Alchemist 2.1 suggestions.

[AnimatedPaper]

Temperans wrote:

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.

Pretty sure that was deliberate, not a fumble. The investigator is based around devise a stratagem, with any of their methodologies tying into that and augmenting it, but only somewhat. I've tried to make it work as a martial alchemist, and there's posts in this thread by people who have made it work for them, but I personally want a martial class whose feats and abilities tie into their alchemy.

And then after that I want either a new class or class archetype (I think a CA might be enough, but if I can think of 10 feats just in already printed material I'm sure Paizo could think of 30 more) that does what the alchemist does, except with magical consumables. Give us another vending machine to make the alchemist less lonely. They can have free scrolls that make a pseudo-bound caster to give them some punch during combat. I really liked the playtest thaumaturge playing around with that, and would like to see those feats and abilities come back.

Edit:

Temperans wrote:

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.

Here I'm with you. Making mutagens less punishing to use for the alchemist at least seems pretty key, and if a new class is needed for that to happen, then I think that needs to be what happens.

Could even split it both ways. The current alchemist could get feats that make their stuff less punishing to use (and more action efficient to distribute), while the martial spin off gets bigger boosts from their own product. That would support the playstyles of each without either feeling like the other is taking their lunch, and give both something to pick up from the other in the case of a multiclass.

Edit edit: Now my mind is sort of boggling at what a elixir of life subclass for this theoretical class would look like. Fast healing and dr maybe, but I feel like mutagens have that covered. Temp HP?

[Dragonhearthx]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

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.

You had mentioned "doctrines" (aka subclasses) I was commenting on that. The alchemist has to much in it at the moment. Remove the mutagenist and make it its own class. Aka witcher-like.

[AnimatedPaper]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

AnimatedPaper wrote:

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.

You had mentioned "doctrines" (aka subclasses) I was commenting on that. The alchemist has to much in it at the moment. Remove the mutagenist and make it its own class. Aka witcher-like.

Doctrines aren't subclasses, but okay, I see what you meant in that case.

I wasn't criticizing your post either way; I was rephrasing my own point since 2 people responding like you did means I was unclear.

[Dragonhearthx]

Temperans wrote:

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.

Of course not. That's why I am proposing this as a CHANGE to mutagens.

[Temperans]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

Temperans wrote:

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.

Of course not. That's why I am proposing this as a CHANGE to mutagens.

Okay I see what you were trying to say. I can see a set of mutagens built around that, but I cannot see mutagens as a whole built like that.

At the core, mutagens play on the Jekyll and Hyde, Bane, Green Goblin, etc. type of gameplay were you consume it for general power. A set based on creature type would be a good addition to that base to have more options.

[Temperans]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Temperans wrote:

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.

Pretty sure that was deliberate, not a fumble. The investigator is based around devise a stratagem, with any of their methodologies tying into that and augmenting it, but only somewhat. I've tried to make it work as a martial alchemist, and there's posts in this thread by people who have made it work for them, but I personally want a martial class whose feats and abilities tie into their alchemy.

And then after that I want either a new class or class archetype (I think a CA might be enough, but if I can think of 10 feats just in already printed material I'm sure Paizo could think of 30 more) that does what the alchemist does, except with magical consumables. Give us another vending machine to make the alchemist less lonely. They can have free scrolls that make a pseudo-bound caster to give them some punch during combat. I really liked the playtest thaumaturge playing around with that, and would like to see those feats and abilities come back.

Temperans wrote:

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.

Here I'm with you. Making mutagens less punishing to use for the alchemist at...

Focusing on Devise a Stratagem was the fumble. Because it made the whole thing so stiff. But yeah I can understand wanting a melee class that focuses on Alchemy: That is what I thought mutagen alchemist subclass was going to be.

As for the magical consumable vending machine class. I am surprised that Artificer doesn't have a subclass for that. They already deal with magical armor and weapon, so magical consumable items should be right in thr ball park.

Also, I miss alchemist having extracts, and the fact they were just "look I can make all of these magical potions with the small amount of magic I have".

[Dragonhearthx]

Temperans wrote:

Okay I see what you were trying to say. I can see a set of mutagens built around that, but I cannot see mutagens as a whole built like that.

At the core, mutagens play on the Jekyll and Hyde, Bane, Green Goblin, etc. type of gameplay were you consume it for general power. A set based on creature type would be a good addition to that base to have more options.

Maybe make the generic mutagens more unique. As in they give the boons of monsters.

Example: troll mutagen (lesser): Gives fast healing 2 and fire weakness 2 for one minute. If you take fire damage last turn you do not get the healing.

You would also have fewer generic mutagens. And maybe instead of an item bonus to attack, the generics are status bonus to damage. While the creature types are a statis bonus to hit.

[AnimatedPaper]

Temperans wrote:

As for the magical consumable vending machine class. I am surprised that Artificer doesn't have a subclass for that.

