

And the most important thing, the fighter has spent 1/8 feats, you have spent 5/7.

PS. If your fighters only get an AoO every 4th round, there's something seriously wrong within how they are played.

[SuperBidi]

shroudb wrote:

You have - 2 from Mutagen, titanic fury is both an untyped - 1 and Clumsy 1.

Ok, I realized I made a mistake. I meant just Fury Cocktail, not Titanic Fury. Titanic Fury is for reach build that this build isn't.

shroudb wrote:

If you want to grab heavy you have already spent 5/7 feats for the dual wield+sentinel.

You don't have to finish Sentinel, so it's one single feat. You can add a second one if you want to exit it (and Mighty Bulwark is a super feat). Dual-Wield costs from 1 to 3 feats as you mostly need Double Slice. So we are at 3 to 5 feats roughly.

shroudb wrote:

Your combat stats are lower due to having to pump int that fighter doesn't have to.

Where does this build uses Int? So you have just one boost that you can't remove. Of course, you can pump it if you want, but it's more a choice than a necessity for the build.

shroudb wrote:

He still does at minimum +1 attack at full map since level 13 is well beyond the time where fighters keep knocking down things.

Then you are not speaking of the Fighter but of a specific Fighter build. Maybe a strong one, but I won't start comparing to specific builds.

Also, I've never said this Alchemist was overshadowing a Fighter in combat, just that it was competing with the highest martial damage dealers (with the graphs to prove it). You're free to consider that worthless or whatever. I feel that it's too strong and it's my opinion.

[shroudb]

SuperBidi wrote:

shroudb wrote:

You have - 2 from Mutagen, titanic fury is both an untyped - 1 and Clumsy 1.

Ok, I realized I made a mistake. I meant just Fury Cocktail, not Titanic Fury. Titanic Fury is for reach build that this build isn't.

shroudb wrote:

If you want to grab heavy you have already spent 5/7 feats for the dual wield+sentinel.

You don't have to finish Sentinel, so it's one single feat. You can add a second one if you want to exit it (and Mighty Bulwark is a super feat). Dual-Wield costs from 1 to 3 feats as you mostly need Double Slice. So we are at 3 to 5 feats roughly.

shroudb wrote:

Your combat stats are lower due to having to pump int that fighter doesn't have to.

Where does this build uses Int? So you have just one boost that you can't remove. Of course, you can pump it if you want, but it's more a choice than a necessity for the build.

shroudb wrote:

He still does at minimum +1 attack at full map since level 13 is well beyond the time where fighters keep knocking down things.

Then you are not speaking of the Fighter but of a specific Fighter build. Maybe a strong one, but I won't start comparing to specific builds.

Also, I've never said this Alchemist was overshadowing a Fighter in combat, just that it was competing with the highest martial damage dealers (with the graphs to prove it). You're free to consider that worthless or whatever. I feel that it's too strong and it's my opinion.

A) you still need to complete an archetype 3 feats to leave it.

So, unless you plan to play single weapon for 12 of the 13 levels of your build, then that's minimum 5 feats, 3 for dual, 2 for sentinel at 8+10.

B)you present a super specific build with exact weapons and items used, but we are NOT comparing builds? We are only allowed naked featless fighters?

That doesn't seem like a valid comparison at all.

C)but he is not.

The math shows that "as a martial he has to sacrifice everything to only reach the damage, excluding all defences"

And that math only works if we ignore the actual abilities of the fighter.

[SuperBidi]

shroudb wrote:

A) you still need to complete an archetype 3 feats to leave it.

So, unless you plan to play single weapon for 12 of the 13 levels of your build, then that's minimum 5 feats, 3 for dual, 2 for sentinel at 8+10.

I do it in 2 class feats. Dual weapon at level 2, Heavy Armor proficiency at level 3. At level 9 you get Multitalented for Fighter Dedication. Level 10 for Double Slice and you retrain your level 2 feat for Sentinel Dedication and level 3 feat for whatever you want. So, yes, you can pay more than needed, or whatever, but it's not that expensive.

Also, Free Archetype is definitely a thing that puts Archetype feat cost really low.

shroudb wrote:

B)you present a super specific build with exact weapons and items used, but we are NOT comparing builds? We are only allowed naked featless fighters?

I present a super specific build (well, there is still a lot of room, so not really specific) and I compare it to some generic build that uses the same combat style so one can get an idea of how it fares. If I need to compare it to absolutely every Fighter build in the game then I just give up.

shroudb wrote:

C)but he is not.

Whatever. I provided graphs so you can make your own opinion. I gave you mine.

A Fighter making one AoO per round is something I've never seen, so for me it's not a strong damage dealer it's a cheated build. I consider that a generic Double Slice Fighter is a high damage dealer. But we can disagree, everyone has a different vision of what an optimized build is.

[shroudb]

SuperBidi wrote:

shroudb wrote:

A) you still need to complete an archetype 3 feats to leave it.

