This is the definition of the tiniest of nitpicks, but you list Chir's healing FV's as xd6 + x. I do not know where the + x is coming from, as they only heal for the bomb's base / "initial" damage. So they are that tiny bit worse, lol.
.
A more general feedback is that you seem very reluctant to give anything a true 1 star bad rating, I see a lot of 2 stars that maybe should be differentiated from each other via that rating. Bomber being 3 stars is fine, but also putting Chir, Muta, and Tox all as 2 stars seems like you are pulling punches to your own guide's detriment. Do you really think all three of those deserve the same rating?
You seem to not actually use the star rating to, ya know, rate the thing. Increasing Extend Elixir's rating to 2-star because it's a pre-req feat tax for a later feat goes against what the star rating does for the reader. If the feat's value is a 1-star, then that's what it is. The text is there to explain that you may want to take this very bad 1-star anyway, because of a later feat. Stars are supposed to be as objective a value measure as one can get.
.
Another general feedback is that you seem to treat things with small numerical benefits with a bit more scorn than is warranted, while also treating things with very rare contextual use more highly than is warranted.
This paring is most easily recognized due to your discussion of Mutagenist's L1 F.Benefit & F.Vial abilities.
You rate the always helpful, but small numbers 1-min tHP as a rare 1-star, yet you rate the used maybe once in campaign of the drawback suppression ability as a 2-star.
Even though I've never played Mutagenist specifically, the obviously backwards star rating honestly does put a some doubt into my ability to put trust into the rest of your star ratings in the guide.
.
More concerning is that you repeat the misinformation that the Toxicologist psn immunity override applies to all poison trait items including bombs, when those familiar with Paizo's writing know that to be false.
When Paizo wants to use and reference traits, they do so, like in Chir's features where "... elixirs with the healing trait" is said. We also have the brains to understand that [poison] is a damage type tag, and not a category ID tag like elixir & bomb are, this is why it's mechanically important to know the difference.
To claim "infused poisons" is intended to *not* mean "the poisons item group" is dishonest, and requires ignoring context of other text where "poisons" are disscussed. Iirc, it might be *every* page talking about poisons where the full "alchemical poisons" is used near the start, but then is shortened in later sentences to just "poisons." It's the same case in the Tox field details, where the full term of "alchemical poisons" is used above.
When "infused poisons" is used later, it's absurd to pretend that's an intended to be a gimme where you can apply it to any item with the poison trait.
To restate for clarity, no. It goes against the RaW for a Toxicologist to be able to sicken and slow a psn immune ghost with a Skunk Bomb (though they can gas them with Mustard Powder).
Other personal disagreements:
L4 feats, Enduring Alch VS Efficient Alch VS etc:
Enduring Alchemy is actually quite good, but frustrating. The ability to allow some of your items to persist into the next turn matters much more often than you'd think, most commonly when the Alchemist has 2 hands for Double Brew (and Quick Bomber).
For those Alchemists without a Lab Assistant familiar, this is the primary way to perform pseduo 0A Q-Alch in combat. You use Double Brew + Quick Bomber to make and throw a bomb all in one action, perhaps the last action of your turn.
Your next turn, you have the created elixir/tool in-hand and ready to use without the Q-Alch action tax, for either item. You've managed to use 2 items across 2 turns with 0 spend on the Q-Alch action tax.
Saving combat actions is the single most "powerful" effect that can be gained, which this feat very easily can do if you understand Alchemist's options.
.
Efficient Alchemy is imo much worse, and seeing it at a 4-star is surprising. Daily prep items are in a weird place in Re:Alch. Because they are the one group that still has their duration, you want to use them for all-day buffs like Darkvision(grtr) Antiplagues, etc. The main other group is alch ammo, which can be genuinely good. It took a while, but by this point I no longer prep any bombs, nor items I would rather use VVs to create in combat. This means that the idea of running out of daily prep items itself is a weird concept to spend a feat to assist with. On one of my PCs, a Chir, I do keep a spiked injection gauntlet loaded with 1/3 daily healing elixirs, but that's the only real item that I'd call a ~"combat generic" which I can run out of. Even Bombers don't want to use daily items for combat items like bombs, as those cannot carry Additives. When I do use injury poisons, I've found the "10 min sustain" trick to be the way to go. I could see a Tox wanting to use prepped inhaled poisons I suppose, but those are also a valid candidate for combat Q-Alch thanks to their lack the "apply first" issues. I've never once found an opportunity to use ingested/contact poisons, and certainly cannot imagine spending daily prep budget on them hoping for the chance.
Too wordy, but in brief, I think you are over-valuing +2 daily items.
Especially when you can spend a familiar ability for +1, using the class feat to instead upgrade (or obtain) a familiar really puts how bad the +2 is into perspective.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The feat Double Poison has some serious exploit potential that you seem to have missed, and imo is kinda essential to Toxicologist's power budget on the whole.
With that feat, you can do shenanigans like swapping a Fort psn you care about into a Will save. Or use it to "lock in" a Stage 1 malady by adding a psn with a long duration stage timer.
You can keep one of these super-poisons "sustained" with the recharging VVs, so having an "every fight" super poison that does not tax your daily items is a genuine benefit.
One of the main "perks" of the stage duration exploit is that you are still able to lower their affliction stage with repeat exposures, but they cannot raise it / recover during the time-frame of combat. This can sometimes justify spending prep items to go for the repeat exposures, but how many to prep can vary hugely by campaign and personal taste.
Double Poison also benefits from all other feats that involve your injury poisons, such as Sticky Poison, so having "extra valuable" injury poisons helps synergistically justify both feats in a manner that is rare/uncommon for pf2.