To choke down on my earlier sarcasm, what class do you mean here?

If you meant inventors, they kind of do with gadgets, but their main thing is permanent magical items (I think of them as the class that monkeys with an item's traits). I'd like to see them explore more of that, even unto branching into explicitly magical items like Aeon stones, before they get more consumables.

[Temperans]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Temperans wrote:

As for the magical consumable vending machine class. I am surprised that Artificer doesn't have a subclass for that.

To choke down on my earlier sarcasm, what class do you mean here?

If you meant inventors, they kind of do with gadgets, but their main thing is permanent magical items (I think of them as the class that monkeys with an item's traits). I'd like to see them explore more of that, even unto branching into explicitly magical items like Aeon stones, before they get more consumables.

I said artificer purely because that is what the inventor is on a mechanical level. They deal with mechanical and magical items.

Also yes, I also see them doing all that stuff you mentioned, and I am surprised that they don't already. Maybe one day they will add all those class archetypes.

[Karneios]

I've always felt they should do more with the class archetype system, a whole five in the game, only two of those actually changing up things for a single class, but if they did it more it could be good for subclasses that want to change up class features more and I feel like alchemist is one of the classes that could take advantage of that

[Captain Morgan]

Honestly, the simplest fix to mutagens would be to just rotate the penalties to match their PF1 variants. Picture this:

Benefit You gain an item bonus to Athletics checks and unarmed attack rolls. You gain a claw unarmed attack with the agile trait and a jaws unarmed attack.
Drawback You take a –2 item penalty to Arcana, Crafting, Lore, Occultism, and Society checks. Choose one skill in which you are trained; for the duration, you become untrained in that skill. All your failures on checks to Recall Knowledge become critical failures.

Benefit You gain an item bonus to Acrobatics checks, Stealth checks, Thievery checks, Reflex saves, and Dexterity-based attack rolls, and you gain the listed status bonus to your Speed.
Drawback You take a –2 penalty to Will saves, Perception Checks, and wisdom based skills.

Benefit You gain an item bonus to Fortitude saves and the listed number of temporary Hit Points. Whenever you are at maximum Hit Points for at least 1 full minute, you regain the temporary Hit Points.
Drawback: You take a -2 penalty to Diplomacy, Deception, Intimidation, and Performance checks.

Benefit You gain an item bonus to Deception, Diplomacy, Intimidation, and Performance checks. You gain the same bonus for charisma based spell sttacks. Your critical failures with any of these skills become failures instead.
Drawback You take damage equal to twice your level; you can't recover Hit Points lost in this way by any means while the mutagen lasts. You take a –2 penalty to Fortitude saves

Benefit You gain an item bonus to Arcana, Crafting, Lore, Occultism, and Society checks and all checks to Recall Knowledge. You gain the same item bonus to intelligence based spell attacks. Your critical failures on Recall Knowledge checks become failures instead.
Drawback You take a –2 penalty to weapon and unarmed attack rolls, Athletics checks, and Acrobatics checks. You can carry 2 less Bulk than normal before becoming encumbered, and the maximum Bulk you can carry is reduced by 4.

Benefit You gain an item bonus to Will saves and Perception, Medicine, Nature, Religion, and Survival checks. This bonus improves when you attempt Will saves against mental effects. You gain the same item bonus to wisdom based spell attack rolls.
Drawback You take a –1 penalty to AC and a –2 penalty to Reflex saves.

It is a lot more useful, and gives spell attacks an item bonus option as well. You could probably ditch that part if it breaks things with True Strike.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

lower all the penalty to -1 instead of 2 maybe able to encourage player to use mutagen even at low level

[Themetricsystem]

Karneios wrote:

I've always felt they should do more with the class archetype system, a whole five in the game, only two of those actually changing up things for a single class, but if they did it more it could be good for subclasses that want to change up class features more and I feel like alchemist is one of the classes that could take advantage of that

Careful, anytime folks suggest the use of the Class Archetype around here they get talked down to about how "that concept you're thinking of should AKSCHUALLY just be a regular Archetype or its own Class!" and it literally never stops.

I think folks on the Dev team even started to believe it because they seem to be completely unwilling to actually make new Class Archetypes despite how impactful they could be.

[Temperans]

Themetricsystem wrote:

Karneios wrote:

I've always felt they should do more with the class archetype system, a whole five in the game, only two of those actually changing up things for a single class, but if they did it more it could be good for subclasses that want to change up class features more and I feel like alchemist is one of the classes that could take advantage of that

Careful, anytime folks suggest the use of the Class Archetype around here they get talked down to about how "that concept you're thinking of should AKSCHUALLY just be a regular Archetype or its own Class!" and it literally never stops.

I think folks on the Dev team even started to believe it because they seem to be completely unwilling to actually make new Class Archetypes despite how impactful they could be.