So, unless you plan to play single weapon for 12 of the 13 levels of your build, then that's minimum 5 feats, 3 for dual, 2 for sentinel at 8+10.

I do it in 2 class feats. Dual weapon at level 2, Heavy Armor proficiency at level 3. At level 9 you get Multitalented for Fighter Dedication. Level 10 for Double Slice and you retrain your level 2 feat for Sentinel Dedication and level 3 feat for whatever you want. So, yes, you can pay more than needed, or whatever, but it's not that expensive.

Also, Free Archetype is definitely a thing that puts Archetype feat cost really low.

shroudb wrote:

B)you present a super specific build with exact weapons and items used, but we are NOT comparing builds? We are only allowed naked featless fighters?

I present a super specific build (well, there is still a lot of room, so not really specific) and I compare it to some generic build that uses the same combat style[/bb] so one can get an idea of how it fares. If I need to compare it to absolutely every Fighter build in the game then I just give up.

shroudb wrote:

C)but he is not.

Whatever. [b]I provided graphs so you can make your own opinion. I gave you mine.

A Fighter making one AoO per round is something I've never seen, so for me it's not a strong damage dealer it's a cheated build. I consider that a generic Double Slice Fighter is a high damage dealer. But we can disagree, everyone has a different vision of what an optimized build is.

a)even your explanation of how to get there is extremely specific using all kinds of retraining just to use half of your feats, including general and ancestry feats for specific weapons, specific items and etc.

the counter "build" was literally: fighter grabs a greatsword.

that was it.

all you had to do when you are comparing a very specific build, is to match it against another popular complete build, including the class features you chose to ignore.

plus, it was not even the "same style", one being a two weapon and the other being a twohander.

b)then phrase it as the graph you are presenting: "if you ignore everything else, you can do DAMAGE about as much as a naked, featless fighter without fighter features" (because that's what the graph shows) and let people make their own conclusions, do NOT try to pass it as if that graph somehow makes them "close to a fighter "as a martial""

[SuperBidi]

shroudb wrote:

the counter "build" was literally: fighter grabs a greatsword.

I realize I made tons of mistake when writing about this graph. It was against a Double Slice fighter, not a Greatsword one.

shroudb wrote:

all you had to do when you are comparing a very specific build, is to match it against another popular complete build, including the class features you chose to ignore.

Double Slice Fighter is a very popular build.

Around most tables I play in, if you bring a Double Slice Fighter with your feats spent on nothing relevant for combat, you will end up being at the top of the damage chart, maybe tied with another character. Comparing only to the most optimized builds is not a fair comparison, to me.
But as I said, we can disagree. Your expectations for optimization are clearly not mine.

shroudb wrote:

b)then phrase it as the graph you are presenting: "if you ignore everything else, you can do DAMAGE about as much as a naked, featless fighter without fighter features" (because that's what the graph shows) and let people make their own conclusions, do NOT try to pass it as if that graph somehow makes them "close to a fighter "as a martial""

If you ignore everything else? I don't ignore "everything else", I focus on an average build. Do you want me to compare it to a 14 Str Fighter like I've played with? Or a 12 Str Thamaturge? Yes, 12 in the attack stat, I've played with that. So, I take a very basic build that is quite solid without anything else.

The level of optimization is not similar around all tables. And your 1-AoO per round Fighter is nothing I've ever seen (and honestly, considering the number of times you made mistakes with numbers, I must admit I don't buy it until I find someone really doing it on their own and not with 3 other characters supporting them).
Now, I've given my numbers. For me, it's high damage, but you can disagree. We just have different expectations.

[shroudb]

i've made 0 mistakes on my numbers, my numbers were based on an average build based on the stuff you posted.

not my fault you made several mistake on what you posted.

when you lower all of your defenses and focus solely on offence and more importantly bar your main abilities (potions) from being usable in combat (2 wielding alchemist), then yes: You ignored everything else.

and yes, when you spend half your feats, both mutagens, specific equipment, and a complicated retraining plan, and you compare it to "fighter picks up a weapon", it is not a fair comparison.

even then, you should have given the fighter some base abilities like the ones you've given the alchemist to have a fair comparison. Even if simply picking up sneak attack. Simplest thing would have been giving the fighter the Alchemist dedication and see how easy it is to replicate all those tricks, since 3rd level energy mutagen and weapon siphons are trivial to have.

as for expectations on builds:

i've seen a single double fighter and it was a crit-fishing pick build.
most fighters i see either use reach weapons or knockdown twohanders, so yes, most of them get at least 1 aoo per turn.

p.s.
but as before, yourmind seems to be fixed on something, blindfolding you from critisism . Like before, you are simply ignoring what's posted so i see no reason to continue this debate.

[siegfriedliner]

The alchemist is a complex class has a lot of moving parts (formulas, reagents, batch sizes, quick alchemy).

It's also a subtle class it's resources are on the whole less impressive than spells but more numerous.