.
.
Improbable Elixirs is also being bizarrely under-rated, seemingly because it's boring?
If it was literally just "Potion of Haste" as a feat, that alone should have a higher star rating than bloody Miracle Worker. Yet, some of the options you missed, such as Invisibility, Hovering, & Shared Life, all are very valuable and evergreen. Being able to mix these into other elixirs via Combine takes this ability over the top, and it is absolutely a top-power pick.
Potions of Haste are outright better than the Haste spell, as they only require 1 Action to use. Being able to stuff those in all your party's open hands as yall walk around thanks to prep items is itself a bit balance disrupting, to be honest. In part due to being able to 1A feed adjacent PCs (like that 2-H Barbarian), this tactic is kinda nuts.
I'll take the time to write out one more bit for now, a defense of those neglected gems of ooze, the Goo Grenade & Ooze Ammunition.
They have a key detail that it seems everyone misses their first time through (including myself).
These items impose their maladies via the clinging ooze. This means that there is no way for the maladies to "fall off" passively during the short time frame of combat. The enemy *must* spend an action or more to wipe off / escape the ooze. (and Escape is a MAP action!)
While the persistent damage can trip up a reader into thinking the whole effect vanishes upon recovery check, it's actually the opposite. Passing the recovery check is useless until they wipe off the ooze, as it'll instantly reapply.
Similar to doing a Retch to try and remove Sickened when the poison/spell causing it is still in effect, you technically can do the action, but the debuff is instantly reapplied when doing so.
.
This little detail makes these 2 items genuinely good, easy to say a 3-star due to their "action tax or suffer" imposition upon their targets. Ooze ammo in particular makes for a great opening shot for those using the Alchemical Crossbow, and makes for a perfect "filler item" for any Alch that wondering what to select for their remaining daily item allowance.
Final perk: the grenade's speed minus is typed as Circumstance, which means it'll usually stack, and the Ammo neglected a type, so it ends up being the always-stackable untyped penalty. (Glue Bomb is a Status penalty)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have mixed feelings about this guide. There are good things in it and it's definitely a high quality guide but there are also a lot of mistakes that need to be addressed to make it a perfect guide. So I'll start with the ones I see:
- Stating that the Chirurgeon is not a healer is objectively wrong. Once you put your hands on Combine Elixir, your combined Elixirs of Life heal like a 2-action Heal. It's as early as level 6. At level 13, you heal like a level 10 2-action Heal precisely (125 hps).
So there's a discussion about the Chirurgeon being the best healer in the game at high level, stating that it's bad at healing is clearly missing something.
Now, Medic Dedication is not a bad advice as it can increase your healing when you need to move but as a Chirurgeon I think it's better to make sure you never have to move (either through reach or free moves like the one from a mount).
- There's a mistake on Supreme Invigorating Elixir, it doesn't give you master class DC at level 15, that doesn't change and is acquired at level 17. I also think it should be rated much higher as it's definitely the pinacle of the Invigorating Elixir feat line.
- A word on Invigorating Elixir: It doesn't remove the condition, it counteracts the effect applying the condition. So it dispel spells, can get you out of poison and things like that.
- The "Classic Alchemist" is clearly misleading. Bombs are limited to Bombers only. Mutagenists will be in general Strength-based, Toxicologists use their hands for weapons and Chirurgeons don't have the Versatile Vials to produce Bombs (nor the feats to improve them). That's the main difference between the preremaster and postremaster Alchemist: The basic Alchemist weapon switched from Bombs to Bestial Mutagen. And I think it's important to state it, I've seen too many people making a Dex-based Chirurgeon and some had to retrain to a Bomber at level 6 when they realized they can't use Elixirs of Life at all due to a shortage of VVs.
- There's also a rule issue around Poisons in the Pernicious Poison feat. If you produce a Poison with Quick Alchemy you have one round to "activate" it. But once on a weapon it stays for 10 minutes. I know this rule is not completely clear and there have been discussions about it but it's the way I've seen it played by most players as otherwise it would make poisons created with Quick Alchemy close to impossible to use. It makes Pernicious Poison a pretty usable feat (as otherwise it'd be completely useless I agree).
- A small one but Sticky Poison and Pinpoint Poisoner have the same relative effect: roughly +25% chances to poison an enemy. But Pinpoint Poisoner is higher level and needs the enemy to be Off Guard so you definitely should reverse your stars on these.
- I also see a clear delineation in your guide between Mutagenist, Chirurgeon and Toxicologist. This delineation doesn't exist actually. Mutagens, Elixirs of Life and Poisons can be used simultaneously by the same builds and as such they're best considered as a single Research Field. It's not the case for Bomber as Bombs will eat all your resources (VVs, feats, daily items) and as such are exclusive to Mutagens, Elixirs of Life and Poisons.
- Summoner is definitely not a 1-star Dedication. There's a Chirurgeon with Summoner Dedication build I play that is working wonderfully. It's true that it's a specific build but it's worth mentioning in my opinion.
- For Choker-Arm Mutagen, you missed the combo with Chirurgeon. It allows you to deliver your Elixirs of Life at range and as such avoid moving. And the drawbacks can be avoided by using spells as your main attack option (or with an Eidolon like I do).
- Titanic Fury Cocktail is the base of the Reach Mutagenist. And Energy Mutagen is extremely useful if you want to play a Dual Weapon Alchemist (same goes for Weapon Siphon). I find that your description doesn't explain how to use them and your color code doesn't do them justice.
- The Injection Reservoir is not "automatic". You need an action once you hit to inject the poison. It makes it pretty bad.
