Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 51
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Welcome to the Legendary Games playtest for the Legendary Alchemist! We’ve been working on this class for quite a long time, and we’re happy to share it with you. Unlike other playtests, this one will only be a week long, as we’re anxious to finish this class. But we will be listening to any and all feedback during that time, doing our best to improve the class and make it as Legendary as possible! Please feel free to comment or leave feedback here, and we hope that you’ll enjoy our newest offering!
    Last edited by N. Jolly; 2019-05-21 at 06:58 PM.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Mehangel's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    It looks good. I do have to say though it is a massive document, that almost makes me think that it might've been better to split it into two documents (for playtesting purposes), maybe by having archetypes and/or discoveries placed in the separate document.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by Mehangel View Post
    It looks good. I do have to say though it is a massive document, that almost makes me think that it might've been better to split it into two documents (for playtesting purposes), maybe by having archetypes and/or discoveries placed in the separate document.
    That's a reasonable statement, the design doc was split into two for this reason. If it becomes an issue with more people, I'll probably end up doing that.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Liking what I see so far. My first question is about the term "alchemical undead" used in the Reanimator archetype. What is it referring to?
    Dark Green, the color of Chaotic Evil

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Altruistorc is leaving me deeply disturbed and intrigued at the same time...

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Jeff the Green's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Great PNW
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Hi all! I'm the secondary author on this project. As my sig says, I've written for Spheres of Power, but this is my first time working on a Legendary project. I wrote the tinker discipline (along with its automaton), several related discoveries, and a number of the archetypes. I'll do my best to answer any questions or concerns on those aspects.

    Enjoy!
    Author of The Auspician's Handbook and The Tempestarian's Handbook for Spheres of Power.
    Ask me (or the other authors) anything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lateral View Post
    Well, of course I'm paranoid about everything. Hell, with Jeff as DM, I'd be paranoid even if we were playing a game set in The Magic Kiddie Funland of Perfectly Flat Planes and Sugar Plums.
    Greenman by Bradakhan/Spring Greenman by Comissar/Autumn Greenman by Sgt. Pepper/Winter Greenman by gurgleflep

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2017

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by Thealtruistorc View Post
    Liking what I see so far. My first question is about the term "alchemical undead" used in the Reanimator archetype. What is it referring to?
    That one's my baby. The intention there is undead created with the alchemical necromancy feature, that could do with some more clarity. Thanks!

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    The main link should be updated with the published version, which should load faster for those with issues.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    May 2014

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Just a thought. Would you consider putting gaps between different class feature groupings? I initially thought only toxicologists got bombs.
    Last edited by platinumdragon; 2019-05-21 at 08:59 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by platinumdragon View Post
    Just a thought. Would you consider putting gaps between different class feature groupings? I initially thought only toxicologists got bombs.
    That's reasonable, I actually spaced it out with a 'return to table of contents' link, which have been added to the doc for ease of browsing. That should make it easier to navigate and look cleaner.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    The part of the Alchemy ability that allows you to spend Quintessence for +1 dice of damage on alchemical items seems weirdly costed compared to all the other Quintessence uses - I'm not sure when you'd ever want to use it. Quintessence in general feels like it'd be really scarce, actually, given how many things use it and how little you get per day.

    The text for Alchemical Trapsmith mentions the Trap Breaker for some reason.

    Making an Automaton Small sized gives it a Con penalty even though they're all Con -.

    One of Alchemical Scoundrel or Esotericist could use a clause so they're compatible (by losing one spell per level per day) - there doesn't seem to be a good reason to make them incompatible.

    Alchemical Scoundrel + Chirurgeon + Urban Adept seems like it'd make for a really interesting character build.
    Last edited by ChrisAsmadi; 2019-05-21 at 11:31 PM.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Jeff the Green's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Great PNW
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisAsmadi View Post
    Making an Automaton Small sized gives it a Con penalty even though they're all Con -.