With the exception of plumb deluge no alchemical item is going to have the power of 7th level haste or 6th level slow, or synthesia, or stoneskin, or teleport or 3rd level fear.

As a damage dealer bombs at least map roughly to slightly better than unaugmented ranged strike damage but lack the range these offer.

The fact alchemists have worse proficiencies than martials and worse DC's than casters means that unless you really know what your doing they can feel just inferior at everything. In my mind this is a problem.

[SuperBidi]

shroudb wrote:

i've made 0 mistakes on my numbers, my numbers were based on an average build based on the stuff you posted.

most fighters i see either use reach weapons or knockdown twohanders, so yes, most of them get at least 1 aoo per turn.

I happen to have a Reach Fighter in my AoA PbP campaign, not played by me (so no chance that it could come from me). I've looked at the last 5 fights: 18 rounds, 16 when the Fighter attacked an enemy, 5 AoOs, 1 every... 3 to 4 rounds.

So, yes, another completely made up number very far away from reality. It's the third time in a month I debunk your numbers by extreme margins. Sorry about that but I tend to consider that most of your numbers are completely made up, which creates some issues when engaging with you.

shroudb wrote:

but as before, yourmind seems to be fixed on something, blindfolding you from critisism . Like before, you are simply ignoring what's posted so i see no reason to continue this debate.

On that I agree with you. Our discussion is pointless and I think no one cares about it but us.

[SuperBidi]

siegfriedliner wrote:

The alchemist is a complex class has a lot of moving parts (formulas, reagents, batch sizes, quick alchemy).

It's also a subtle class it's resources are on the whole less impressive than spells but more numerous.

With the exception of plumb deluge no alchemical item is going to have the power of 7th level haste or 6th level slow, or synthesia, or stoneskin, or teleport or 3rd level fear.

As a damage dealer bombs at least map roughly to slightly better than unaugmented ranged strike damage but lack the range these offer.

The fact alchemists have worse proficiencies than martials and worse DC's than casters means that unless you really know what your doing they can feel just inferior at everything. In my mind this is a problem.

It's been ages that I move things everywhere wondering if there could be a simple fix to the Alchemist and I haven't found any. Sometimes, I wonder if a complete (and by complete I mean complete) overall is not the only valid solution. The concept of having tons of items with low efficiency is not very functional. Balancing and using it is so subtle that you very easily end up with something broken (and considering that Paizo errs on the underpowered side by default, it means too weak in the case of the Alchemist).

[siegfriedliner]

The path of least resistance fix to a alchemist is give them marital proficiency in weapons and armor. Now that is a massive boost to alchemist power but I am not convinced the utility they bring is more impressive than what you get from wave casters so in my mind it would rebalancing them to a tier where they fit better.

[SuperBidi]

siegfriedliner wrote:

The path of least resistance fix to a alchemist is give them marital proficiency in weapons and armor.

It's not fixing, it's giving up. The Alchemist is not a martial. Making a martial out of it because it's too hard to make a proper fix is not what I want.

I hope Paizo will be able to keep what makes the class unique and develop that instead of just handwave it and make a basic martial out of it.

As of now, the Alchemist "uniqueness" is, in my opinion (it's a personal list, there are certainly other things people like):
- The way Mutagens allow you to push beyond the boundaries (in reach, unarmed attack damage and damage buff).
- Elixir healing and how it is very different from spell-based healing.
- Poison mechanics.
- Buffing.
- Bombs mechanics.
- Utility.

Right now, Mutagens are too punitive on defenses so most strange builds are paper made.
Elixir healing is really hard to use due to action economy issues. And Elixir of Life leveling is quite bad.
Poison has nearly no support, especially poisoning your allies' weapons. I'd love something to encourage a broad use of poison.
Buffing is dependent on either poison or Mutagens so same issues than above.
Bombs work quite fine.
Utility works fine once you get to mid to high levels.

So instead of giving martial proficiency, I'd prefer something to address all these play styles (a way to reduce Mutagens effect on defenses, especially saves, action economy enhancers for Elixirs and more granularity for Elixirs of Life, some Poison feats that are not based on you using poisons but anyone using your daily poisons, etc...).

[Eoni]

SuperBidi wrote:

siegfriedliner wrote:

The path of least resistance fix to a alchemist is give them marital proficiency in weapons and armor.

It's not fixing, it's giving up. The Alchemist is not a martial. Making a martial out of it because it's too hard to make a proper fix is not what I want.

I hope Paizo will be able to keep what makes the class unique and develop that instead of just handwave it and make a basic martial out of it.

As of now, the Alchemist "uniqueness" is, in my opinion (it's a personal list, there are certainly other things people like):
- The way Mutagens allow you to push beyond the boundaries (in reach, unarmed attack damage and damage buff).
- Elixir healing and how it is very different from spell-based healing.
- Poison mechanics.
- Buffing.
- Bombs mechanics.
- Utility.