I forgot about using spoiler tags for text compression, shoulda been doing that in the above posts.
.
While it does require the familiar to share your square, Lab Assistant is a legacy familiar ability that was niche in old Alch due to the differences around daily limited reagents and Q-Alch.
For Remaster Alch, it's a literal game changer.
Lab Assistant is carefully worded where: "It can use your Quick Alchemy action. [...]"
If you get 3 familiar abilities for L. Assistant, Independent, & M. Dexterity, then you have gained a pseduo 0A Quick Alchemy every turn.
This is critical for any Alchemist that wants to use their VVs for something other than bombs. It will easily save 3 ish actions per combat, and for some PCs it can replace Quick Bomber while still enabling 1A bombs.
Yet, Lab Assistant is completely absent from the guide.
For any player that wants to give the Alchemist class the "best chance" at being fun, I highly recommend the bit of headache needed to get the familiar combo online, then not worry about much else homework style optimization.
Making Lab Assistant work really is the "king of kings" performance aid in the new VVial paradigm. Any other "suboptimal choices" in other build decisions imo are fine and not worth splitting hairs about.
.
To add a bit more to this, the guide's discussion of this weapon mod kinda shows the inexperience of the author. The injection reservoir is an amazing tool for just about every PC, perhaps even more so than for a Toxicologist. The text of the Injection trait is where the missable mechanic lies: "...can be filled with a liquid, usually an injury poison.[...](If the target is willing, the injection takes only 1 Interact action total.)"
I make an effort not to abuse this, but you can wear and mod spiked gauntlets with injection reservoirs, then fill them with beneficial elixirs and potions before every combat. Any time that gauntleted hand is open, you are able to perform a 1A injection of its contents. This is honestly most useful across the whole party to make use of looted/found potions/etc, but it is also an important tool for any Alchemist who wants to spend their prep item budget on beneficial combat elixirs.
It's the kind of potent and easy to miss mechanic that, well, kinda should make it into guides like this one.
.
Even in your own rebuke, you only claim Chir is a healer starting at L6, which shows just badly that fit fails. Any player selecting Chir who trusts the claim of Chir "being a healer" is going not going to patiently wait 5 levels before passing judgement.
I think it is more harmful than helpful to call Chirurgeon a healer, as the expectations for what that will provide are worlds apart from the textual reality of Chirurgeon. As one datapoint on why, before level 13, there's not really a noticeable difference btwn "the healer" Chir and that of a Bomber playing that role. If you compare the actual real difference between a Bomber & Chir 's healing ability to a Warpriest vs Cloistered Cleric, the tiny degree of Alch difference should be a red flag.
.
And yes, the L13 auto-max ability is just stupid, and is impactful enough to change things*. Iirc, I mathed it out to a ~40% boost to El o Life healing. I have still not found any ability or feat that provides anywhere close to the same absurd numerical buff in the entire system. It's an outlier that should have been reworked in the remaster. And as stupid powerful as it is, it's still a buff to a single item in your alch list. At L17, my Chir only uses it every 3rd ish combat or so, as fights are hella mobile, and it's still competing against every alch item in the list and action available to the PC.
As I expected to abuse use that ability a lot more than I have, I've retrospectively identified an underestimated factor, that of pre-buff VS reactive heal.
Turn 1 is your best chance to feed allies without movement being problematic, and this is precisely when a healing elixir is unusable, but buffs like Numbing are perfectly valid.
Even at L17 with that ability online and in the rear-view mirror, I find it unhelpful to think of my Chir as a healer. Right after the unlock when I attempted that playstyle, it sucked. So many wasted actions. Worse, due to how common AoE attacks are in higher level pf2 play, running up to a low HP ally to heal them is often the trigger that'll have the GM throwing an AoE at us, reversing that healing twice over due to the extra target (two for this PC w/ a familiar).
Presently, that PC finds most merit in playing as an aggressive "annoyance-tank." I might not be able to do the big dmg numbers, but I can debuff and harass foes with the full bag of tricks, including 30ft spells (R6 Slow wand, etc), to the degree that foes want to prioritize me.
As the one case where a touch-range heal is not problematic is when used upon one's self, I'm the most common target for the rare Elixir of Life. Which still requires them to first get through the Numbing, Stone Body, Bttl Md, etc.
.
I find it incredibly incongruous that you seem aware of how bad/inefficient the "healer" use of VVs is, yet do not seem to register that as a genuine problem with the playstyle.
A single early bomb can prevent a foe Strike from landing. When that happens, preventing hits is a more efficient "heal" of HP than it would have been for a Chir to reactively feed an elixir.
1A Bombs are simply far too good for Chir to ignore.
Sometimes, you can knock back a foe with a Pressure, other times you'll plug a square with Boulder Seed, or you'll go for the Skunk debuff. Figuring out which bomb has the best chance to waste foe actions and prevent damage is as hyper contextual a question as it gets for pf2, but it is a reliable tactic, one that I argue is absurdly better than choosing to limp along with atrocious healing numbers while shunning other uses of one's VVs, precisely because your "healer" usage of them is so poor performing / inefficient.
IMO, the Invigorating feat tree is a trap that can easily leave Chir too feat starved, and sunk cost invested, to properly use their full kit. Three feats from that line provide contextual debuff removal, which is enough for the full dip into and out of Witch or any other archetype.
I think it is more harmful than helpful to call Chirurgeon a healer,
We won't agree. Mostly because you don't need VVs in combat unless you're a Bomber, so your example with the Bomber is funny as the Bomber can't heal during combat at all. As I said, the non-Bomber Alchemist go to offensive option is Bestial Mutagen, which doesn't even cost a VV if you decide to use a Collar of the Shifting Spider. So you have all your VVs to heal.