    One of Alchemical Scoundrel or Esotericist could use a clause so they're compatible (by losing one spell per level per day) - there doesn't seem to be a good reason to make them incompatible.
    Both of these have been fixed. Thanks!
    Author of The Auspician's Handbook and The Tempestarian's Handbook for Spheres of Power.
    Ask me (or the other authors) anything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lateral View Post
    Well, of course I'm paranoid about everything. Hell, with Jeff as DM, I'd be paranoid even if we were playing a game set in The Magic Kiddie Funland of Perfectly Flat Planes and Sugar Plums.
    Greenman by Bradakhan/Spring Greenman by Comissar/Autumn Greenman by Sgt. Pepper/Winter Greenman by gurgleflep

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisAsmadi View Post
    The part of the Alchemy ability that allows you to spend Quintessence for +1 dice of damage on alchemical items seems weirdly costed compared to all the other Quintessence uses - I'm not sure when you'd ever want to use it. Quintessence in general feels like it'd be really scarce, actually, given how many things use it and how little you get per day.

    The text for Alchemical Trapsmith mentions the Trap Breaker for some reason.

    Making an Automaton Small sized gives it a Con penalty even though they're all Con -.

    One of Alchemical Scoundrel or Esotericist could use a clause so they're compatible (by losing one spell per level per day) - there doesn't seem to be a good reason to make them incompatible.

    Alchemical Scoundrel + Chirurgeon + Urban Adept seems like it'd make for a really interesting character build.
    That's fair, I believe the costing for that was from a previous doc. Now if you spend quintessence, the boosting scales (no spending additional quint for additional damage dice). That ability is mostly there so in the early levels if you don't have much to spend quint on (tinker has this issue), you can do something with it. We're actually looking for feedback on if quintessence is given enough, so any thoughts on that are openly appreciated.

    Fixed the trap breaker reference.

    Looks like Jeff fixed the con reference.

    Huh, thought esotericist had that, I'll have to check that out.

    Also probably need to change the name of alchemic scoundrel, it's really close to another archetype name I wrote.

    Appreciate the feedback, we'll hopefully be adding more content as time passes, and let us know if there's any content you'd like to see, such as archetypes, magic items, or other such things.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by N. Jolly View Post
    That's fair, I believe the costing for that was from a previous doc. Now if you spend quintessence, the boosting scales (no spending additional quint for additional damage dice). That ability is mostly there so in the early levels if you don't have much to spend quint on (tinker has this issue), you can do something with it. We're actually looking for feedback on if quintessence is given enough, so any thoughts on that are openly appreciated.
    I'd like to see a +Quintessence per day FCB bonus at least (so that if you're playing a build that needs lots of it, then you're not forced into spending all your feats on boosting it). Maybe some way of recovering it (maybe through extracts?), but that might run into issues.

    The only other suggestion I can think of for the moment is some way to get Shortbow / Longbow proficiency without Spheres of Might or being an Elf, because that was a popular use for the Grenadier archetype. Maybe as an alternate class feature swap for the Alchemical Weapon proficiencies?

    Customize Automaton, Major & Fantastical seem like Discovery taxes - both of them are good enough that I'm not sure why you'd ever not want to take them as a Tinker - but then I'm also not sure how you'd solve that (unless you swapped them for Invigorating Command and Semblance of Cognition and instead made those Discoveries, because while they're both interesting and fun, they don't seem as mandatory).

    Also, the ToC says "Favorite Class Bonus" where it should say "Favored Class Bonus".

    e: Another suggestion to add - an Equipment Sphere Discipline Combat Talent that gives proficiency with the Alchemical Weapons, in case anyone wants to use them with other classes?
    Last edited by ChrisAsmadi; 2019-05-22 at 09:30 AM.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Troll in the Playground
     
    khadgar567's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    turkey
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    you know this thing looks like wolf quacks like duck and move like mick jagger. i cant get a grip in the class as each sub option tries to be something completely different road it feels like jumbled mess in shape of absent minded doctors thesis on Z-rusting the core class
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Shadow View Post
    Threads are like cats. They go where they want, and never listen to what you want them to do.