Right now, Mutagens are too punitive on defenses so most strange builds are paper made.
Elixir healing is really hard to use due to action economy issues. And Elixir of Life leveling is quite bad.
Poison has nearly no support, especially poisoning your allies' weapons. I'd love something to encourage a broad use of poison.
Buffing is dependent on either poison or Mutagens so same issues than above.
Bombs work quite fine.
Utility works fine once you get to mid to high levels.

So instead of giving martial proficiency, I'd prefer something to address all these play styles (a way to reduce Mutagens effect on defenses, especially saves, action economy enhancers for Elixirs and more granularity for Elixirs of Life, some Poison feats that are not based on you using poisons but anyone using your daily poisons, etc...).

These are all great points. I really think the class at a baseline needs Quick Draw, whether that just be for infused items or all alchemical items. Alchemists should be able to mitigate the drawbacks of mutagens to make them more unique users of the items since the concept is so closely tied to the class identity.

[aobst128]

I think if the class remains without the ability to interface with combat in the same capacity as other classes, it's gonna remain painful to fight with. A martial chassis makes the most sense along with some more nuanced changes. A "quick use" ability would be pretty handy.

[Eoni]

aobst128 wrote:

I think if the class remains without the ability to interface with combat in the same capacity as other classes, it's gonna remain painful to fight with. A martial chassis makes the most sense along with some more nuanced changes. A "quick use" ability would be pretty handy.

I agree with SuperBidi about the Alchemist not being a martial. It should be a modular class that can step into or blend any roll depending on their resources. If mutagen drawbacks weren't so harsh this bit would feel better. This is why I'm hoping they get an ability to suppress the drawback, even temporarily similar to Psychic's Unleash.

My greatest hopes are action enhancers, powerful alchemy from level 1, legendary class dc, resource replenishment, and mutagen drawback suppression/reduction.

[siegfriedliner]

The alchemist in pathfinder 1e was as much a martial as the summoner and the rogue. If alchemists are going to be dependent on strikes for their damage then they need the facility to be good at them.

[AidAnotherBattleHerald]

Tragically, the ideal high level martial alchemist already exists. It's just not an alchemist. It's an alchemical sciences investigator with the alchemist archetype.

You get 10 vials for quick alchemy elixirs at your level, enough to keep you and an ally topped up on your favorite mutagen. Int to accuracy for ranged or melee attacks once a round giving you lots of flexibility. Strategic precision damage on bombs, and knowing ahead of time if you're going to crit so you can hit them with the necrotic bomb for sickened 3. Knowing if you're gonna hit or miss so you can just drink an elixir. Accuracy with choker arm mutagen is higher than the alchemist's normal accuracy.

Then you have 20 reagents for level-5 items, many of which are pretty solid picks. You can even advanced prep insight coffee for d8s on your precision damage.

Hell, pick up Trick Magic Item with all your investigator skill proficiencies and cast a scroll of Heroism before every combat. Only 30gp, you can afford like 30 of those with just the recommended spare change for a level 13, master proficiency martial character. The wand is only 360gp. It's better than most mutagens that cost up to 4000gp if you don't have a source of status bonus and stays relevant the entire game, unlike the mutagens with their inflated costs just to pull off a relative +1.

Like, we can do powergame nonsense. We can start choker arm, Devise a Stratagem, free action Revivifying Mutagen, then drink a fury cocktail to get the relative +2 to squeak out the crit. You don't even need to use the maximum level choker arm mutagens (or many elixirs), the level-5 prepared ones are good enough.

And the main thing driving me toward switching to this powergame nightmare nonsense is that the alchemist can only target AC and can only do that poorly at high levels. Casters can at least pick which of the 4 defenses to target.

The alchemist archetype is stacked. Any martial can take it and get decent weakness coverage, moderate healing, slow burn but great late game utility. You can just get what ends up feeling like the whole class, just a little behind and for 3 or 4 feats. I don't run free archetype but with it that's literally free.

Master proficiency with unarmed, simple, and bombs at 13 (15 max) would really help late game. Recommend auto-heighten formulas as well. Don't need crit spec or greater weapon spec or big damage boosts or whatever, but at least hitting is important.

I really wish this class and alchemical items could get a whole fundamental rebuild in themselves but it's honestly too late for that.

[Crouza]

One thing I genuinely hope for, and this extends to other areas of the remaster, but what I hope is that the team at Paizo do not feel they need to work within a rigid framework of the classes levels and progression.

They should feel the freedom to change at what point the Alchemist class gets its features. That if they need to push the quick alchemy buffs to a different point in the class in order to free that space for bomb proficiency bonuses at 7 and 13, then so be it.

Same with other classes like the cleric. I don't want them to have to feel like they have to be like, "NO! We cannot change Alchemist Alacrity to anything but 15! Alchemist must get master proficiency at 19th level only." because honestly, re-aranged when certain features come online would greatly benefit a lot of different classes, but the problem classes especially.

