Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Egan_BW]

The spell itself is a free action, so that would be basically "+1 to all unarmed attacks when you have at least 1 ki."

IMO, the players don't need any buffs. :v

[Gentlefish]

Ah jeez it is, isn't it. In that case, you can take a single action for the +1 or leave it a free action and spend a ki point.

[Dwarmin]

@ki complaint, I won't make it not a feat, but I will make it a cantrip-esque thing you can do while you have at least 1 ki point.

Just call the IRS right now!

The spell itself is a free action, so that would be basically "+1 to all unarmed attacks when you have at least 1 ki."

IMO, the players don't need any buffs. :v

Well now I'm confused. It says this.

You gain the ki strike ki power (see page 234). This power is a type of special spell you can cast by spending Spell Points.

But you DON'T have to spend spell points to cast this ki power? Which the book doesn't imply anywhere else? Someone call the editors, this needs clarification.

[randomgenericusername]

What? I mean there's a cap of 18 points per stat. Also, I can only reach 18 in strenght because of being a paladin and I would have to leave strenght at 14 to reach 16 constitution and 16 charisma. Unless I'm doing something wrong.

[Dwarmin]

What? I mean there's a cap of 18 points per stat. Also, I can only reach 18 in strenght because of being a paladin and I would have to leave strenght at 14 to reach 16 constitution and 16 charisma. Unless I'm doing something wrong.

I guess you were responding to me, but my point stands. You get an benefit for con/cha/str. But you only need to put a lot into CHA if you intend to max it and get the feats along with it.

[Pancaek]

Since I was rather looking forward to this, I went and looked up some spoiler-free reviews of the playtest to kill some time. Biggest feedbacks I've read: Alchemist is the worst class, the action point economy is pretty dang wonky, the playtest adventure is seriously deadly.

Looks like we're in for a treat.

[randomgenericusername]

Then it's probably better for me to leave strenght at 14 to be better at healing and tanking stuff. Is grabbing a shield worth it?

[Dwarmin]

Hmm, alchemist does look...dense. Out of combat you can whip the party into shape with heals and buffs, in it you're pretty much down to ranged attacks with a twist of having different types of Alchemic damage at extremely short ranges.

They're essentially a spell caster, for all intents and purposes. With an emphasis on crafting, which the GM absolutely has to recognize and assist you in, otherwise you're just a goofy archer.

I almost want to try and play one...we already have a monk...hmm...

The hardest part of playing an Alchemist would be trying to figure out your starting gear. I also dunno if your daily alchemy stuff is supposed to be permanent or not.

Then it's probably better for me to leave strenght at 14 to be better at healing and tanking stuff. Is grabbing a shield worth it?

If your character can handle the weight and afford it, why not?

Anytime your character has a spare action, you can spend it to lift the shield and get an AC/TAC bonus. Of course wearing a shield will raise your check penalty, but you could easily choose to have one on your back. It could be useful anytime we're getting attacked outside of foot range, which seems likely.

[Egan_BW]

Then it's probably better for me to leave strenght at 14 to be better at healing and tanking stuff. Is grabbing a shield worth it?

I'll let you decide: it uses up one hand, and gives a -1 to strength and dex based checks. To use it, you need to spend one action to raise the shield, which will give you a bonus to AC until the start of your next turn. +1 AC for a small shield, +2 AC for a large one. If you get hit and take damage while having the shield up, you can spend your reaction to deflect the blow, reducing the damage you take by the shield's "hardness". Which is 3 for a wood shield, or 5 for a steel one. The shield will also take some damage from this, but around there is where the book lost me.

Overall, It kinda sucks to lose an action for it, but 2 extra AC isn't anything to scoff at.

[Dwarmin]

Yeah, because ideally you're not always *using* all your actions every turn either. Any free action, up the shield goes.

For example you might be in close combat, and wallop an enemy with two attacks on a turn, and then your third attack will have a -10 penalty, so why not boost up your AC instead if the enemy is particularly evasive and seems like you might be targeted? Because you're certainly not going to be landing all three attacks very often, but his 1st attack on the next turn is likely to land on you.

[Gentlefish]

Shields are, conditionally, pretty great. A steel shield will be able to turn away a single shortbow arrow a round without any real damage coming its way unless they get lucky on rolls.

As, as per powers, they're mixed in with spells in a really dumb way.

KI STRIKE POWER (cost) 1
Casting: [free action] Verbal Casting; Trigger You start to
attempt an attack roll for an unarmed Strike.
You gain a +1 conditional bonus to the triggering attack roll.

[Dwarmin]

Pathfinder Monks officially depress me.

@Gentlefish: For alchemists, are the daily alchemy items they make permanent in duration? Should they begin play literally stocked up with as much as they can carry? Or will you just begin the game with a shipwreck that destroys their entire inventory anyway? :V

[Pancaek]

I think one of the big things against alchemists I heard had to do with resonance points, but I didn't really read into the details. Just a heads up, maybe it's important.

[Dwarmin]

Yeah, that was the first problem I saw. Ironically it wasn't entirely the alchemist themselves, who use their INT+Level for Resonance, which determines alchemical daily production-but the fact other characters in party who use CHA+level for resonance.

It's a new thing in Pathfinder 2. If you don't have good CHA you can't even use many magic items per day with any regularity.

I realized my Dwarf monk, for example, has no resonance (Dwarf racial and all that). So every time he chugs a potion, he has a 50% chance of it working, and a 50% chance of it not working, and not being able to use any more of items in a day, or possibly not any magical items. So if the whole party is dumping CHA, your buffing/healing potions are useless to them, especially at low level.

I'm not entirely against this, actually. Dumpstats shouldn't be a thing, and giving CHA a valid use rather than being pretty is OK to me. But in return, the Alchemist is sort of lame until the non-CHA classes gets a few levels and can actually benefit from potions.

[Gentlefish]

HAHA SPEAKING OF resonance points, you won't need to invest in potions. And wands only need one daily invested. And staves only need one invested which will also recharge them. They will also have a higher capacity for points than 10. Maybe. They're meant to be beefy and reusable wands after all.

Wondrous items need investing only for their active abilities and even then only once.

E: As per rules, I believe that alchemist's spontaneously created items last 24 hours, and are free minus their resource pool to make. To make permanent items you will need to spend gold crafting though I will let you craft them in short order provided enough "alchemical reagent" measured in GP, one minute, and a successful roll. For every 10 you succeed the DC by, you will create another one for the same cost.