Its a weird situation with that.

A lot of people kept saying that Swashbuckler, Investigator, etc. should just be class archetypes or generic archetype. People disagreed for obvious reason.

But a lot of people took that, and made it into "nobody ever wants class archetypes". Which is honestly just bad for the game. More class archetypes is good.

If anything the biggest issue class archetypes have is that PF2e did not give class a lot of options for things that can be replaced. They probably have a hard time coming up with how to even do it for that reason.

[MEATSHED]

My only real suggestion is to have mutagen feats not be so specific. There are like 10 feats that each buff a different type of mutagen.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

mutagen feat are far too weak

even if those mutagen feat apply to any mutagen they make with quick alchemy they still wouldn't be good enough

plum deluge perfect mutagen and mega bomb really need to be baseline performance of alchemist at level 1 instead of level 20 for the class to work

[ottdmk]

I find the conversation around Mutagens and their benefits and drawbacks fairly fascinating.

I decided to play an Alchemist because of these forums. A couple of years ago I was looking to play a character from Level 1 up, and I was looking for ideas, so I started reading these forums. (I was already playing Pathfinder 2e, but we moved our homebrew campaign over from D&D 3.5 and everybody was L12.) Reading about Alchemists, everything was basically folks dumping on the Class, which intrigued me. My reaction was basically "it can't be that bad", so I started reading it over, and eventually realized this was a Class I wanted to try.

I decided early on that there had to be a reason for the accuracy deficiencies in the Class. The only reason I could think of was the access to Mutagens, so I started looking at Mutagens a lot. Quicksilver in particular, as I wanted to play a Bomber.

The Drawback, I will admit, was daunting. -2 to Fortitude Saves? 2 HP per level? The damage scales?

So I started wondering. I mean, obviously, whomever designed this stuff believed people would use it. Why would they believe that? What does the Drawback actually mean in play?

I looked at the damage first. 2 HP per level. So, instead of an 8 HP per level Class, I would become a 6 HP per level Class. I already knew that healing up between fights was straightforward, so cumulative damage didn't worry me. So, 6 HP a level.

I was already playing a Wizard by that point. A L12 Wizard, true, but a Wizard. I figured if I was surviving ok with a Wizard, I could survive being a 6HP per level Bomber.

Don't get me wrong... I compensated as much as I could. I brought up Con as much as the build would allow. I went Hillock Halfling because they may be the best there are at healing up between fights. I took Toughness at L3.

But for the most part, I believe I made the right call. I've played a Bomber to L11 so far. Being Ranged has definitely upgraded my survival ability. A fair number of fights I'm not even targeted. Being knocked to Dying has been quite rare.

So that left the Fortitude Save penalty.

Alchemists start with Expert in Fortitude Saves. So, a -2 penalty essentially shifts that to Trained.

Alchemists also get Juggernaut (the Class Feature) at L11. Which would basically be Expert on Quicksilver (although with the Success -> Critical Success upgrade.)

So I started wondering, much as I did with the damage: How does that compare to other Classes?

What I found was that the latest that other Classes got Expert Fortitude Saves was 9th. Six Classes finally get Expert Fortitude Saves at 9th level.

Ten and a half Classes never get Master in Fortitude Saves (barring Canny Acumen, of course.) (The half is Cloistered Cleric, if you were wondering. Warpriests get Fifth Doctrine, aka Juggernaut, at L15.)

So all right... L1-8, I'm Trained while on Quicksilver. I've got six other Classes right there with me. L11+ I'm Expert, just like 10.5 other Classes. Although I've got Juggernaut, even at Expert... and that's a very nice thing.

That leaves 9 & 10 where I will have the worst Fortitude Saves in the game.

I decided I could live with those two levels. And I finished playing through them not long ago.

And in return? Well, for six out of the next ten levels (counting this one) I'm +2 ahead of Resilient Runes when it comes to Reflex Saves. (The other 4 just +1.)

I'm +1 ahead of the Strike Bonus from Greater Alchemist's Goggles, which I don't have to buy (I'd need them for my four Perpetual Infusion Bombs, which are behind on Item Bonuses.)

I have a better Status Bonus to Speed than Longstrider, although the duration isn't nearly as good. Still, I can afford to invest considerable resources in keeping up Quicksilver most of the day now.

I have a +3 bonus to Acrobatics and Stealth six levels before I'd expect to have that level otherwise. I even have a +3 to Thievery, although I don't think my guy even owns Thief tools.

All told, I'm quite happy with the trade.

[AnimatedPaper]

Temperans wrote:

Themetricsystem wrote:

Karneios wrote:

I've always felt they should do more with the class archetype system, a whole five in the game, only two of those actually changing up things for a single class, but if they did it more it could be good for subclasses that want to change up class features more and I feel like alchemist is one of the classes that could take advantage of that

Careful, anytime folks suggest the use of the Class Archetype around here they get talked down to about how "that concept you're thinking of should AKSCHUALLY just be a regular Archetype or its own Class!" and it literally never stops.