[Red Griffyn]

SuperBidi wrote:

siegfriedliner wrote:

The path of least resistance fix to a alchemist is give them marital proficiency in weapons and armor.

It's not fixing, it's giving up. The Alchemist is not a martial. Making a martial out of it because it's too hard to make a proper fix is not what I want.

Bombs work quite fine.

Hard disagree. Not my alchemist! I want a martial bomber with a clear progression that aligns with everyone else and is not super janky because Paizo can't balance differing item progression with expected class proficiency progression.

Just like with the warpriest we can acknowledge that people want different things from the class. You want something closer to the existing and still a lot of folks want a martial bomber.

It isn't giving up to give people what they want. The class is extremely polarizing in the community and its rare that the community can so clearly identify a singular fix that they think will get them what they want (give them martial weapon proficiency scaling).

[Squiggit]

SuperBidi wrote:

It's not fixing, it's giving up. The Alchemist is not a martial.

I mean you say that, but a significant number of the things on your list of unique traits are based around strikes. Bombs? Strikes. Those reach, unarmed, and damage buffing mutagens? Strikes. Poisons? Injury poisons are delivered through strikes. Buffing? A number of those buffs improve... strikes.

That's a whole lot of hitting things with a weapon for a class you say isn't supposed to hit things with weapons. Not to mention they already have martial proficiency for a significant chunk of the game as is.

Smoothing out their proficiency curve is part of how you fix a lot of those builds, because it doesn't matter how "cool" or "unique" you make something, if you spend three actions trying to deliver an injury poison and whiff because your accuracy is garbage it's not going to feel good.

Pure utility alchemists are already highly functional and arguably are in the least need of further improvements anyways, while some of the other builds being described here genuinely struggle with their output. It's not about "giving up", it's about improving a variety of different builds instead of just your personal favorite.

[SuperBidi]

Squiggit wrote:

SuperBidi wrote:

It's not fixing, it's giving up. The Alchemist is not a martial.

I mean you say that, but a significant number of the things on your list of unique traits are based around strikes. Bombs? Strikes. Those reach, unarmed, and damage buffing mutagens? Strikes. Poisons? Injury poisons are delivered through strikes. Buffing? A number of those buffs improve... strikes.

That's a whole lot of hitting things with a weapon for a class you say isn't supposed to hit things with weapons. Not to mention they already have martial proficiency for a significant chunk of the game as is.

Smoothing out their proficiency curve is part of how you fix a lot of those builds, because it doesn't matter how "cool" or "unique" you make something, if you spend three actions trying to deliver an injury poison and whiff because your accuracy is garbage it's not going to feel good.

Pure utility alchemists are already highly functional and arguably are in the least need of further improvements anyways, while some of the other builds being described here genuinely struggle with their output. It's not about "giving up", it's about improving a variety of different builds instead of just your personal favorite.

I'm a proponent of giving Master Proficiency at 15. I'm fine with smoothing out the proficiency curve. What I'm not fine with is considering that it solves the Alchemist to just focus on martial proficencies, something that some posters consider as the solution (like the post from "community" just above yours).

I think there's a general consensus that the Chirurgeon healing is clunky.
I think there's a general consensus that Mutagens penalties are too heavy, especially when it comes to saves/AC, making them hardly interesting.
I think there's a general consensus that Poisons are too easily resisted.

Giving only martial proficiency won't solve any of that. It will just encourage you to ignore the Alchemical Items and focus on hitting things. I'd prefer a fix that improves the interaction with Alchemical Items so the Alchemist stays an Alchemist and doesn't become a bland martial.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

alchemist bomb use dex attack roll seem to be a fundamental mistake

change bomb to dex save and give alchemist legendary class dc would be a much better basic fram work for the class

[Temperans]

On thinking a bit. Maybe the issue is just the overall lack of support for the different play styles. With the support that does exist being extremely hit or miss.

Take for example mutagens. Those have huge penalties for usually just mininal gain because of item bonuses. Then the only way to remove the penalty is a level 20 feat. There is no actual way for the alchemist to improve mutagens via their feats. Yeah you have some feats that offer minor improvements to specific, but they only have 3 generic mutagen specific feats:
• Revivifying Mutagen (lv 2), end a mutagen early for some emergency healing.
• Persistent Mutagen (lv 16), make one mutagen last until next day.
• Perfect Mutagen (lv 20), remove the penalty.

What is my point? Nothing about the alchemist makes them actually good at using mutagens. They don't really get any feats outside of "make more mutagens" that make that playstyle good. That playstyle usually revolves around making strikes, which the class doesn't do well because it lacks the proficiency.

I used mutagens for my example but the other fields aren't much better. Bombs "do well" but they are the most supported play style and people still mostly just talk about quick bomber, calculated splash, and debilitating bomb. This is why everyone thinks that its just "item dispenser the class", there is so little about the class that makes them actually using the item worth it. It becomes extra jarring when you realize that a lot of what made alchemist as a class worth playing, was turned into something just anyone can make/use, but the class was given nothing to really replace that: Hence again why it feels hollow, it is quite literally just a shell of its former self.

