Pathfinder 2E Is this a fair review of PF2?

[CapnZapp]

I think Cap is saying it is harder, not that it is hard. And specifically that it is harder than 5e in the math department. He is also not saying that is a bad thing, but that it shouldn't just be dismissed like you seem to want to do. He is also, I believe, talking in reference to people coming from 5e, not PF1. A 5e player or DM would probably find it quite shocking (I know I did). However, it is less the math (which I am pretty good at) and more the multitude of conditions and feats that is keeping me from PF2e (and I couldn't find anyone to play) at this time.

Yes.

My point is that "much easier than PF1" is much less important and relevant to the average reader of this thread than "much harder than 5E".

Paizo has made a game, that contrasted to PF1 comes across as clean and simple, while still avoiding most (but not all) of the 4E pitfalls.

But we're not living in a world of PF1 and 4E. We left that world five years ago.

Instead we live in a world of 5E. In contrast to that game, PF2 comes across as hopelessly overflowing with the tiniest minutae. It's not a bad game. But compared to 5E, it's a highly specialist game for special people only.

(And before y'all say anything, I'm playing it myself)

If 5E didn't exist, we would probably all marvel at the neatness of the PF2 rules, its balance, and simplicity. Now, it mostly comes across as a throwback to the more complicated times before 5E.

Paizo has created a game to compete with last decade's games, while apparently completely failing to make sure their game can compete with this decade's game.*

That is my point.

*) To make any sense, please pretend you read that last year...

 

[Porridge]

So... since everyone has been so helpful with commentary...

I'll deviate from the Puffin video and ask about the alchemist. Now, I'm mildly obsessed with the alchemist as a PC (so much so I read grimoires to mine them for gaming material, and I recently wrote an Alchemist class for the GLOG system using those grimoire spells).

I was very excited when PF2 came out and the alchemist was going to be all alchemy - no more pseudo spells, only alchemical preparations! Yes! But when I read the playtest rules they felt... very flat. Lacked creativity.

How is the class working in the actual release?

As Philip Benz noted, the CRB Alchemist is generally thought to be the weakest class. Of the three CRB research fields (Bomber, Chirurgeon, and Mutagenist), only the Bomber seems to be viable (given CRB-only options), and (in my experience) even that's a bit underwhelming.

Some good news on that front, though:

1. The Advanced Players Guide introduces some new alchemist feats, alchemical items, and a new research field, that provide a moderate boost to the Alchemist's viability.

• The biggest addition is the new research field, the Toxicologist, which seems to be a step-up from the other research fields (either on a par with, or strictly better than, the Bomber).
• There are a couple new bombs with good status inflictions (which makes bomb-chucking more valuable).
• There are a couple new elixirs to help out with various conditions (which makes the Alchemist-as-healer role more viable).
• There's a nice mutagen that gives a substantial boost to AC (which makes the Mutagenist more viable, though not great).
• There's a new Alchemist feat that allows you to use perpetual infusions on an item covered by a different research field (this is basically a mandatory choice for your level 8 feat). This does a fair bit to make Mutagenists and Chirurgeons playable at levels 8+ (though not great).

2. The Advanced Players Guide introduces the Investigator class which has Alchemical Sciences as one of its methodologies. It doesn't give you enough alchemical "slots" to do things like throw bombs all the time or apply poison to your weapon every round. But it's great if what you want are long-lasting items (like mutagens) or niche-but-great-when-you-need-them items (like condition-removing or utility items).

This is a very attractive option if you want to build a character with the flavor and feel of a Mutagenist or Chirurgeon. This basically gives you some limited alchemical access (which is all those specialities need), and pairs it with a much better chassis.

TLDR: If you want to make a Bomber Alchemist, and you build carefully, you can get something that's OK (especially at levels 7+, when perpetual infusions kicks in). If you want to make a Toxicologist Alchemist, you can build something decent as well. And if you want to make a Mutagenist or Chirurgeon, you can build an Investigator with the Alchemical Science methodology, and get a character that's actually pretty good.

 

[Gorgon Zee]

On alchemist bombers: we have one in our party (currently level 15). It definitely was underpowered before the APG, so if you want to play one, I'd definitely use the APG. Some good points about it:

• It's not hard to get your miss damage up to 10 around level 10-12. At that point if you throw bombs into a group of three enemies (take all feats to increase the smash range) you're doing 30 damage on a miss. So if you are hasted, that's 120 damage with 4 misses. We've definitely felt the power of that when fighting high-AC enemies as that's going to be the top DPS for that case
• Many enemies in PF2 seem vulnerable to cold/fire or other alchemical stuff. The alchemist has easy ability to tune damage type without needing to buy multiple weapons.
• With an APG feat, the alchemist can throw healing elixirs to heal others, making it the only class I know of with one-action ranged heals. They can also have an infinite supply of weaker elixirs.

But there are issues that are unfriendly in play:

• 60' max achievable range is annoying. Especially against a Wendigo who grabs people and flies up 100' in a single turn. Just a random example, not necessarily from last night's game, but possibly.
• Enemies with 5 resistance all laugh at alchemists. They're rare, but they basically ignore the alchemist.