As for the low range, it's not that impactful. Being able to do the equivalent of a 2-action Heal in 3 actions is not exactly bad. Most casters' third action won't be impactful anyway. And that's if you need to move.Now, I agree for the first 5 levels. But the Alchemist starts slowly anyway. Bestial Mutagen is bad before level 3 and if you want a Full Plate you'll have to wait for level 5. Poisons are bad at low level, mostly because enemies go down in a single round (or hit) and as such never score repeated damage. Some Mutagens (like the Fury Cocktail) are not available before level 4. So many reasons why, if you look at quick effectiveness, you will not be interested in the Alchemist.
Stating that the Chirurgeon is no healer is a lie. Stating that it's a problematic build is fine, I won't deny that, it has its issues.
And if I don't make a mistake you play a Chirurgeon whose main attack option are Bombs. That's just a bad build, you should have retrained out of Chirurgeon stuff ages ago.
Bombs never do enough damage to make damage the primary point of them.
IMO, this is a "fact" due to the comparison of their damage to their debuffs and action stealing potential. Bombs can never compare to pf2's expected martial damage due to things like lacking power or flurry attack abilities, having no property runes or other enhancements, and how each bomb burns a limited resource.
Yet, when compared to other classes, Alch bombs are genuinely better at debuffing/action stealing in many ways. Hence, yeah, even Chirs ought make use of that power.
My L17 Chir throws 1 to 2 bombs per fight on average, more often then they use El o Life, but less often than other "generics" like Numbing Tonic.
And I would be remiss if I didn't count the "sustained" Combine Mutagen, (default is Stone Body + Quicksilver) as VV use. This means that it's normal for those 2 buff VVs to be between half and a third of my ~average combat VVial spend.
Even max-invested Bombers do not have the dmg numbers to make the "damage bombs" a better choice in a generic, "first pick" manner. Bombers will always seek for a contextual match, such as weakness sniping or appropriate debuff.
Imo, the only ~build where the damage is "high enough" is with the imo very not-rules "combo" where splash enhancements increase Sticky Bomb damage, which grants 10/11 flat persistent. Even with that crazy ruling, the "debuffs over damage" reality remains for the maximal Bomber, as all splash bombs gain the exact same dmg boost.
This means that the most important part of bombs, their non-damage effects, is entirely intact for non-Bomber Alchemists, including Chirurgeons.
Shunning options like a 1A Skunk that'll Sicken on save success, simply because one is not a Bomber, is absurd.
.
Again, there is +Int tHP difference between Bomber & Chir "healers" pre L13. When I say the Bomber can "play as a healer," I'm talking about the inherit chassis differences, not feat selection. The differences between Alch fields is tiny, especially when considering that most pf2 play is way below L13.
.
The term "healer" is ofc going to be vague and ill defined. I'll describe the concept of a "healer" as a creature where most of their combat actions are going toward "healing," which means not using actions upon foes. If most actions are not going toward healing, I think that's a fair line to judge where that is "not a healer."
This already reveals how "a healer" is a shaky concept for pf2 compared to most uses of the term, like in MMOs. Even a cloistered cleric will often fewer than half their actions healing, much of the time they will be throwing offensive spells. If a Cleric genuinely spends more actions offensively, it strains the term's usability to consider their first / primary label to be "healer."
.
To be clear, I have played a very healing-optimized Chir, and for 2 or 3 rounds, this meant spending nearly all those actions on healing. This is a terrible strategy and playstyle. When doing so & spending 2 VVs per turn, you deck out far too fast, need to wait for full recharge before every combat, and can still hit 0 to become a *very* poor contributor to combat when it runs longer than you planned for.
If you instead prioritize damage prevention and obtain other priority combat actions, you gain far, far more than you surrender to get them. The only thing my Chir is "missing" is the Invigorating feat line. Once I remembered the blood booster items, I retrained out of Clotting and into Improvise Admixture, and recommend every alch do the same.
You may not like it, but the feat cost:benefit of "improving" elixir healing as a strategy is so poor, that just the spellcasting dip factually makes my Chir a "better healer" than one who's gone all-in for the "paper Chirurgeon." Collective & Unexpected Transposition, Shared Invisibility, and many others are evergreen tools for "a healer," especially one that is limited to touch range.
At any moment, my Chir could choose to spend most of their combat actions on healing, and would only lack the rarely usable Invigorating Additive. Which already competes in opportunity cost with Combine. If you want to add in Clotting, Soothing, and Unstable as "healer feats" then the gains that trio is compared against the gains of a boosted familiar, and still fails to compare favorably.
.
I think highlighting this bit will be enough of an eyebrow raiser to readers to encapsulate why I think you are so far off the mark here.
As for the low range, it's not that impactful. Being able to do the equivalent of a 2-action Heal in 3 actions is not exactly bad. Most casters' third action won't be impactful anyway. And that's if you need to move.
Needing to spend an extra action is just about as mechanically bad of an asterisk* as is possible to have. And this asterisk is even worse, as that "extra action" cost to also means your PC must abandon the notion of tactical positioning at all. I've personally tried a fix for the positioning problem via the Choker Arm mutagen enabling me to reach across the foe to feed my flanking buddy, and it still sucked, badly.
More to the point, this comparison to a 2A heal is still only talking about post L13 play, which is an absurd thing to consider the normal/generic case.
Even the extra rider "argument" of casters not having good 3rd actions is a huge red flag that savvy players will strongly reject.