[Temperans]

SuperBidi wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

SuperBidi wrote:

It's not fixing, it's giving up. The Alchemist is not a martial.

I mean you say that, but a significant number of the things on your list of unique traits are based around strikes. Bombs? Strikes. Those reach, unarmed, and damage buffing mutagens? Strikes. Poisons? Injury poisons are delivered through strikes. Buffing? A number of those buffs improve... strikes.

That's a whole lot of hitting things with a weapon for a class you say isn't supposed to hit things with weapons. Not to mention they already have martial proficiency for a significant chunk of the game as is.

Smoothing out their proficiency curve is part of how you fix a lot of those builds, because it doesn't matter how "cool" or "unique" you make something, if you spend three actions trying to deliver an injury poison and whiff because your accuracy is garbage it's not going to feel good.

Pure utility alchemists are already highly functional and arguably are in the least need of further improvements anyways, while some of the other builds being described here genuinely struggle with their output. It's not about "giving up", it's about improving a variety of different builds instead of just your personal favorite.

I'm a proponent of giving Master Proficiency at 15. I'm fine with smoothing out the proficiency curve. What I'm not fine with is considering that it solves the Alchemist to just focus on martial proficencies, something that some posters consider as the solution (like the post from "community" just above yours).

I think there's a general consensus that the Chirurgeon healing is clunky.
I think there's a general consensus that Mutagens penalties are too heavy, especially when it comes to saves/AC, making them hardly interesting.
I think there's a general consensus that Poisons are too easily resisted.

Giving only martial proficiency won't solve any of that. It will just encourage you to ignore the Alchemical Items and focus on hitting things. I'd...

I will agree that they should not be full martial.

But my reasoning, based on my previous post, is that I think Alchemist should get rid of the subclasses entirely. Those should be class archetypes with actually dedicated support. Instead the class should:

• Allow alchemist to get a higher item bonus than other classes get from alchemical items.
• Make it so alchemist throwing bombs add Int to damage by default. There really is no reason why that is not already a thing.
• Make it so that they actually have class feats that interact with alchemical items beyond "this ones last longer" and "you make more of those".
• Make infused items only work for the character who made the item, unless you get a feat.
• Add back all the weird stuff like Gloom discoveries, spell knowledge, promethean disciple, etc.
• Either make each type of alchemical item have their own pool of reagents (bomb reagent vs elixir reagent) or double the number that they currently get.
• Get rid of perpetual alchemy. Yeah its great to not consume resources, but I think that feature is a distraction and reinforcing the "just a vending machine" idea.

[AidAnotherBattleHerald]

Mutagens are so punishing that alchemist becomes the only support class where a large subset of players actively reject your class's support.

And their benefits are typically worse than a 30gp scroll of heroism. The free gold value is an illusion.

[gesalt]

There's what? Four worthwhile mutagens? Energy for every melee with a weapon, drakeheart for a turn 1 sprint, cognitive for lore checks and silvertongue to maybe save some money on the party face.

[Crouza]

I honestly do say that I miss playing a mutagen focused alchemist like I would in Pathfinder 1e. Master proficiency would be good but at the same time, I want to be able to utilize the different mutagens without it feeling as bad. Not to mention toxicologist sounds like it'd be really fun but there is a lack of poison support.

Perhaps giving them caster proficency(Expert at 7, Master at 15) is a great baseline fix, and the other fixes should be what's discussed with the understanding that Alchemist will be able to boost up its to hit via items. I am a little miffed that Alchemist Goggles scale 1 level behind Potency runes, when that's literally all they do. I feel like you should be able to apply Potency Runes to Bombs AND Weapons without needing to basically juggle upgrading a magic item and fundamental runes to do the exact same thing for both.

[aobst128]

AidAnotherBattleHerald wrote:

Mutagens are so punishing that alchemist becomes the only support class where a large subset of players actively reject your class's support.

And their benefits are typically worse than a 30gp scroll of heroism. The free gold value is an illusion.

The new mutagen collar from treasure vault that lets you use a mutagen as a free action upon initiative makes them a lot more useful and competitive with spells just for the action economy. Prep a party with juggernauts and you're good to go. Only really bad ones are quick silver and bestial, which yeah, kinda stink.

[aobst128]

Crouza wrote:

I honestly do say that I miss playing a mutagen focused alchemist like I would in Pathfinder 1e. Master proficiency would be good but at the same time, I want to be able to utilize the different mutagens without it feeling as bad. Not to mention toxicologist sounds like it'd be really fun but there is a lack of poison support.