  15. - Top - End - #15
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisAsmadi View Post
    I'd like to see a +Quintessence per day FCB bonus at least (so that if you're playing a build that needs lots of it, then you're not forced into spending all your feats on boosting it). Maybe some way of recovering it (maybe through extracts?), but that might run into issues.

    The only other suggestion I can think of for the moment is some way to get Shortbow / Longbow proficiency without Spheres of Might or being an Elf, because that was a popular use for the Grenadier archetype. Maybe as an alternate class feature swap for the Alchemical Weapon proficiencies?

    Customize Automaton, Major & Fantastical seem like Discovery taxes - both of them are good enough that I'm not sure why you'd ever not want to take them as a Tinker - but then I'm also not sure how you'd solve that (unless you swapped them for Invigorating Command and Semblance of Cognition and instead made those Discoveries, because while they're both interesting and fun, they don't seem as mandatory).

    Also, the ToC says "Favorite Class Bonus" where it should say "Favored Class Bonus".

    e: Another suggestion to add - an Equipment Sphere Discipline Combat Talent that gives proficiency with the Alchemical Weapons, in case anyone wants to use them with other classes?
    I'm actually shocked I didn't do a FCB for extra quint, that's been added at 1/4 per level (ToC has been fixed)

    We could probably toss in some weapon FCB stuff, since that'd be fun.

    As for that, I'd rather do that in a spheres book, reprinting the weapons and such. I could probably do a makeshift version of it unofficially, but not sure I feel like adding new sphere talents in a book that isn't spheres.

    I'll let Jeff address the customization stuff, since that's his babby.

    Quote Originally Posted by khadgar567 View Post
    you know this thing looks like wolf quacks like duck and move like mick jagger. i cant get a grip in the class as each sub option tries to be something completely different road it feels like jumbled mess in shape of absent minded doctors thesis on Z-rusting the core class
    This took 3 different people for me to understand what you were saying here. Also learned what zeerusting was, so that was fun. I don't really agree that it's anymore unfocused than the base class, which gives several class features and leaves you to do with them as you will without any real focus.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Jeff the Green's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Great PNW
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisAsmadi View Post
    Customize Automaton, Major & Fantastical seem like Discovery taxes - both of them are good enough that I'm not sure why you'd ever not want to take them as a Tinker - but then I'm also not sure how you'd solve that (unless you swapped them for Invigorating Command and Semblance of Cognition and instead made those Discoveries, because while they're both interesting and fun, they don't seem as mandatory).
    I understand the concern, but if I'm going to ditch those I'd prefer to just remove the lock altogether and just make it based on level. Making it a Discipline Breakthrough locks out certain combinations of archetypes from major/fantastical discoveries. Not the end of the world, I know, but it does invalidate a character I want to play at some point.

    Quote Originally Posted by N. Jolly View Post
    This took 3 different people for me to understand what you were saying here. Also learned what zeerusting was, so that was fun. I don't really agree that it's anymore unfocused than the base class, which gives several class features and leaves you to do with them as you will without any real focus.
    To elaborate, Paizo's alchemist has basically two primary functions: blast and buff. But it doesn't lean into either of them and a lot of class features don't synergize with them. One of our design goals was basically to give simple buffing and general blasting, with the option of choosing to lean into buffing, add some debuffing, or gain an ally you can buff (with the right discoveries). This means that very few class features won't be used. Yes, you can play this class multiple ways, but each character should be more focused.
    Author of The Auspician's Handbook and The Tempestarian's Handbook for Spheres of Power.
    Ask me (or the other authors) anything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lateral View Post
    Well, of course I'm paranoid about everything. Hell, with Jeff as DM, I'd be paranoid even if we were playing a game set in The Magic Kiddie Funland of Perfectly Flat Planes and Sugar Plums.
    Greenman by Bradakhan/Spring Greenman by Comissar/Autumn Greenman by Sgt. Pepper/Winter Greenman by gurgleflep