And that's not even relevant to Alchemist! Alch is a class that nickle and dimes it's way to usefulness with every action it can scrape together. My L17 typically gets to both Cast a Spell for 2A, while being able to Activate any 1A alch item in the same turn (thanks to Lab Assistant). On action taxed turns with only 2A free, that can be a Double Brew pair of alch items, a spell, or a Trip + Item, etc.
Specific build aside, even damned low level consumables are absurdly evergeen and worth the actions and gold at L17. The (6 gp) feather token bush outright grants cover, the same +2AC of Raise, without the downside of it lowering. 20 gp is an Invisibility Potion, outright poofing any touch-range recipient Undetected. If we want to limit it to the alch list, you have every low gp option, from Cat's Eye to Bottled Night.
It's honestly shocking that you can make such silly non-sequitur arguments like "casters don't make good use of their 3rd actions" to excuse your insistence on self-nerfing Chir, while being so savvy in other areas / threads.
SuperBidi: Chirurgeons can't use Bombs as once they're level 6 they'll realize they can't heal and will have to Retrain out of Chirurgeon stuff.
Trip: I have a Chirurgeon who uses Bombs and I never managed to heal.
We fully agree, you just blame the wrong thing. The issue is your build, not the Chirurgeon. Don't throw the baby with the bathwater.
I play 2 Chirurgeons, a level 7 and a level 8 one. The level 7 is on retirement because she uses Bombs (preremaster build). The level 8 is fine. It's an uncommon build so I won't say that it proves everything but healing with a Chirurgeon is not an issue (the only question would be: Is it a good healer?).
Again, you are not reading.
My performance "as a healer" is better than it would be if I went full Invigorating and elixir-maxing with feats.
There is no "problem" with the build. It is absurd that you are pretending my build is invalid when I spend 0 actions on Quick Alchemy via Lab Assistant and constantly have 1A haste at the ready. I am actively nerfing myself to not abuse parts of that PCs with pseudo RP reasons, such as avoiding using Protector Tree, only wearing one injection gauntlet, skipping Medic, etc. This PC may not do big damage, but it absolutely does not lack for combat power.
Meanwhile, you are running around and spending 3 actions to feed a single Combine Elixir as an all-turn activity.
.
You are plugging your ears and la la la-ing out the reality here.
I do heal, and am "the party's healer," but I know that preventing the damage from happening and being proactive is mechanically superior in this system. By attempting that play style for myself, I have found that sitting on my butt waiting for allies to take damage is simply a bad strategy. Even turn 1 buffing w/ Numb + Soothing is typically superior to reactive healing.
If I instead force a foe to Escape some ooze w/ a long range crossbow shot turn 1, that's a stolen MAP action that is hindering their ability to fight, and worth much more than a reactive heal later. (Bola Shot also deserves a mention as a scaling ranged Trip)
.
My PC can cast Collective Transposition for 2A, rearrange three allies around the battlefield with 0 check, and then still have the action to administer a Combine Elixir thanks to Lab Assistant, or can throw a debuff bomb if healing is not needed.
Our Barbarian wants to be hit by Strikes, and dislikes being healed above 50% HP, so my Reaction can be spent swapping them into Strikes intended for me. All of these tools I can use to "play as a healer" would not exist in your build.
.
Your build, which might sometimes allow you a *chance* to cleanse a lingering malady, is a joke in comparison.
In large part, this is because of "Paizo balance" being so poor that Chir's healing numbers & feats don't stack up against debuffs, spellcasting, etc.
It *should* be a valid side-grade to go all-in on the support / healing feats. The sad reality is that is very obviously not the case.
Even all this time later, you are still literally the only person I have seen who claims to have played Chirurgeon and insists on shunning "non-healer" options like bombs with claims of mechanical superiority.
shunning "non-healer" options like bombs with claims of mechanical superiority.
Did you understand what I said? Because it looks like you don't as I say exactly the opposite.
I've said that if you use Bombs then they compete with Elixirs of Life for your Versatile Vials. And this competition will in general favor Bombs. The end result being that you don't heal with Elixirs of Life and if you do you shoot yourself in the foot. Which is exactly your experience.I think what you miss is that Bomber may be better than the other Research Fields. So by playing a Bomber (I still don't understand why you have kept the Chirurgeon Research Field while claiming that you don't use Elixirs of Life) you may have a higher effectiveness and as such would by no means replace your Bombs by Elixirs of Life. But someone willing to actually play a Chirurgeon ie. to use Elixirs of Life would have to play something else than a Bomber, ending up, potentially, with a weaker build. But still a build that heals with Elixirs of Life and achieve the greatest effectiveness by doing so.
That's why your experience is not helping. To provide a valuable experience you'd have to use Elixirs of Life with a build that can use them, ie. a Strength-based Chirurgeon. Otherwise, you're just showing what we all know.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I forgot about using spoiler tags for text compression, shoulda been doing that in the above posts.
.
** spoiler omitted **.
** spoiler omitted **...
The Injection Reservoir does not work like you state. While weapons like the visap can be filled with beneficial elixirs, the injection reservoir does not. It uses its own rules specific to injury poisons rather than referencing the injection trait.
The Injection Reservoir does not work like you state. While weapons like the visap can be filled with beneficial elixirs, the injection reservoir does not. It uses its own rules specific to injury poisons rather than referencing the injection trait.
It is true that the injection reservoir weapon mod does not directly invoke the injection trait. However, it is honestly a little silly to insist the weapon mod has a different set of mechanics than the base trait it is clearly using.