I think folks on the Dev team even started to believe it because they seem to be completely unwilling to actually make new Class Archetypes despite how impactful they could be.

Its a weird situation with that.

A lot of people kept saying that Swashbuckler, Investigator, etc. should just be class archetypes or generic archetype. People disagreed for obvious reason.

But a lot of people took that, and made it into "nobody ever wants class archetypes". Which is honestly just bad for the game. More class archetypes is good.

If anything the biggest issue class archetypes have is that PF2e did not give class a lot of options for things that can be replaced. They probably have a hard time coming up with how to even do it for that reason.

That's the conclusion I came to as well. The proper use case for a class archetype seems to be: messing about with proficiencies (Doctrines), adding a class ability that is unbalanced compared to similar abilites (Spellshot), or altering spellcasting somehow (pretty much every other one). And even some of that can be accomplished by feats when it is purely additive instead of wholesale swapping out of existing abilities. And even there, the changes have to be small enough that you only need a limited number of feats added and they can safely use the majority of their existing class feats; if the archetyped class needs 20+ feats to support its playstyle, or it suddenly can't use half the existing class feats (for example, taking away Divine Font from a cleric) you might as well add a new class and not risk weird interactions.

[MEATSHED]

ottdmk wrote:

I find the conversation around Mutagens and their benefits and drawbacks fairly fascinating.

I decided to play an Alchemist because of these forums. A couple of years ago I was looking to play a character from Level 1 up, and I was looking for ideas, so I started reading these forums. (I was already playing Pathfinder 2e, but we moved our homebrew campaign over from D&D 3.5 and everybody was L12.) Reading about Alchemists, everything was basically folks dumping on the Class, which intrigued me. My reaction was basically "it can't be that bad", so I started reading it over, and eventually realized this was a Class I wanted to try.

I decided early on that there had to be a reason for the accuracy deficiencies in the Class. The only reason I could think of was the access to Mutagens, so I started looking at Mutagens a lot. Quicksilver in particular, as I wanted to play a Bomber.

The Drawback, I will admit, was daunting. -2 to Fortitude Saves? 2 HP per level? The damage scales?

So I started wondering. I mean, obviously, whomever designed this stuff believed people would use it. Why would they believe that? What does the Drawback actually mean in play?

I looked at the damage first. 2 HP per level. So, instead of an 8 HP per level Class, I would become a 6 HP per level Class. I already knew that healing up between fights was straightforward, so cumulative damage didn't worry me. So, 6 HP a level.

I was already playing a Wizard by that point. A L12 Wizard, true, but a Wizard. I figured if I was surviving ok with a Wizard, I could survive being a 6HP per level Bomber.

Don't get me wrong... I compensated as much as I could. I brought up Con as much as the build would allow. I went Hillock Halfling because they may be the best there are at healing up between fights. I took Toughness at L3.

But for the most part, I believe I made the right call. I've played a Bomber to L11 so far. Being Ranged has definitely upgraded my survival ability.

This is kind of the key problem with mutagens. You wrote all this analysis for if the mutagen is worth it while heroism exists and does almost everything quicksilver (it doesn't improve speed, everything else heroism also improves) does but it doesn't require you to learn high level versions to keep giving a +1 and its good on everyone and also doesn't stab you. Yes you'll have more alchemy supplies than the spellcaster buffer has slots but they also have access to stuff like bless to help everyone while buffing themselves.

[aobst128]

MEATSHED wrote:

ottdmk wrote:

I find the conversation around Mutagens and their benefits and drawbacks fairly fascinating.

I decided to play an Alchemist because of these forums. A couple of years ago I was looking to play a character from Level 1 up, and I was looking for ideas, so I started reading these forums. (I was already playing Pathfinder 2e, but we moved our homebrew campaign over from D&D 3.5 and everybody was L12.) Reading about Alchemists, everything was basically folks dumping on the Class, which intrigued me. My reaction was basically "it can't be that bad", so I started reading it over, and eventually realized this was a Class I wanted to try.

I decided early on that there had to be a reason for the accuracy deficiencies in the Class. The only reason I could think of was the access to Mutagens, so I started looking at Mutagens a lot. Quicksilver in particular, as I wanted to play a Bomber.

The Drawback, I will admit, was daunting. -2 to Fortitude Saves? 2 HP per level? The damage scales?

So I started wondering. I mean, obviously, whomever designed this stuff believed people would use it. Why would they believe that? What does the Drawback actually mean in play?

I looked at the damage first. 2 HP per level. So, instead of an 8 HP per level Class, I would become a 6 HP per level Class. I already knew that healing up between fights was straightforward, so cumulative damage didn't worry me. So, 6 HP a level.