I haven't seen a comparison with other ranged attackers -- I'd be curious about comparing them to an archer specialist. I guess my general feeling is that they would be quite close to them in damage output, but that's just gut feeling.

 

[CapnZapp]

Could it be that the Alchemist's basic problem is he's a ranged shooter?

Range means a hard nerf to damage in PF2 - you're strongly encouraged to enter melee to get business done.

But the Alchemist doesn't have that option. Neither does it have the flexibility of spellcasters.

And since crafting is essentially neutered in the game, there's nothing left for the Alchemist to excel at.

At least that's the theory. Is there anything to it?

 

[Gorgon Zee]

Could it be that the Alchemist's basic problem is he's a ranged shooter?

Range means a hard nerf to damage in PF2 - you're strongly encouraged to enter melee to get business done.

But the Alchemist doesn't have that option. Neither does it have the flexibility of spellcasters.

And since crafting is essentially neutered in the game, there's nothing left for the Alchemist to excel at.

Ranged shooters definitely are penalized for being a safe distance from the action -- I'm the cleric in our team, and I rarely need to pay attention to her. So she doesn't cost me actions for her damage, unlike the front-line fighters who need constant attention!

For DPS, the auto-splash damage and ability to flat-foot the opposition for everyone, combined with often being able to focus on vulnerabilities, is where they need to focus. If there are 3+ enemies in a medium sized room, the alchemist will do as much damage as our optimized barbarian, especially when hasted. It's also more dependable damage.

The big thing about the alchemist is that they don't need gear. Our barbarian, the main hitter, is the only one in our group to get the +3 prof rune. He was the first to get the keen rune and, actually, pretty much the first to grab all the good melee runes. The alchemist is effective with pretty much nothing, so another benefit to having them in the party is that they are very cheap to optimize! The bad part is that they are pretty boring, as there's not much equipment they need. On the other hand, choice of 12+ items to throw is a lot, and the ability to do 60' ranged heals as one action is EXCELLENT!

Our alchemist is not interested in the various mutagens that allow all sorts of more odd effects, like empowering some stats at the cost of others, but I think that if you were interested in them, you might get a lot of flexibility from them.

In terms of excelling, the alchemist is an all-rounder mostly. They will be your go-to character for INT-based knowledge skills, pretty much nailing them alway, but I think they should basically appeal to someone who wants an all-rounder who is never in a lot of danger and always helpful.

Plus being the best DPS character in a fight against a half-dozen invisible high-AC dark dwarves ("hey guy-with-see-invisible -- where do I throw this extended-splash fire bomb? I can get four in that square square? OK, I do splash four times and do 40 damage to each of them") where the barbarian struggled ("I make four attacks. The first would have hit but I failed the 50-50 roll, the second hits and 3 and 4 are whiffs. I hit once for 70")

 

[Celtavian]

Alchemist bomber overall effect on the group is pretty strong. They do a lot of damage when AoE is easy and your party gets energy resistance to coordinate with the alchemist. Cheetah Elixirs help movement. Goldenmist Elixir demonstrably reduces damage. They can switch energy types as needed. If you focus too much on one energy type for damage, then you can be screwed if you fight creatures that are immune. But the alchemist bomber from a DM perspective is that super annoying guy you ignore because the other martials are hitting harder for single big hits, but you're suddenly going, "Damn. This guy is doing 20 points a round to four targets, has two people burning with persistent fire damage, and one guy burning with Acid. He's splashing everyone every round." His damage kind of adds up to this aggregate mass of pain.

Ranger is good at ranged damage. Not sure why someone would view ranged damage as inferior unless you're a monk or non-fighter or ranger. Ranger hammers with a bow. I think some of this viewpoint may be low level ranged damage. The archer starts coming into his own as his bow gets better and he gets specialization and more shots. That's not so different than PF1, so not sure why ranged damage would be viewed as weak. It takes a while to ramp up like it did in PF1 to match melee damage.

In PF1 big heavy two-handed weapons did the most damage the soonest. In PF2 big heavy two-handed weapons do the most damage the soonest. Eventually ranged closes the gap. They gain a big damage advantage from not having to spend move actions to switch targets.

If we're talking ranged spell damage, then I agree that is weak save in higher level AoE damage which can get insane. But archery is one of the better fighting styles to build around for damage. Starts off slower than melee, but quickly starts to catch up as you get specialization and better striking weapons. You can even build some excellent rogue archery builds. At lower level that half-strength bonus to damage stands out, not so much as you gain levels.

 

[Celtavian]

So... since everyone has been so helpful with commentary...

I'll deviate from the Puffin video and ask about the alchemist. Now, I'm mildly obsessed with the alchemist as a PC (so much so I read grimoires to mine them for gaming material, and I recently wrote an Alchemist class for the GLOG system using those grimoire spells).