There is even textual reason to claim this too, as the injection reservoir weapon mod has a "Usage: applied to a non-injection melee weapon that deals piercing damage". So this "not allowed to double up" does provide reason to presume equivalence.
To be clear, it is correct that it is not "true RaW" to use the full injection trait mechanics for the weapon mod. That said, every GM I've asked has "filled in that gap" and considered that a valid use of the injection reservoir mod.
Though now I kinda want to retrain into Ceremonial Knife for the thematics of the injection *trait* Visap dagger also being the PC's witch knife wand, and the default "in-hand" thing to carry around. A spooky spell wand you also jab into your allies to buff them is very on-brand for that PC.
.
A Chir Alch will lean more toward support than a Bomber Alch (the Craft for Med is a genuinely good ability), but both absolutely should be using each other's ~"specialty" items when appropriate.
You are essentially shunning a huge portion of your "spell list" simply because they all use the same manna pool. And this seems incredibly hypocritical, as you don't claim a Chir or Bomber musn't use mutagens because they are going to be inferior when used by a non-Muta, and compete for the same VVials. And while Fort saves suck balls, I do still occasionally feel optimistic and pop an inhaled poison, despite not being a Tox.
.
I've got no idea why you think a Chirurgeon should prioritize Strength (assuming before Dex), as doing so hurts your ability to use a large portion of the item list. If this is because you are archetyping to improve your Bestial Strikes like a martial, that doesn't sound very "healer" to me.
If you are committed to Bestial Mutagens, ask your GM if they will consider a method to gain finesse to them. Mine allows the slashing claws graft to be upgraded by Bestial, while preserving their [finesse] & [agile] traits. Even then, I've found the Quicksilver + Stone Body as my preferred default, as they help cancel each other's drawbacks while enabling me to be much more comfortable on the front line without the large HP pool typical to that position.
Or you could just use a finesse/throwing weapon, which tends to play nicer with Alch's kit than the often excluded unarmed strikes. Weapon mods, energy mutagens, etc.
The Injection Reservoir does not work like you state. While weapons like the visap can be filled with beneficial elixirs, the injection reservoir does not. It uses its own rules specific to injury poisons rather than referencing the injection trait.It is true that the injection reservoir weapon mod does not directly invoke the injection trait. However, it is honestly a little silly to insist the weapon mod has a different set of mechanics than the base trait it is clearly using.
There is even textual reason to claim this too, as the injection reservoir weapon mod has a "Usage: applied to a non-injection melee weapon that deals piercing damage". So this "not allowed to double up" does provide reason to presume equivalence.
To be clear, it is correct that it is not "true RaW" to use the full injection trait mechanics for the weapon mod. That said, every GM I've asked has "filled in that gap" and considered that a valid use of the injection reservoir mod.
Though now I kinda want to retrain into Ceremonial Knife for the thematics of the injection *trait* Visap dagger also being the PC's witch knife wand, and the default "in-hand" thing to carry around. A spooky spell wand you also jab into your allies to buff them is very on-brand for that PC.
.
** spoiler omitted **...
I suppose that I assume the item is written separately from the injection trait is more to have the specific differences from it rather than an oversight but there's no way to know for sure without designer insight.
You are essentially shunning a huge portion of your "spell list" simply because they all use the same manna pool.
Yes!!!! Finally, you got it.
A Combined Elixir of Life costs 2 VVs and to call yourself a healer you need to be able to do it at least twice per fight, leaving you with 2 VVs for other Alchemical Items. As such, Bombs are out of the picture as your main attack option as you have the VVs to use them only twice per fight (at the cost of all your remaining VVs so it shuns a massive portion of your "spell list").
Bestial Mutagen on the other hand costs a single VV or even none with a Collar of the Shifting Spider so it's compatible as a main attack option. As Bestial Mutagen asks for Strength if you want to play a Chirurgeon you should be Strength-based.
The core of what I'm trying to get through to you is that a hybrid generalist Alchemist is absurdly superior to a close-minded specialist.
I've fully understood that you consider your Chirurgeon who doesn't use Elixirs of Life to be superior to my Chirurgeon who uses Elixirs of Life. The issue is that your Chirurgeon is a Bomber who just chose the wrong Research Field.
"Just play a Bomber because it's more optimized" isn't a satisfying answer to someone who wants to play a Chirurgeon. Solkanar is already stating that Bomber Research Field is better than Chirurgeon so the player's warned that by choosing a Chirurgeon they are choosing a weaker build.
Now, instead of explaining to this player that they chose wrongly, I think it's more interesting to give them the build that will help them being a Chirurgeon. And this build doesn't use Bombs as main attack option. Only Bombers use Bombs as their main attack option with the remaster.
Another way of phrasing:
Because all Alchemists, including Chir, have the ability to use every alch item in the list, this makes the use of Elixirs o Lf that much more expensive, which we agree on.
Using VVs to heal competes with all alch items, we still agree.
A consequence of this is that every feat or other bit of variable investment compares against each other in a weird way for Alchemist. If you *could* take options that help all alchemy, but choose a limited feat like Invigorating, that has *more* of a negative opportunity loss than normal in pf2.
By the same token, going outside of Alchemist for actions is *that much better* for Alchemist than it is for other classes, because it removes burden from your VVs.
This includes support/healing actions. The Medic archetype is *abnormally* good on Chirurgeon because it improves the availability of all alch items. Each use of Battle Medicine -to heal- is a VV saved. Note that this can mean more VVs for healing elixirs, this is what I mean by my strat also making my PC's "better healers." Note that this is a big aspect of why I say Chir is a bad / not a healer as that Bttle Md cannot be called a Chir action.