Perhaps giving them caster proficency(Expert at 7, Master at 15) is a great baseline fix, and the other fixes should be what's discussed with the understanding that Alchemist will be able to boost up its to hit via items. I am a little miffed that Alchemist Goggles scale 1 level behind Potency runes, when that's literally all they do. I feel like you should be able to apply Potency Runes to Bombs AND Weapons without needing to basically juggle upgrading a magic item and fundamental runes to do the exact same thing for both.

I've played a toxicologist and I think it's the most fun subclass just because of the large variety of poisons at your disposal. Every level gives you more options while the other subclasses mostly just have their lvl 3, 11, and 17 varieties of items to work with. Plus, poisoning your allies weapons before combat is one of the easiest ways to support as an alchemist.

[Dragonhearthx]

AidAnotherBattleHerald wrote:

Mutagens are so punishing that alchemist becomes the only support class where a large subset of players actively reject your class's support.

And their benefits are typically worse than a 30gp scroll of heroism. The free gold value is an illusion.

Like the quicksilver mutagen. -2 to fort saves AND double your level in damage that cannot be healed until after the fight.

For what? A +1 to dex attacks and reflex saves? I think the bard gives the same buffs with no draw backs.
Other mutagens don't hurt you thankfully, but they still give debuffs to saves.

[AidAnotherBattleHerald]

I've had a maestro bard without charisma item bonuses turn down silvertongue's +3 because they didn't want to deal with being temporarily untrained in a skill.

-1 AC mutagens turned down because people don't want to be on the receiving end of a crit. (Especially reasonable against a dragon.)

Quicksilver turned down by the sorcerer eldritch archer who stays in the far back because if they do get hit, they already don't have a ton of hp.

I've even had energy mutagens turned down. (Not really that reasonable but oh well.) I got so used to hearing no that I didn't even bother to offer while we were in a fire dungeon. Just announced I was using it, explained what it did, and no one asked for one.

(Meanwhile I have a bomber player who took ranger archetype just so he can Hunt Prey and Hunter's Aim, which doesn't combine with Quick Bomber. I gave him early expert proficiency and told him to retrain out of it after two sessions. He'll do all that for accuracy but won't drink quicksilver.)

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

alchemist can give anyone effect of juggernaut and greater juggernaut at level 11 and 17

that is one of the strongest class feature any class can have

it come online so late no player will suffer 10 level of alchemist just to give other player a nice boost

[Eoni]

With all this Alchemist chatter I’ve been thinking Mutagens need a full remaster across the board. Get rid of the weird drawbacks and just replace them with status effects that either affect you during their duration or after. It becomes more of a gamble to use them rather than getting slapped on the wrist immediately upon use.

[AnimatedPaper]

Eoni wrote:

With all this Alchemist chatter I’ve been thinking Mutagens need a full remaster across the board. Get rid of the weird drawbacks and just replace them with status effects that either affect you during their duration or after. It becomes more of a gamble to use them rather than getting slapped on the wrist immediately upon use.

Even making the bonus not an item bonus might make the trade off more interesting, since it would then stack instead of merely giving a small increase at great expense.

But, agreed. I hope mutagens across the board are examined.

[AnimatedPaper]

Personally, I hope that we just get a second alchemy class. Double down on this one being essentially a caster that doesn't use magic, and spin out another class that can craft items but mostly is intended to use alchemy to self-buff, like a Witcher.

It might be possible to make a doctrine like ability that modifies proficiencies one way or the other in order to get more or fewer alchemical items per combat, but I think spinning out a new class might be better than trying to cram all the needed feats into a single class.

[Temperans]

Eoni wrote:

With all this Alchemist chatter I’ve been thinking Mutagens need a full remaster across the board. Get rid of the weird drawbacks and just replace them with status effects that either affect you during their duration or after. It becomes more of a gamble to use them rather than getting slapped on the wrist immediately upon use.

The drawbacks are fine in theory.

The issue is that the payoff is no way near enough to justify the penalty, specially when the bonus does not stack with other things.

Make them give an alchemical bonus, and its a bit more justifiable. But I know plenty of people would complain about breaking the math and that having 5 buff types is too much for people to handle; Just to be clear I disagree with them.

Make the bonuses scale better and many people wouldn't mind it. But others would complain that it breaks the math, I personally say its a fair trade.

Make the penalties smaller, which would less the stance against the mutagens. But again people would complain that those items should have a heavy punishment. I personally think it never should be more punishing than half the bonus it gives at base value.

Mutagens are very much "rage as a consumable" but the benefit to penalty was not balanced properly.

[Temperans]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Personally, I hope that we just get a second alchemy class. Double down on this one being essentially a caster that doesn't use magic, and spin out another class that can craft items but mostly is intended to use alchemy to self-buff, like a Witcher.

It might be possible to make a doctrine like ability that modifies proficiencies one way or the other in order to get more or fewer alchemical items per combat, but I think spinning out a new class might be better than trying to cram all the needed feats into a single class.

Wait isn't this what investigator was supposed to be?