I was already playing a Wizard by that point. A L12 Wizard, true, but a Wizard. I figured if I was surviving ok with a Wizard, I could survive being a 6HP per level Bomber.

Don't get me wrong... I compensated as much as I could. I brought up Con as much as the build would allow. I went Hillock Halfling because they may be the best there are at healing up between fights. I took Toughness at L3.

But for the most part, I believe I made the right call. I've played a Bomber to L11 so far. Being Ranged has definitely upgraded my survival ability.

This is...

You gotta consider action economy. Mutagens can be activated as a free action upon initiative with the mutagen collar while heroism is gonna always cost you at least 2 actions. 3 if you need to stride to your target since it's a touch spell. Plus, mutagens will stack with heroism so it's not necessarily a competition when you can have both active.

[ottdmk]

MEATSHED wrote:

This is kind of the key problem with mutagens. You wrote all this analysis for if the mutagen is worth it while heroism exists and does almost everything quicksilver (it doesn't improve speed, everything else heroism also improves) does but it doesn't require you to learn high level versions to keep giving a +1 and its good on everyone and also doesn't stab you.

You do realize it's more than just about a +1, right?

1) I'm not +1 over Resilient Runes. I'm +2. And I will be for 6 out of the next 10 levels (11-13, 17-19). The other four I'll be +1. Everyone makes such a fuss over "every +1 matters"... well, this is +2.

2) To get what I get out of Quicksilver, I'd have to invest in Greater Alchemist's Goggles, Thunderblast Slippers, a Greater Shadow Rune, and later I'd have to upgrade them. Mind you, I *would* be getting Anklets of Alacrity anyways as they're the best Apex Item for my combat style.. but that still leaves the other two. And Major Quicksilver would still be +1 over the Anklets. I'm not really sure what I'd do about the speed. Wand of Longstrider maybe? Not as fast though. Awful lot of investment.

3) I always take Quicksilver as a free Formula, as it's fundamental. I can work around not getting any of the others, but not that one.

Quote:

Yes you'll have more alchemy supplies than the spellcaster buffer has slots but they also have access to stuff like bless to help everyone while buffing themselves.

Fantastic! They can buff my guy while they're at it.

aobst128 wrote:

You gotta consider action economy. Mutagens can be activated as a free action upon initiative with the mutagen collar while heroism is gonna always cost you at least 2 actions.

What I've found is this: Opportunities to pre-buff, even with ten minute durations, are rare. Usually you're straight into Initiative.

So, if I've gone the Trick Magic Item route, it's three Actions to use Heroism, or one entire Round. Possibly four, if I don't have the item on hand. (I imagine if I were doing it regularly, I would keep it out.) If I went with a Spellcasting Archetype (I imagine Psychic would be a good choice) it would be better... two at most, three if need to Draw.

Compared to my current duration on Quicksilver: 1 hour. I have enough Reagents now that I can just keep using it all day. I'm gonna try six out of eight hours though. I think that'll be enough. All I need is about ten minutes to heal up after each one (less if I get lucky with a Revivifying Mutagen roll).

So, no actions. Don't even need to bother with a Collar.

Quote:

Plus, mutagens will stack with heroism so it's not necessarily a competition when you can have both active.

Yep! And with hour-long Quicksilver it would be the same action economy. Spend the first round buffing with Heroism.

Personally though, think I'll just start throwing Bombs instead.

[Squiggit]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Pretty sure that was deliberate, not a fumble

Given that the entire investigator class is a fumble, hard to say.

[AidAnotherBattleHerald]

ottdmk wrote:

I've played a Bomber to L11 so far.

Levels 7-12 are the best levels for an alchemist. Bomber is the least complained about subclass. Alchemical sciences investigator can use the same self-buffs (less splash damage but can precision d8 the bombs), so I don't honestly feel like access to mutagens is a justification for the late game nerf.

You're about to hit the levels where you miss more often than any other class. Creatures get +3 AC every two levels and you're gonna feel that lack of master, and you're gonna feel hard locked into quicksilver instead of being able to mix up something else occasionally. Maybe you'll be like me and miss with a 14 (after a +1) on the die against a PL+1 creature in the midst of a near TPK and just... lose interest. AC is the only thing you can really target with your abilities, you're not a caster.

I was about to ask to switch from mutagenist to chirurgeon because so many of my turns became quick alchemy 2 elixirs of life and chug or force feed someone. Funnily enough, an extremely powerful ability that I never had the class fantasy of doing so often. Maybe it and now skunk bomb (which nearly requires bomber subclass to not hit allies) and sticky bomb and mutagens together are the reason we're at expert. Mostly I think they thought alchemical items would scale harder than they did.