I could never in a million years recommend someone take the Invigorating feat line when that could instead be Medic, Dr's Visitation, & Treat Condition. The cost benefit is that absurdly imbalanced when you zoom out and get some perspective.
.
Again, taking feats that only improve [healing] + [elixir] items is *uniquely* bad thanks to the archetype system.
This is also why a 2-feat investment for something like Lab Assistant makes such a positive difference, and is my go-to recommendation to improve the gameplay of Alchemist. It does not dilute the "Alchemist" flavor of the PC, while leaning into Alch's one unique strength, the "full book any time" nature of Quick Alchemy. And due to saving an action every time you Q-Alch, it is perhaps the single most "powerful buff" one could gain.
.
.
To shift a bit, I do need to repeat / warn that it's a mistake to call a Chir a healer to outside players.
I am not exaggerating when I say that levels 1 through 4 are so atrociously bad that there is a real risk of the experience damaging a player's perception of pf2 on the whole.
There is just no g@% d+$n excuse for Paizo to present Chir as a healer, then leave them with such absurdly bad healing numbers for that long. I've mentioned this anecdote before, but I had a pf1 vet see the healing numbers, and with 0 prompting, say "Oh my god, I am so sorry."
I knew what I was doing with that PC, and had an Electric Arc that matched a real Wiz to get me through those early levels, but I had no illusion that I was "playing a healer." Had I planned on the healing numbers to be legitimate with that as my first PC, there's no way I would have continued.
(This is the L12 PC that is (now) giving a throwing build the best chance it can, Alch / Wiz / Ranger, siphon + spellheart, etc, etc)
Alchemist, specifically the Chirurgeon and Toxicologist, are honestly so poorly performing when built "straight" that they are an infohazard for a newbie to take interest in. They perform so much worse than they appear, that it is damaging to the perception of pf2 as a whole.
Using VVs to heal competes with all alch items, we still agree.
VVs only cover some use of your Alchemical Items namely Bombs, Elixirs of Life, combat utility and out of combat utility.
Poison, long duration buffs and Mutagens use (or can use) your daily items.
Considering that your regeneration of VVs can cover out of combat utility without impacting much your in combat VVs, the only thing that competes with Elixirs of life is combat utility (circumstantial) and Bombs. Once you remove Bombs the competition for VVs is close to none. As I said, you still have 2 VVs left for combat utility which is enough in general.
If you *could* take options that help all alchemy
There are options that help "all" alchemy? Because from my perspective there are none. Maybe an Extra Alchemy/Extra Vial Familiar would qualify but it's far from a must have. As a Chirurgeon, you'll choose an Item Delivery Familiar in general.
a hybrid generalist Alchemist is absurdly superior to a close-minded specialist
I was all in for that preremaster. But the remaster changed the game. Now, there are specialists that compete with generalists. My Alchemists are doing fine, and while I was used to play a generalist preremaster and learned to like it, I also realized that specialists builds now work equally well. Which is a good thing in my opinion.
Still, a specialized Alchemist plays like a generalist compared to most classes, I'm obviously not advocating for using strictly one type of Alchemical Items. Actually, the only Alchemical Item that competes with all others are Bombs. Elixirs, Mutagens and Poisons all use distinct resources and as such don't compete with each other.
There are options that help "all" alchemy? Because from my perspective there are none.
I'll repeat myself, Lab Assistant enables a pseduo 0 A Quick Alchemy. It takes 2x familiar investment, but the ability to have the familiar perform the action tax on your behalf is "all alchemy." By a similar token, investing in draw-dodging helps all held items, all alchemy included. This is also why prep vs VV items is much more a fuzzy separation than it used to be.
Actually, the only Alchemical Item that competes with all others are Bombs. Elixirs, Mutagens and Poisons all use distinct resources and as such don't compete with each other.
This is imo much too close minded, and indicative of why I think your contribution to the discussion can engender unintended consequences with readers. In part because you are still thinking from the limited PoV of "your alchemist."
While they trickle in across the levels, there are plenty of very useful combat alch items beyond bombs. The very thought process of thinking in such defined boundaries is harmful to the experimental thought needed to find or consider them.
Bottled Night, Mistform / Smoke Ball, Cat's Eye, Revealing Mist, Sense-dulling Hood, Contagion Metabolizers, inhaled poisons, a few lozenges & foods, even many mutagens are all items that I have found Q-Alch genuinely useful in the middle of combat. Not hypothetically, I've genuinely used them in actual play. Part of the reason I'm not a max-bomb invested Bomber is *because* I don't want to weigh the comparison toward bombs. Giving the PC a 0A Q-Alch is rather key piece of why I so often find such a diverse set of items genuinely worth it, and why I recommend other players prioritize getting 0A Q-Alch waaay before specific-item upgrades.
As Double Brew is chassis core, I recommend at least the Quick Bomber + Double Brew combo for those opposed to Lab Assistant. While much more clumsy/awkward to do, it is also a way to get a pseduo 0A Quick Alch for any item in the list. With the downside of requiring both hands, a bomb throw, & being 2A chunk only. You can see why I'm such a Lab Assistant advocate, lol...
(The same applies for, and combos with, Enduring Alch + Double Brew!)
.
Furthermore, as with the above PoV comment, I need to emphasize that your framing of the question limits the ability to conceptualize other forms VV use, and what I am sorry to say is now the "math" most powerful use of VVs post-remaster. And this entire method is outside your presented conceptualization.
Much of the time, the players get to initiate combat. While it was still a thing in old alchemist, recharging VVs have made pre-buffing just before a door kick stupidly good for remaster Alch.