I was very excited when PF2 came out and the alchemist was going to be all alchemy - no more pseudo spells, only alchemical preparations! Yes! But when I read the playtest rules they felt... very flat. Lacked creativity.

How is the class working in the actual release?

I have player playing a goblin alchemist up to lvl 15. I feel the class is better than it is being sold.

1. Alchemist is not a premier single target damage dealer. He'll get big hits, but not like the rogue or precision ranger archer. But his damage is like water dripping on stone. It doesn't do the most damage from direct big hits, but it adds up until the stone breaks.

Often the goblin alchemist is building up damage:
He'll throw 1 fire and 1 acid bomb at a target that allows him to hit a few other targets. So his damage will look something like this:
Fire Bomb: 3d8+2 (specialization)+8 splash fire damage with 5 points of persistent fire damage.
Acid Bomb: 1+2 (Specialization) bludgeoning +8 acid splash with 3d6 persistent acid damage.

Everyone within 15 feet of the target takes 8 splash fire damage and 8 acid splash damage. He can also position to cone this damage.

If you have three targets around the main target, you end up with a damage round that is quite good.

32 fire splash damage to four targets.
32 acid splash damage to four targets
15 points direct fire damage on average to main target
3 acid damage to main target
5 persistent fire on a target
3d6 acid damage on a target

So the alchemist ends up having 82 damage in a round for two actions and 5 PF and around 11 PA going.

As a DM it starts off small, then after 3 rounds of this type of damage the enemy is trying to kill the goblin alchemist because he's tearing them down with death by a thousand cuts. Once he gets persistent damage burning on a few targets and is splashing everyone, it gets really annoying.

2. Alchemist Elixir provide helpful combat buffs. Goldenmist Elixir provides concealment against all attacks. This reduces damage given the number of attacks quite often, even crits. Each enemy has to roll a 5 or better on a d20 every attack or miss. Cheetah Elixir lasts an hour and boosts everyone's movement by +10 feet greatly enhancing mobility.

The goblin himself usually takes Juggernaut Elixir which gives him 30 temporary hit points and a +3 item bonus to fortitude saves with a success being a critical success on a fortitude saving throw. It reduces his will save by 2, but he's often out of battle so doesn't get targeted as much.

3. The goblin built up his charisma and took a feat that allows him to use Create a Diversion to hide every round after he throws bombs. He tends to throw two bombs, then Create a Diversion to hide using his Deception skill. He often has to hide after the enemy gets tired of death by a thousand cuts when the lunatic goblin is tossing bombs and doing splash damage even on a miss.

Even if you roll a regular miss, the alchemist does his splash damage to everyone in the splash range or he can focus it on the main target.

4. Alchemist also has some good out of combat utility. He used Infiltrator Elixir to conduct an undercover investigation alone in a dwarf city. He was able to spend most of his daily reagent uses on these elixirs allowing him to remain undercover most of the day. It was a good show of versatility.

As an alchemist you won't be the big, flashy precision ranger archer or rogue damage dealer, but I don't think you'll be weak though you'll have some moments when you're best damage strategy may not work if something is immune or highly resistant. Alchemist is one of those classes where lots of littler perks and damage options add up to a very useful class. For example, our goblin alchemist also tosses electrical bombs that flat foot the target for the whole party. He often gives the rogue a Juggernaut Elixir to boost his hit points. He has lots of little ways of being useful.

Our party has never regretted having an alchemist in the group. The player has lots of fun playing a mad bombing goblin.

 

[Yardiff]

Ranger is good at ranged damage. Not sure why someone would view ranged damage as inferior unless you're a monk or non-fighter or ranger. Ranger hammers with a bow. I think some of this viewpoint may be low level ranged damage. The archer starts coming into his own as his bow gets better and he gets specialization and more shots. That's not so different than PF1, so not sure why ranged damage would be viewed as weak. It takes a while to ramp up like it did in PF1 to match melee damage.

In PF1 big heavy two-handed weapons did the most damage the soonest. In PF2 big heavy two-handed weapons do the most damage the soonest. Eventually ranged closes the gap. They gain a big damage advantage from not having to spend move actions to switch targets.

I thinking their comparing 5e ranged attacks. Dex to damage is global in 5e.

 

[Retreater]

It's good to see the APG makes the Alchemist somewhat more viable. My player who tried one was very disappointed in the original build options.

 

[Celtavian]

I thinking their comparing 5e ranged attacks. Dex to damage is global in 5e.

Ah. If you include Sharpshooter, hard for a PF2 ranged attacker to match a 5E ranged attacker. Sharpshooter gives so many perks in one feat that PF2 can't match it, at least at low level. I recall as a 5E DM reading Sharpshooter when a player took it and used it with bless for the first time and I couldn't believe how good the feat was. I could no longer use cover to help the enemies against ranged attacks. A good bless roll practically eliminated the -5 penalty for the +10 damage.

PF2 is still a very good damage dealer at higher level, but hard to match the 5E Sharpshooter Archer. Game ruining feat in my experience as a DM. Makes most fights trivial.