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff the Green View Post
    I understand the concern, but if I'm going to ditch those I'd prefer to just remove the lock altogether and just make it based on level. Making it a Discipline Breakthrough locks out certain combinations of archetypes from major/fantastical discoveries. Not the end of the world, I know, but it does invalidate a character I want to play at some point.
    That's a fair point. It just seems like right now that if you're playing a Tinker, you're almost certainly going to take those two discoveries because they have such big benefits compared to other discoveries.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Llyarden's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Okay so this turned into a bit of a slew of things. Sorry about that.

    Does the extra damage from a bomb still not work with Vital Strike, or was the omission of that clause intentional?

    The Discovery class feature being right at the bottom of the class seems a weird place to put it to me, and is somewhat contrary to the normal precedent.

    What can Bulwark Automaton trigger off/affect? The only generic definition of an 'attack' as far as I know is the one that invisibility uses, which means that your automaton can somehow intercept spells that simply require the caster to focus on one specific person (rather than actually, like, hit them or something), which seems a bit weird. Also it isn't clear how that would work with area attacks like fireball (or an alchemist bomb.)

    Multi Bomb has a typo in it: "the t alchemist"

    "50% fortification" isn't a thing. The armour ability is moderate fortification, or you could just say a 50% chance to negate critical hits and sneak attacks, especially since that's the wording used for the 19th-level improvement.

    What does Ultimate Bomb affect? Specifically, does it affect critical or Vital Strike damage dice?

    Multiped automaton might want a clause about exactly how many legs it has for if people go about using called shots (or something like SoM's Limb Ripper legendary talent) on them.

    The Customisation ability of the automata talks about the 'tinker advanced discipline' for major/fantastical customisations instead of the relevant discoveries.

    Is 'Customisation Bonus' just a thing you get along with any customisation that lists one? Because that isn't very clear.

    Orichalcum shell might want to specify that it becomes DR/- for clarity.

    Alchemical Saber says 'feed' instead of 'fed,' and probably should say 'provokes attacks of opportunity' instead of 'provokes.'

    The kallen's gift spells talk about needing poison from a crimson scorpion but don't actually have any material component?

    Awakened Genius...I think is meant to grant Diverse Training and not 'discipline divergence'?
    Last edited by Llyarden; 2019-05-22 at 04:29 PM.
    "Follow the moonwalking Nosepass!"
    "Can you put the lich in a box?"

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Jeff the Green's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Great PNW
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by Llyarden View Post
    What can Bulwark Automaton trigger off/affect? The only generic definition of an 'attack' as far as I know is the one that invisibility uses, which means that your automaton can somehow intercept spells that simply require the caster to focus on one specific person (rather than actually, like, hit them or something), which seems a bit weird. Also it isn't clear how that would work with area attacks like fireball (or an alchemist bomb.)
    Now specifies weapon or natural attack.

    Quote Originally Posted by Llyarden View Post
    Multiped automaton might want a clause about exactly how many legs it has for if people go about using called shots (or something like SoM's Limb Ripper legendary talent) on them.
    Done. Specifies it can be from 6 to 750. (Insect to longest millipede.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Llyarden View Post
    The Customisation ability of the automata talks about the 'tinker advanced discipline' for major/fantastical customisations instead of the relevant discoveries.
    Fixed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Llyarden View Post
    Is 'Customisation Bonus' just a thing you get along with any customisation that lists one? Because that isn't very clear.
    Yes. It's part of the customization, essentially. I think I clarified it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Llyarden View Post
    Orichalcum shell might want to specify that it becomes DR/- for clarity.
    Done.