Okay so you've either spent money getting Collar of the Shifting Spider on all 4 party members, and you're lucky enough that they're all willing to use them. You're about level 6 or 7. You've got your action economy boost over ambushes. Or, 11+ when you've rebought all your formulas just so they can do again what they already did, but they last an hour now. Just a couple levels before the heroism scroll becomes cheap enough it might as well be a cantrip.

Being able to prebuff with a ten minute buff is something I've almost always been able to do. The majority of the games take place in dungeon-equivalents. In my experience, it's rare to be ambushed, slightly rarer to ambushed in the next 10-60 minutes instead of the next 10 minutes. But yes, you'll get more action economy value if you can't predict if you'll be in a fight in the next ten minutes.

Yes, heroism and mutagens stack. That doesn't really have relevance to a conversation about comparing the two. It seems to imply that, because they can stack, mutagens need to be second class because bards and spells are first class.

[Dragonhearthx]

To everyone who is bringing up the collar of the shifting spider. You do realize that you are requiring a magic item for the class to work. And this has a few problems.
1. It's item level 5, so early game is out.
2. It cuts the duration in half, so low level mutagens are off the table.
3. You take damage using this, and with quicksilver that's just more health lost.
4. Outside of fundamental runes, you are never guaranteed that you would get this.

[aobst128]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

To everyone who is bringing up the collar of the shifting spider. You do realize that you are requiring a magic item for the class to work. And this has a few problems.

1. It's item level 5, so early game is out.
2. It cuts the duration in half, so low level mutagens are off the table.
3. You take damage using this, and with quicksilver that's just more health lost.
4. Outside of fundamental runes, you are never guaranteed that you would get this.

It's a common alchemical item. Your average alchemist is gonna grab the formula or buy it at some point. It's part of the toolkit like your other items are.

[Captain Morgan]

Is there anything which stops you from making them with Advanced Alchemy? Doesn't seem intended but I don't recall there being a limitation to just consumables.

[ottdmk]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

To everyone who is bringing up the collar of the shifting spider. You do realize that you are requiring a magic item for the class to work. And this has a few problems.

1. It's item level 5, so early game is out.
2. It cuts the duration in half, so low level mutagens are off the table.
3. You take damage using this, and with quicksilver that's just more health lost.
4. Outside of fundamental runes, you are never guaranteed that you would get this.

I'm currently putting together a more detailed reply to AidAnotherBattleHerald , but this is quick, so I'll hammer it out.

0) It's not a Magic Item. It's a permanent Alchemical Item. If you went strictly RAW (I wouldn't) you could Advance Alchemy two of these per Batch per day. Even discarding that, with the formula and a lab, any Alchemist can make their own.

Also, it's not a requirement. It's very nice to have, but not a requirement.

1) True, but it's available, (if wanted) for 3/4 of the game.

2) You never want to be using lower level Mutagens. By Level 5, Moderate Mutagens are available (even Lesser Fury Cocktail, which is equivalent to a Moderate of pretty much any other kind of Mutagen.) 5 minutes will handle any fight. Heck, for those without the advantage of Revivifying Mutagen, cutting the duration in half could be considered a feature.

3) It's a single point of damage, at Level 5+. Any healer will get rid of that with a strong glare. :)

4) OK, I must confess, I have no idea what you're talking about here.

[MEATSHED]

Captain Morgan wrote:

Is there anything which stops you from making them with Advanced Alchemy? Doesn't seem intended but I don't recall there being a limitation to just consumables.

Technically nothing stopping you, but you should probably just buy one so you can keep the reagent for other stuff (and buying one is a pittance later while being just as good). (I didn't know the collar existed before because it was added in treasure vault and if I'm being honest feels like they realised that most mutagens were kind of bad at 2 actions and you mostly just used 1 type anyway.)

[aobst128]

The collar is definitely something of a "fix" for mutagens like the insight coffee is for the investigator. It's nice but a proper class adjustment would be preferable. I've got high hopes for the remaster.

[AnimatedPaper]

Squiggit wrote:

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Pretty sure that was deliberate, not a fumble

Given that the entire investigator class is a fumble, hard to say.

Fair enough. My point was more that it wasn't an accident that the investigator subclass was, at the end of the day, an investigator subclass and the options to invest heavily in making and using alchemical items are just not there (outside of archetypes that anyone could take).

Whether the investigator class itself works is a somewhat different topic, but that's not that one subclass's fault.

aobst128 wrote:

The collar is definitely something of a "fix" for mutagens like the insight coffee is for the investigator. It's nice but a proper class adjustment would be preferable. I've got high hopes for the remaster.

Indeed. The fact that these items exist gives me hope that the classes themselves might be patched. Every reason to just incorporate them into the class itself when you know a problem exists, have a fix, and are about to remove and streamline chunks of the game.

Like, shadow signet. Make that a wizard thesis, or even just a wizard class ability/feat, to demonstrate how in control of the very shape of magic they are and how they can apply magical theorems to their spells.