It is as boring / unfun as it gets, but being able to spend recharging VVs to buff allies for 0 combat actions is "game changing" and important to be aware of.
No joke, the early levels of that SoT PC would have my Chir passing out buffs for most of my VVs, then spending the actual fight mostly slinging Electric Arc + Strikes, with Bttl Md & 1 or 2 VVs on standby.
In new Alchemist, it's very hard for 0 A prebuffs to be "worse" than waiting to use the VVials in combat, especially for reactive healing.
Because now the real comparison is between 2 VVial Numbing/etc's buffs *plus* the 0A alternative action, like Electric Arc + Strike, being measured against the notion of a 3A double Combine El o Life heal.
.
Again, I'm fully aware this is not a fun reality, but it is the reality of the current Alchemist design.
New Alchemist is genuinely a bit overpowered compared against other classes, *if* you get to initiate the fight.
It should not be surprising to game designers that recharging, custom-context prebuffs (that are balanced around being combat actions!), is balance-disruptive when you get them for 0A before a fight begins.
When I say I've had to RP nerf my Chir PCs, I'm not making that up.
Starting a fight where every PC has a Numbing Tonic active genuinely hurt the fun, and I just stopped doing it. Bottled Night is contextually even more OP, but gives the GM waaay more room to make it dynamic and engaging, such as by having persistent fire damage create 5ft bubbles of light for the foes to use, wind-ish effects interacting w/ the mist, etc.
It is notable to mention that my SoT Chir is in a 3 PC party, while the L17 Stolen Fate Chir is in a 4/5 PC party, and this does make a noticeable difference in "prebuff power," but it's still very much in "self nerf" territory for the L17.
** spoiler omitted **...
Most of your post shows how table-dependent experiences are. Bottled Night is obviously forbidden around most tables and jumping on enemies more than the other way around is also 100% table-dependent (it happens less than 20% of the time around my tables).
I personally think your experience strongly impacts your vision. Which doesn't mean that it's "wrong", experience is experience, but I wonder what would be your point of view if your GM was forbidding all Uncommon and Rare items, especially those coming from dubious sources, and if enemies were attacking the PCs more often than not. I'm sure it'd change a lot of things and I don't think you'd consider your character OP anymore.
If I lost access to uncommons, then very little would change. Bottled Night is already an item you don't use super often, because it's kinda rare to fight "normal people" who don't have darkvision, so it's not a cornerstone to any "usual strategy."
The largest "power" issue is with prebuffing, and Numbing Tonics are the go-to "generic" default choice that's useful and potent for every single fight.
Some PCs prefer different buffs. Stealth PCs are uncommon, but Camouflage Dye is everything they could wish for in a prebuff. The "doesn't break the camo effect" coming online at level 7 is nuts.
Prebuffing even got a whole lot more dangerous/powerful thanks to a single new feat, showing that Paizo really are not thinking about the issue. Numbing Spice Exhalation is genuinely well balanced, but that is in the context of a combat-only ability.
Being able to "pre-load" every short-range PC with a 1A fire breath that scales +1d6 per Rank is a bit too good when that's costing 0 combat actions to prepare. (Inflammation Flask is a bomb that imposes fire, cold, acid, slashing weakness on hit by the way, no save)
It's even crazier when a "reaction stun them during their turn" lozenge is usable as a "default" in case the PC doesn't find any other alch food more preferable. Feat and stunner are both common.
Again, it's genuinely possible to build an overpowered as hell PC in pf2, even an Alchemist, thanks to the archetype system (Timber Sentinel says hello).
This works backwards compared to how most would intuitively guess, and classes with crazy good combat actions are harder to make OP from archetyping, as those classes need to keep using those actions. It's classes like Alchemist that have the flexibility to "inefficiently" use their budgeted class power in low action cost ways. Prebuffs are the end-state of that, it's cashing that class power for 0 combat actions, while still being able to archetype dip and abuse off-class actions like non-DC impulses, spells, etc.
If you skip a VV-heal turn to plant a Tree, that means that next turn you can burn 3 VVs with a Skunk + Combine elixir and keep the same pace of resource burn.
.
Hemming an hawing about the rarity of a mentioned alch item, or about "table variance" is not a real counterargument against the core issues being discussed.
Hi everyone,
I have just made a guide to the remastered Alchemist.
It is my humble effort to make the class a bit more beginner friendly.Unstable Reactions: A Remastered Alchemist Guide
Comments are always welcome!
Circling back to the guide... Spiderfoot Brew is listed as uncommon but it's common according to Pathbuilder. Quite a handy exploration mode tool for party members that struggle with climbing related obstacles so it's definitely nice to have on your list.
I also find it odd you say "Bomber is the clear winner in research fields" but it's only 3 stars. If you think it's definitely the best of the 4 options, shouldn't it be 4 stars?
I don't know if "Classic Alchemist" is the best name for that particular playstyle, since it was never really the only thing you were doing before (whereas now it can be). Maybe it's more like the "Explode Stuff Alchemist", because it's quite good at that and IMO it's definitely the easiest Alchemist to play. You pick appropriate bomb and fire, you can land something even on a miss, can you can get very wide splash or only splash your primary target. It definitely works and if you have weaknesses to exploit it feels pretty effective (getting weakness damage on a miss is really nice for helping those 2nd and 3rd attacks make an impact).
Some good info in here. Thanks for the guide!
Spiderfoot Brew used to be Uncommon, IIRC. It originally appeared in the Fumbus comic from Dark Horse, then it was reprinted in Treasure Vault.