    Thanks for the suggestions!
    Author of The Auspician's Handbook and The Tempestarian's Handbook for Spheres of Power.
    Ask me (or the other authors) anything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lateral View Post
    Well, of course I'm paranoid about everything. Hell, with Jeff as DM, I'd be paranoid even if we were playing a game set in The Magic Kiddie Funland of Perfectly Flat Planes and Sugar Plums.
    Greenman by Bradakhan/Spring Greenman by Comissar/Autumn Greenman by Sgt. Pepper/Winter Greenman by gurgleflep

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by Llyarden View Post
    Okay so this turned into a bit of a slew of things. Sorry about that.

    Does the extra damage from a bomb still not work with Vital Strike, or was the omission of that clause intentional?

    The Discovery class feature being right at the bottom of the class seems a weird place to put it to me, and is somewhat contrary to the normal precedent.

    What can Bulwark Automaton trigger off/affect? The only generic definition of an 'attack' as far as I know is the one that invisibility uses, which means that your automaton can somehow intercept spells that simply require the caster to focus on one specific person (rather than actually, like, hit them or something), which seems a bit weird. Also it isn't clear how that would work with area attacks like fireball (or an alchemist bomb.)

    Multi Bomb has a typo in it: "the t alchemist"

    "50% fortification" isn't a thing. The armour ability is moderate fortification, or you could just say a 50% chance to negate critical hits and sneak attacks, especially since that's the wording used for the 19th-level improvement.

    What does Ultimate Bomb affect? Specifically, does it affect critical or Vital Strike damage dice?

    Multiped automaton might want a clause about exactly how many legs it has for if people go about using called shots (or something like SoM's Limb Ripper legendary talent) on them.

    The Customisation ability of the automata talks about the 'tinker advanced discipline' for major/fantastical customisations instead of the relevant discoveries.

    Is 'Customisation Bonus' just a thing you get along with any customisation that lists one? Because that isn't very clear.

    Orichalcum shell might want to specify that it becomes DR/- for clarity.

    Alchemical Saber says 'feed' instead of 'fed,' and probably should say 'provokes attacks of opportunity' instead of 'provokes.'

    The kallen's gift spells talk about needing poison from a crimson scorpion but don't actually have any material component?

    Awakened Genius...I think is meant to grant Diverse Training and not 'discipline divergence'?
    I'll leave the stuff Jeff can cover to him and respond to my info (all typos are being corrected):

    The VS omission was not intentional, it's been added. Appreciate the catch.

    Huh, I thought I mentioned discoveries sooner. I'll be changing the location of them.

    Clarifying ult bomb's interaction with all that: "(the ultimate bomb’s base damage is treated as 3d4+ three times the alchemist’s Intelligence score)".

    Fixed alchemical saber, it's an update of a 3.5 weapon, so that's probably why it had that wording.

    That's just a flavor thing, but I can add a M component with no cost if it really matters.

    Oh wow, awakened genius is actually using text back from when multi-pathing was a base part of the class. I'm going to have to change that to something else.

    Appreciate the feedback, changing things as we speak.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    I cannot help but think that toxicologist is significantly weaker than mutagenic and tinker. The little bit of extra damage and the sickening, which do not even affect a significant chunk of poison-immune enemies, cannot stand up to the raw buffs of mutagenic or the action economy of tinker.

    The bomb Intelligence damage and Throw Anything Intelligence damage interaction should be clarified.

    Kallen's Demolitionist gift should likely be 3rd-level to match the other Kallen extracts; it is not much stronger.

    The bound elemental looks worse than the automaton to me. I think you could stand to directly give the alchemist all Knowledge skills as class skills, and then simply make the bound elemental a fourth discipline, alongside mutagenic, tinker, and toxicologist.

    The beastborne shifter should likewise be a discipline, not an archetype. It should not suddenly call for Wisdom, either.

    The black powder researcher looks like a step down from the rather competent gun chemist to me.