[Dragonhearthx]

AidAnotherBattleHerald wrote:

Maybe it and now skunk bomb (which nearly requires bomber subclass to not hit allies)

Alchemical familiar: Alchemical Gut will fix that problem. Turns the splash to extra damage I believe.

[shroudb]

skunk bomb as a bomber is mainly from perpetual for a debuff with very little damage.

that's because the actual prepared ones with advanced alchemy have pitiful DC if you are not a toxicologist.

it is a step though in the right direction i feel, but the alchemist needs more equally strong things for all types of alchemists.

[Dragonhearthx]

shroudb wrote:

skunk bomb as a bomber is mainly from perpetual for a debuff with very little damage.

that's because the actual prepared ones with advanced alchemy have pitiful DC if you are not a toxicologist.

it is a step though in the right direction i feel, but the alchemist needs more equally strong things for all types of alchemists.

I keep forgetting that "powerful alchemy" only works on "quick alchemy." Honesty it should be "advance" and "quick"

[Dragonhearthx]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

AidAnotherBattleHerald wrote:

Maybe it and now skunk bomb (which nearly requires bomber subclass to not hit allies)

Alchemical familiar: Alchemical Gut will fix that problem. Turns the splash to extra damage I believe.

I forgot to add "directional bombs" and it's any bomb so any subclass can use it.

[Ed Reppert]

rainzax wrote:

Hmm.

Maybe they can calculate their Bulk as a function of INT than ST?

It doesn't seem logical to me that smarter people can carry more stuff.

[Ed Reppert]

SuperBidi wrote:

consider this build:

Alchemical Familiar
Witch Dedication
Enhanced Familiar (Independent, Manual Dexterity, Valet, Extra Reagents)
First Lesson (Elemental Betrayal)

Does this character get a second familiar with witch dedication? Not sure how that works.

[Ed Reppert]

What's the difference between a class archetype and a subclass?

[Themetricsystem]

Ed Reppert wrote:

rainzax wrote:

Hmm.

Maybe they can calculate their Bulk as a function of INT than ST?

It doesn't seem logical to me that smarter people can carry more stuff.

You might ... be surprised. A bag weighing 30lbs can be harder to carry than one weighing 100 if not packed and worn the correct way and I can't think of ANY Class that efficient and careful packing of a bag would be more important to than an Alchemist.

[Temperans]

Ed Reppert wrote:

What's the difference between a class archetype and a subclass?

They interact different with the game systems.

A subclass is built into the class and the feats that class has.

A class archetype costs a second level class feat it also can change, remove, or add class features to make the archetype work.

If the game had more actual class features and less just "this proficiency increases" class archetypes could remove any number of those features to make something new, but still use the same core class and its feats.

[Dragonhearthx]

Themetricsystem wrote:

Ed Reppert wrote:

rainzax wrote:

Hmm.

Maybe they can calculate their Bulk as a function of INT than ST?

It doesn't seem logical to me that smarter people can carry more stuff.

You might ... be surprised. A bag weighing 30lbs can be harder to carry than one weighing 100 if not packed and worn the correct way and I can't think of ANY Class that efficient and careful packing of a bag would be more important to than an Alchemist.

Necromancer.

[Dragonhearthx]

In a similar way to the meta magic experimentation (wizard thesis) in character creation, how about we make additives the same? Instead of making additives a class feat, they are a second slot. They will be fewer slots than class feat slots.

At: 2, 6, 10, 14, & 18

[shroudb]

another option to help both the "support" alchemist as well as the "martial" alchemist, is to mold the subclasses closer to the cleric doctines:

as an example, have the bomber and mutagenist subclasses give you master in bombs and unarmed/weapon respectively at level 15, have the toxicologist get legendary DC (to help with poison DCs), and have the chirurgeon get something more support oriented (increase their 3x efficiency on all elixirs instead of only healing ones?, increase duration so that they can more easily "prebuff"?, something along those lines) (obviously at later levels as well, not from level 1).

[Squiggit]

Personally I'd rather not see the alchemist get super distinct subclasses. The fact that every alchemist can be good with a broad category of items is imo a really good feature of the class, not a problem that needs to be changed.

[shroudb]

Squiggit wrote:

Personally I'd rather not see the alchemist get super distinct subclasses. The fact that every alchemist can be good with a broad category of items is imo a really good feature of the class, not a problem that needs to be changed.

but i dont think that getting extra features, that coincide with a playstyle, takes away from that identity.

getting better at your field still leaves you exactly as competent as they currently are at the other fields.

and similarily as i don't expect a mutagenist to throw bombs as his core gameplay, even now, i don't think that having the bomber getting better at throwing bobs will somehow make the mutagenist worse.

regardless of how little or lot the currect specializations impact how good you are at using items from the other fields, it is a fact that each field already has a more defined gameplay. a bomber will throw more bombs, a mutagenist will use more mutagens and be more martialy focused, a chirurgeon will be more supportive and a toxicologist will use more poisons.

my suggestion is to make those field specializations stronger NOT to make the things you are not specialized in weaker.

and (imo always) this is a good solution to satisfy both groups: those that want alchemists to be more maritally focused, and those that want alchemists to be more support focused.