A class that is:
• heavy on melee.
• focuses on self buffs.
• has access to alchemical items they make.
• is great at investigating monsters.
• is more intelligent than people would assume at first glance.

Yeah, I am pretty sure investigator is meant to be "witcher" but that class has its own issues.

********************

Thaumaturge is also very witcher-like. They just need to get rid of the one-handed implement thing and its pretty much set.

[SuperBidi]

I also think the "high buff and high penalty" route is the best. I expect a Mutagen to really change my character in both a good and bad way.
But I'd prefer to stay away from numbers and get more tactical bonuses.

Extreme reach for example is in my opinion more interesting than just higher chances to hit. It really asks a question: Can I capitalize on this reach to get more than I lose because of the drawbacks?

I'd love the Mutagens to really open extremely imbalanced builds instead of current situation where they don't affect your character performance much.

[Temperans]

SuperBidi wrote:

I also think the "high buff and high penalty" route is the best. I expect a Mutagen to really change my character in both a good and bad way.

But I'd prefer to stay away from numbers and get more tactical bonuses.

Extreme reach for example is in my opinion more interesting than just higher chances to hit. It really asks a question: Can I capitalize on this reach to get more than I lose because of the drawbacks?

I'd love the Mutagens to really open extremely imbalanced builds instead of current situation where they don't affect your character performance much.

I think both have a place. But its specially hard to balance tactical bonuses, specially bonuses that are not numerical.

[AnimatedPaper]

Temperans, you can be assured that I am aware of what classes already exist.

So, no, the investigator is not what I meant, though it does demonstrate some of the strengths and weaknesses of a theoretical class. Thaumaturge is closer, but uses magical consumables instead of alchemical ones.

Might as well say the gunslinger is what I'm talking about. They at least get higher level feats that interact and build on their lower level crafting feats.

[Dragonhearthx]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Personally, I hope that we just get a second alchemy class. Double down on this one being essentially a caster that doesn't use magic, and spin out another class that can craft items but mostly is intended to use alchemy to self-buff, like a Witcher.

It might be possible to make a doctrine like ability that modifies proficiencies one way or the other in order to get more or fewer alchemical items per combat, but I think spinning out a new class might be better than trying to cram all the needed feats into a single class.

If they do a witcher, it would be better for it to be a class rather than a subclass. And make mutagens exclusively effective with that. And they only get intelligence mod per day but get a focus like ability to make one more. Flavored as looking for ingredients and crafting.

[AnimatedPaper]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

If they do a witcher, it would be better for it to be a class rather than a subclass. And make mutagens exclusively effective with that. And they only get intelligence mod per day but get a focus like ability to make one more. Flavored as looking for ingredients and crafting.

Right, so, it looks like I was not clear. I'm not asking for a class based on the witcher. I'm asking for a class that uses alchemy to augment their combat abilities, somewhat like the witcher does, but there's no need to tie the class's narrative to that one. Plenty of other sources to draw on.

I say this because it looks like people are trying to do that with the current alchemist, and neither the feats nor proficiencies are there for anyone but bombers. So it seems logical to make a class that can have those needed feats and proficiencies.

[Temperans]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Temperans, you can be assured that I am aware of what classes already exist.

So, no, the investigator is not what I meant, though it does demonstrate some of the strengths and weaknesses of a theoretical class. Thaumaturge is closer, but uses magical consumables instead of alchemical ones.

Might as well say the gunslinger is what I'm talking about.

Oh, I was not saying you don't know the classes. I was saying that Investigator (alchemy) and Thaumaturge (powers) are both very witcher-like. More specifically that Investigator was oh so very close. But because it fumbled the execution and focused on Device a Stratagem and 1-handed weapons, it doesn't quite work.

****************

* P.S. The original alchemist was very witcher like given they had exclusive use of mutagen (until Investigator with its cognatogen). That was very witcher like, specially in some of the class archetypes. The PF2e class also has a subclass all about mutagens. So people want to you know use their mutagens, but well we know how that story goes.

At this point, my idea of it being a chronic issue of lack of support keeps ringing more true.

[Dragonhearthx]

How about making the mutagens creature exclusive? That way you get more variety and the draw back are not that severe?

An example: your weapons are ghost touched but you have clumsy 1 against physical creatures.

Maybe not the best example, but the idea is that you get a specific buff to one creature type and get a debuff for a different opposite creature type.

And with the exception of a few none scale. Rather the higher item level the more monsters you get.
Like early levels you get beasts but it stops at item level 5. Monstrosity is item level 8 and 12. Ect.

[Temperans]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

How about making the mutagens creature exclusive? That way you get more variety and the draw back are not that severe?

An example: your weapons are ghost touched but you have clumsy 1 against physical creatures.

Maybe not the best example, but the idea is that you get a specific buff to one creature type and get a debuff for a different opposite creature type.

Most mutagens are not creature based. Those that are tend to be generic bonuses not specifically to fight the creature its based on.