    The combat scientist's weapon and armor proficiency line should cover alternative class features as well, not just archetypes, for compatibility.

    The esotericist is a straight-up downgrade. The casting scheme is not that much better than extracts, and switching from Intelligence to Charisma is a massive blow. I do not like it at all.

    The martial analyst's unarmored AC bonus could stand to be more like the one in the alternative class features.
    Last edited by EarthSeraphEdna; 2019-05-23 at 03:50 AM.

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Speaking as someone who has never played PF but who would absolutely lunge for an alchemist if I were to find myself in a PF game, this looks pretty neat!

    I’ve probably missed it in one of your earlier threads, but is there an explanation somewhere of your overarching design goals in this whole Legendary X project? Why you thought the classes needed tweaking, what your intended end result is, that sort of thing. Mostly just curious (not trying to imply anything about the project one way or the other).
    In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Roc View Post
    Gentlefolk, learn from Zaq's example, and his suffering. Remember, seven out of eleven players who use truenamer lose their ability to taste ice cream.
    Please come participate in the Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground E6 Appetizer Edition! We're currently judging for Round 17, and we'd love your opinion on the assembled builds!

    My compiled Iron Chef stuff!

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by EarthSeraphEdna View Post
    I cannot help but think that toxicologist is significantly weaker than mutagenic and tinker. The little bit of extra damage and the sickening, which do not even affect a significant chunk of poison-immune enemies, cannot stand up to the raw buffs of mutagenic or the action economy of tinker.

    The bomb Intelligence damage and Throw Anything Intelligence damage interaction should be clarified.

    Kallen's Demolitionist gift should likely be 3rd-level to match the other Kallen extracts; it is not much stronger.

    The bound elemental looks worse than the automaton to me. I think you could stand to directly give the alchemist all Knowledge skills as class skills, and then simply make the bound elemental a fourth discipline, alongside mutagenic, tinker, and toxicologist.

    The beastborne shifter should likewise be a discipline, not an archetype. It should not suddenly call for Wisdom, either.

    The black powder researcher looks like a step down from the rather competent gun chemist to me.

    The combat scientist's weapon and armor proficiency line should cover alternative class features as well, not just archetypes, for compatibility.

    The esotericist is a straight-up downgrade. The casting scheme is not that much better than extracts, and switching from Intelligence to Charisma is a massive blow. I do not like it at all.

    The martial analyst's unarmored AC bonus could stand to be more like the one in the alternative class features.
    As normal, I'll leave Jeff's stuff to Jeff.

    I've thought that too, the toxicologist is getting some buffs in scaling now, including being able to double up on additives on toxins.

    And clarified.

    I feel like the demolitionist gift is a little better, but I'm open to change there.

    Making new disciplines isn't going to happen, we have to have 20 discoveries for them, and there's some stuff that doesn't have the content for a full discipline, thus why it's an archetype.

    See above statement on beastborne shifter, and yeah, the wisdom thing was a copy/paste error.

    I don't agree that gun chemist is better than black powder researcher.

    Sure, that could use clarification.

    The reason the martial analyst's AC bonus is different is because it's connected to a whole archetype, rather than just a single ACF that can be swapped out whenever.

    Appreciate the comments, because of this and other discussion, I think toxins are in a better (and more clear) place than they were before.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaq View Post
    Speaking as someone who has never played PF but who would absolutely lunge for an alchemist if I were to find myself in a PF game, this looks pretty neat!

    I’ve probably missed it in one of your earlier threads, but is there an explanation somewhere of your overarching design goals in this whole Legendary X project? Why you thought the classes needed tweaking, what your intended end result is, that sort of thing. Mostly just curious (not trying to imply anything about the project one way or the other).
    Thanks, a lot went into this. Also love your truenamer guide; it and treantmonks guides were what got me into writing guides myself.