[Squiggit]

shroudb wrote:

my suggestion is to make those field specializations stronger NOT to make the things you are not specialized in weaker.

Given that Paizo's approach to balance is generally about hitting benchmarks, these are functionally the same thing.

[AnimatedPaper]

shroudb wrote:

another option to help both the "support" alchemist as well as the "martial" alchemist, is to mold the subclasses closer to the cleric doctines:

I think for me, no. While I certainly see the value in the doctrinal approach to modifying proficiencies, tying them to subclasses is a step too far for me. Either split the class into 2 classes with martial and caster chassis (current one has a caster chassis), or put in a doctrine-like proficiency chooser but allow mixing and matching. Probably let the caster version get automatic abilities to pass out their stuff and make quick alchemy Enduring (and maybe top out at legendary class DC), while the martial version gets more proficiency and perhaps a little more out their alchemical items when they use them on themselves.

[shroudb]

Squiggit wrote:

shroudb wrote:

my suggestion is to make those field specializations stronger NOT to make the things you are not specialized in weaker.

Given that Paizo's approach to balance is generally about hitting benchmarks, these are functionally the same thing.

i would agree with that if alchemist was starting from the same starting point as the other classes.

but he isn't.

he starts from a lower point, a thing that with the very strict maths of pf2 is easy to pinpoint, and it is widely accepted by most of the community as a fact.

so, there is ground to grow stronger in some aspects without having to grow weaker in others.

that's the ground i want to explore, or, to put it simply "where should those buffs be aimed towards".

we are not talking about a "balanced" class that in order to receive buffs it also requires other aspects of it to be nerfed in order to remain balanced, alongside the witch alchemist is considered the weakest class, so (once more) there is space for it to grow without impacting the rest of the areas of the class.

[SuperBidi]

shroudb wrote:

another option to help both the "support" alchemist as well as the "martial" alchemist, is to mold the subclasses closer to the cleric doctines:

as an example, have the bomber and mutagenist subclasses give you master in bombs and unarmed/weapon respectively at level 15, have the toxicologist get legendary DC (to help with poison DCs), and have the chirurgeon get something more support oriented (increase their 3x efficiency on all elixirs instead of only healing ones?, increase duration so that they can more easily "prebuff"?, something along those lines) (obviously at later levels as well, not from level 1).

I'm puzzled about that. On one side, I agree with Squiggit that I want the Alchemist to keep its versatility and ability to use all items. On the other hand, we already have this kind of situation: If you don't take the Bomber's feats, you won't get much out of Bombs. So we are already in a situation where to capitalize on some Alchemical Items you need to invest in specific class features. And I hardly see how Paizo will be able to balance Alchemical Items without resorting to feats, so why not.

[Dragonhearthx]

SuperBidi wrote:

I'm puzzled about that. On one side, I agree with Squiggit that I want the Alchemist to keep its versatility and ability to use all items. On the other hand, we already have this kind of situation: If you don't take the Bomber's feats, you won't get much out of Bombs. So we are already in a situation where to capitalize on some Alchemical Items you need to invest in specific class features. And I hardly see how Paizo will be able to balance Alchemical Items without resorting to feats, so why not.

Why not make additives its own separate section? At levels: 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18 we get additives. We throw the additives we have now into it, and some of the other Class feats we make into additives. Like reviving mutagen, poison resist, and the specific mutagen feats. Lastly, we add a core class feat that allows one to retrain during daily preparations.

[Puna'chong]

I didn't read all of this but my own homebrew has some things I'd love to see:

1. Rare alchemical recipes that Alchemists automatically get access to and provide more magical-adjacent effects, like the P1e Alchemist. This allows for items that can't just be bought by anyone, represents the Alchemist's superior ability or their tinkering with recipes, and just makes the items more fun. Right now a lot of items seems sort of milquetoast, maybe because they have to be balanced around being a thing anyone could go buy;

2. Using focus points as a way to give some character to builds while also limiting how often these abilities can be used. For example, a pest form focus point elixir that can only turn the alchemist into insects and adds the aberration trait (with further feats in a chain, so you can go full Jeff Goldblum);

3. Tighter mechanical packages and feat lines for the different research fields. They're sort of halfway there right now, but things like Bombers getting to add their Int to bomb damage by default and Chirurgeons getting a focus ability to "launch" elixirs at range. That sort of thing.

Mostly I just want them to tap into that P1e Alchemist spirit. I think the way they did alchemical items has really hampered that, and I'd like to see some of those wild options and cool experimental abilities come back.