    And you're giving me way too much credit assuming stuff like that. Legendary rebuilds are generally just "I like the idea of this class doing the following thing." I've done a few of these rebuilds now, and the goal was always just to make the class feel closer to its intended roots. The design goal is generally "fix what I consider a problem", although some get more ambitious (Legendary Cavalier and Samurai were like that). If you asked some people, the design is just to show that I know the class better than the original devs :P I basically got my start in the industry 'fixing' the kineticist.

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Are the alternate class features for proficiencies compatible with the Combat Scientist archetype or not? It seems like they're intended to, but if so, Combat Scientist should probably read "Weapon and Armor proficiencies: In addition to the normal proficiencies granted by the alchemist class and any other archetypes or alternate class features, if this is this character’s first level in any class, they can select a martial traditionSOM of their choice."

    Quote Originally Posted by N. Jolly View Post
    And you're giving me way too much credit assuming stuff like that. Legendary rebuilds are generally just "I like the idea of this class doing the following thing." I've done a few of these rebuilds now, and the goal was always just to make the class feel closer to its intended roots. The design goal is generally "fix what I consider a problem", although some get more ambitious (Legendary Cavalier and Samurai were like that). If you asked some people, the design is just to show that I know the class better than the original devs :P I basically got my start in the industry 'fixing' the kineticist.
    The best Legendary classes are probably the ones where you guys either fix a class that doesn't work properly (Shifter, Kineticist) or take a boring class and make it interesting (Magus, Samurai). It's why I'm really hoping you do Legendary Cleric at some point, because while it's powerful, it's also super boring.
    Last edited by ChrisAsmadi; 2019-05-23 at 01:13 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisAsmadi View Post
    Are the alternate class features for proficiencies compatible with the Combat Scientist archetype or not? It seems like they're intended to, but if so, Combat Scientist should probably read "Weapon and Armor proficiencies: In addition to the normal proficiencies granted by the alchemist class and any other archetypes or alternate class features, if this is this character’s first level in any class, they can select a martial traditionSOM of their choice."
    We've updated things in this way so that they work with the new ACFs, although I might need to change the wording since right now combat scientist is getting a touch too good of proficiencies. Trust me when I say that I do want everything to work with Com Sci and everything else.

    The best Legendary classes are probably the ones where you guys either fix a class that doesn't work properly (Shifter, Kineticist) or take a boring class and make it interesting (Magus, Samurai). It's why I'm really hoping you do Legendary Cleric at some point, because while it's powerful, it's also super boring
    Glad to have written 3 of those four, and done contributions on the last one. Legendary's always given me the chance to write what I wanted and trust that I can make it 'legendary' as Jason Nelson would say. Being given that freedom has allowed me to explore new territory (as well as old territory when it comes to always having a punch and gun archetype), give products my own voice, and most importantly, bring new people into the industry. It's because of them that I've gotten to work with professional wrestlers Brennan Williams and Mansoor Al-Shehail of the Insiderz. Everyone there are great people, and I support them because they've shown faith in me that has let me accomplish things I never thought possible. Legendary is always a place where the talented get to show off what they can do, which is what I wanted to do with this and every other Legendary Games product.

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    What was actually improved about the toxicologist? I cannot see that great an upgrade over how it was before.

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Jeff the Green's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Great PNW
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by N. Jolly View Post
    As normal, I'll leave Jeff's stuff to Jeff.
    Jeff's stuff:
    Quote Originally Posted by EarthSeraphEdna View Post
    The bound elemental looks worse than the automaton to me. I think you could stand to directly give the alchemist all Knowledge skills as class skills, and then simply make the bound elemental a fourth discipline, alongside mutagenic, tinker, and toxicologist.
    As Jolly said, we ain't making more disciplines. Certainly we're not making another discipline that works almost identically to an existing one. What exactly makes it worse? There are disadvantages (loss of immunities, likely lower HP) and advantages (feats, not mindless). (On the not-mindless front, I clarified that they speak one of the elemental languages or Sylvan, and gave the arch those for free.)

    I had planned to make them more distinct, by restricting some customizations and giving them access to evolutions, but on looking that list over they almost all center around making more or better natural attacks, which is not what I was going for with the automaton. In the end, they ended up being a different flavor of tinker that will play a little differently, and I'm okay with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by EarthSeraphEdna View Post
    The esotericist is a straight-up downgrade. The casting scheme is not that much better than extracts, and switching from Intelligence to Charisma is a massive blow. I do not like it at all.
    That's fine; you don't have to. I personally will probably never play one. I like skill points and Knowledge skills too much. However, an alchemist with Charisma is equally valid. As examples, take the Sparks from Girl Genius. (Jolly also suggests Mei Hatsume and Miu Iruma. Not being familiar with their respective properties, though, I accept no accountability if they're off the mark.)

    While Intelligence has something of an edge in inherent usefulness, it is simply wrong to say that it is flat-out better. Same thing with extracts vs. psychic spells. It's a trade off that's fantastic for some characters and players and absolutely wrong for others, which is exactly what I like to see in archetypes. In addition, the Legendary Alchemist has between 4 and 8 skill points per level before Intelligence (depending on arch and ACFs), which is plenty to play someone who both commands minions and blows things up.

    (I did give it the social skills, though, as I realized that it didn't have the support to make good use of them.)



    In addition to the changes noted above, I thought I'd mention that I've decided to nix the discovery gate in front of major and fantastical customizations. Thinking back to my original design work, it's a legacy from an earlier design paradigm we abandoned.

    I also added language letting you use your unarmed strike in place of a slam for anything related to customize self.

    And it now gets Knowledge (engineering). How the heck did the original class not have that?
    Last edited by Jeff the Green; 2019-05-24 at 02:21 AM.
    Author of The Auspician's Handbook and The Tempestarian's Handbook for Spheres of Power.
    Ask me (or the other authors) anything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lateral View Post
    Well, of course I'm paranoid about everything. Hell, with Jeff as DM, I'd be paranoid even if we were playing a game set in The Magic Kiddie Funland of Perfectly Flat Planes and Sugar Plums.
    Greenman by Bradakhan/Spring Greenman by Comissar/Autumn Greenman by Sgt. Pepper/Winter Greenman by gurgleflep

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Legendary Games
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    Quote Originally Posted by EarthSeraphEdna View Post
    What was actually improved about the toxicologist? I cannot see that great an upgrade over how it was before.
    So drawing a toxin can be done as part of the move action to apply it to a weapon, at 6th level it can be applied as a swift action, at 12th level two additives can be added to the same toxin, and at 18th level, the alchemist can select a additive applied to a poison, and if a creature saves against it successfully, at the beginning of that creature's next round, they have to save against it again.

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    "The mutagenic alchemist must spend 1 point of quintessence and 10 minutes to brew a dose of mutagen, and once brewed, it remains potent until used. A mutagenic alchemist can create as many mutagens as they wish, although each mutagen becomes inert after 24 hours." This seems contradictory to me, do they last until used or only last 24 hours?

    "each toxin being placed inside of a vial of other similar receptacle that is not exposed to open air." I think this should say a vial or other similar receptacle.

    Edit: Confusion bomb has no save, it needs one.
    Last edited by Eldaran; 2019-05-25 at 02:53 AM.

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGirl

    Join Date
    Aug 2018

    Default Re: Legendary Alchemist Open Playtest

    I have to say I am extremely happy to see all the cool unarmed support. I dunno what the hell Wotc and Paizo's problem with punching things is but man does it suck to look around and only find like 3 ways to punch things viably without relying on cheese and then like 20 different ways to use "natural" weapons. Sometimes I don't wanna be Wolverine or Sabretooth. And by sometimes I mean most of the time.
    Last edited by VoltsofEight; 2019-05-24 at 08:43 PM. Reason: Grammar errors

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •