At third level, experimental elixir is bad. Making it scale better doesn't mean anything, because it is bad the level you get it. If I have to wait 5 levels to be able to use a feature so that it is mildly useful, then that feature is badly designed. The ninth level feature, or the idea of upcasting, DOES NOT FIX experimental elixir. Experimental elixir needs to be siginficantly more powerful at the level you get it, not scale better. +1d4 to ability checks is decent, but it is a 1st level spell that can affect 3 creatures. +1 ac is good, but considering that a 1st level spell gives someone +2 AC, it is not worth it. Experimental elixir, compared to the other artificer subclasses that exist in the game, is a significantly underpowered feature. It does not matter if it is useful at times, it is underpowered as hell and needs to be fixed, and not in a way that only effects high level play as an artificer, which, as we already have established, is fine because of the features that already exist, even the buff experimental elixir gets.
While I do agree that the Alchemist is the weakest sub-class among the three current sub-classes, I wouldn't say it is "poor". It has its niche and it looks fun to play.
Personally, I think you are hung up with the idea that the Elixirs are supposed to be the only thing that the Alchemist can do, instead of one of the things it can do. All of the experimental elixirs have use cases that I could see being preferred over a spell. It is important to note that the 5th level feature makes your healing and damage spells better than an elixir... but that only means if you are spending a spell slot to make a Healing Elixir then it is a waste because it would probably be worth more just using Cure Wounds. Everything else has uses that don't overlap with the 5th level class feature that you might need depending on the situation.
I think too many people are comparing this to the 2017 Alchemist, who was more of a mad scientist tossing around potions dealing damage. This is more of a tool box of useful things.
What else can the alchemist do at 3rd level? Specifically. What else? I am not comparing this to the 2017 alchemist, I am comparing this to the power levels of other artificer subclasses being made at the same time. Experimental elixir is a bad feature. "niche use makes it good" is the reason why the current design for ranger is the way it is.
Grizzlebub: what is in my toolbox that other artificers don't have, besides the experimental elixer. I don't agree with you, but I want to hear you out to make sure I understand and maybe re-evaluate
Grizzlebub: what is in my toolbox that other artificers don't have, besides the experimental elixer. I don't agree with you, but I want to hear you out to make sure I understand and maybe re-evaluate
The Swiftness Elixir is quiet useful during combat for rogues and other characters that utilize gorilla warfare tactics not to mention its usefulness for scouting. Though the other archetypes (currently) have Expeditious Retreat, I do feel everyone is underestimating the lack of concentration required for this. Especially considering most Artificers (including Alchemists) will be using their concentration for Arcane Weapon. Not to mention the fact that Expeditious Retreat requires your bonus action to use, something the other Archetypes utilize heavily.
With Resilience, again we are comparing it with other Artificer classes, so Shield of Faith isn't available. That being said while there is no real usefulness of Resilience outside of combat, a +1 to AC (without concentration) where needed is still valuable.
Boldness, again, I can only use things available to the Artificer, but like Resilience, really only useful in combat situations, but very useful (without concentration) .
Flight. Granted Artificers get the Fly spell as a 3rd level spell, which they get at 9th level, but at low levels a 10 foot fly speed can be very useful. In combat being able to fly out of range of melee, even if it is just 10 feet up, has its uses. Outside combat using it to circumvent barriers and stealth into inaccessible areas is useful. Often times players use Misty Step (2nd level spell) or Dimension Door in similar situations. And if we want to compare it to the Fly spell, which Artificers receive at 9th level, then it would be useful to include the 9th level Elixir ability to add temporary hit points.
Transformation is probably the most useful of the effects. Granting underwater breathing or a swim speed if need be, being able to fully change your physical appearance (including voice) and continue to do so for the next 10 minutes. Great for stealth portions of mission or circumventing unwanted encounters. And while Artificers do get Disguise Self, I don't think I need to write up a compare and contrast between Alter Self and Disguise Self (mostly because I feel your confirmation bias will ignore them). The Natural Weapons is also useful in certain situation. Granting magical natural weapons when necessary, but the +1 bonus to attack is overshadowed by Boldness, which is strictly better if you don't need added magical portion to the weapon attack.
I didn't include Healing, because 9 times of 10 the Artificer would be better to use Healing Word or Cure Wounds. Though it still has its usefulness, considering Cure Wounds requires touch and Healing Word is only 1d4 + Spellcasting ability.
While they are the main feature for level 3, I do think they should have upped the "free" elixirs you receive. Give 2 elixirs at 3rd level, 3 at 6th, 4 at 11th and 5 at 15th.
Alchemists and Artillerists derive no real benefit from Arcane Weapon with their single, useless attack. Nor are we sure Arcane Weapon is still in the game given the fact that the spell is being sunset rather than incorporated. It's on the list of Cut Content, whereas the rest of the artificer is not.
Experimental Elixir is a single randomized flask of crap-ass 1st-level spell analogue at long rest. You can burn a spell slot to get the precise effect you want, or you could just cast the spell that the elixir effect is mimicking. Want Longstrider? Just prepare and cast Longstrider. Bless, Alter Self, all the others save Buoyancy? Just cast the damn spell. You have to kill the spell slot anyways.
Lack of concentration requirement is counteracted by the fact that most of these spells have been drastically weakened, and the fact that the alchemist in specific lost any ability to make use of its bonus action. It cannot attack, not with one singular weapon attack to its name. It has no special feature or function anchored on its bonus, as the Artillerist or Battlesmith do. Experimental Elixirs provide weakened bonuses which consume your action to create, and additionally consume a second action entirely to actually grant - you cannot create the elixir and chug the elixir in the same turn.
Also worth pointing out is that temporary HP, of any sort, fall off after a long rest. Restorative Reagents is not permanent until consumed; it is permanent until you sleep. 2d6+INT temp HP is a decent boost, but it's not a game-changing one. Considering that the Battlesmith can engage in martial combat and thus save its spell slots/cantrip selections for utility/exploration/Adventure and the Artillerist can output as much punch as an Evocation wizard with its turrets and enhanced damage cantrips - thus saving its spell slots for the aforementioned utility/exploration/Adventure - where does an Alchemist whose 'defining class feature' is a bunch of weakened first-level spells it still has to pay spell slots for fit in?
I don't think I've argued that the Alchemist is as powerful as the Battle Smith or the Artillerist, I am just saying it isn't as terrible as everyone is making it out to be. I agree that if you are a min-maxer (of which I am not) then there is no reason to choose the Alchemist over the Artillerist or Battle Smith.
That being said, there are examples of less optimized archetypes within other classes that fulfill a thematic niche more than anything: Berserker, Arcane Archer, Beastmaster, Wild Magic Sorcerer, et cetera.
Do I think the Alchemist could use improvements? Yes.
Is it trash? I'd say no.
I think the only thing I am a little miffed about is the extreme swings Wizard has done with the Artificer. Like a pendulum swinging from one extreme to another, from the 2017 Artificer, to the 2019 Artificer to the Official Artificer. It feels as though Wizard made extreme changes between one to the next and to the final one. To the point to where there isn't any opportunity to minutely balance it further.
I think this Alchemist is a step in the right direction (wasn't a fan of the Homunculus), but it's too late to deliver any feedback for improvements. It is already printed.
Additionally, like Yurei1453 stated, we are all arguing when we don't have all of the facts in front of us. Yes we know the class features, but we don't know all of the infusions, or the changes to the spell list. For all we know there may be infusions that have prerequisites for a specific Archetype (Like an Alchemist Satchel, which was hinted at by Jeremy Crawford to be an Infusion), which may change they way we perceive these classes further.
The effects of experimental elixir need to be buffed to the point that, even at 3rd level when you have THREE spell slots, 9/10 it would be useful to make one than to just prepare a spell and cast it. If alchemist was a full caster, I would not have this problem, but it is not a full caster, and therefore I do. I do actually know the facts. I have seen the full leaked class, infusions included.
I've looked at the Eberron Artificer Preview Snapshots, and don't see where Arcane Weapon was removed. Just curious where that information came from? If that is the case then that is a shame.
Quick question for the Alchemist. Is there anything stopping you from just using up the last of your spell slots before you take a long rest to make a potion? If you keep doing that, you should be able to eventually build up a collection of them, hopefully.
@Henribecquerel If that were possible I think we would be having a very different conversation. However, the elixers only last until the end of your next long rest, so unless you had a really permissive DM (which I am, but others are not) then building up a collection unfortunately isn't possible.
Alternatively there's allowing the mixing potions variant option in the dmg (handwave that these are elixirs and not potions?)
Experimental elixir would be worth it just for the 1/100 chance that one effect becomes permanent. More likely to poison yourself or waste a potion, but those are pretty good odds.
Wouldn't be the best idea for every group, but it's got some interesting implications.
Wow, so the potions lose their potency and disappear after every long rest? That does stink and I can understand why everyone would be so annoyed by that. If I was DMing, I would definitely lose that aspect of it. Imagine if all potions worked like that.
Wow, so the potions lose their potency and disappear after every long rest? That does stink and I can understand why everyone would be so annoyed by that. If I was DMing, I would definitely lose that aspect of it. Imagine if all potions worked like that.
They're also made without consuming any resources.
I'd imagine that it would be standard for Alchemists to spend every day of downtime turning all of their spell slots into elixers and then stockpiling a hoard. Add a single level of Warlock and suddenly all they're allowed to do is make elixers and take short rests so they can make more.
If they can sell their elixers, then you just let them break any illusions of an economy before they even hit level five. If for whatever reason nobody will buy them, then you've still given them nearly infinite uses of every elixer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
At third level, experimental elixir is bad. Making it scale better doesn't mean anything, because it is bad the level you get it. If I have to wait 5 levels to be able to use a feature so that it is mildly useful, then that feature is badly designed. The ninth level feature, or the idea of upcasting, DOES NOT FIX experimental elixir. Experimental elixir needs to be siginficantly more powerful at the level you get it, not scale better. +1d4 to ability checks is decent, but it is a 1st level spell that can affect 3 creatures. +1 ac is good, but considering that a 1st level spell gives someone +2 AC, it is not worth it. Experimental elixir, compared to the other artificer subclasses that exist in the game, is a significantly underpowered feature. It does not matter if it is useful at times, it is underpowered as hell and needs to be fixed, and not in a way that only effects high level play as an artificer, which, as we already have established, is fine because of the features that already exist, even the buff experimental elixir gets.
While I do agree that the Alchemist is the weakest sub-class among the three current sub-classes, I wouldn't say it is "poor". It has its niche and it looks fun to play.
Personally, I think you are hung up with the idea that the Elixirs are supposed to be the only thing that the Alchemist can do, instead of one of the things it can do. All of the experimental elixirs have use cases that I could see being preferred over a spell. It is important to note that the 5th level feature makes your healing and damage spells better than an elixir... but that only means if you are spending a spell slot to make a Healing Elixir then it is a waste because it would probably be worth more just using Cure Wounds. Everything else has uses that don't overlap with the 5th level class feature that you might need depending on the situation.
I think too many people are comparing this to the 2017 Alchemist, who was more of a mad scientist tossing around potions dealing damage. This is more of a tool box of useful things.
What else can the alchemist do at 3rd level? Specifically. What else? I am not comparing this to the 2017 alchemist, I am comparing this to the power levels of other artificer subclasses being made at the same time. Experimental elixir is a bad feature. "niche use makes it good" is the reason why the current design for ranger is the way it is.
Grizzlebub: what is in my toolbox that other artificers don't have, besides the experimental elixer. I don't agree with you, but I want to hear you out to make sure I understand and maybe re-evaluate
^ And dont say features you get at higher levels, make it a level 3 alchemist.
I didn't include Healing, because 9 times of 10 the Artificer would be better to use Healing Word or Cure Wounds. Though it still has its usefulness, considering Cure Wounds requires touch and Healing Word is only 1d4 + Spellcasting ability.
While they are the main feature for level 3, I do think they should have upped the "free" elixirs you receive. Give 2 elixirs at 3rd level, 3 at 6th, 4 at 11th and 5 at 15th.
Alchemists and Artillerists derive no real benefit from Arcane Weapon with their single, useless attack. Nor are we sure Arcane Weapon is still in the game given the fact that the spell is being sunset rather than incorporated. It's on the list of Cut Content, whereas the rest of the artificer is not.
Experimental Elixir is a single randomized flask of crap-ass 1st-level spell analogue at long rest. You can burn a spell slot to get the precise effect you want, or you could just cast the spell that the elixir effect is mimicking. Want Longstrider? Just prepare and cast Longstrider. Bless, Alter Self, all the others save Buoyancy? Just cast the damn spell. You have to kill the spell slot anyways.
Lack of concentration requirement is counteracted by the fact that most of these spells have been drastically weakened, and the fact that the alchemist in specific lost any ability to make use of its bonus action. It cannot attack, not with one singular weapon attack to its name. It has no special feature or function anchored on its bonus, as the Artillerist or Battlesmith do. Experimental Elixirs provide weakened bonuses which consume your action to create, and additionally consume a second action entirely to actually grant - you cannot create the elixir and chug the elixir in the same turn.
Also worth pointing out is that temporary HP, of any sort, fall off after a long rest. Restorative Reagents is not permanent until consumed; it is permanent until you sleep. 2d6+INT temp HP is a decent boost, but it's not a game-changing one. Considering that the Battlesmith can engage in martial combat and thus save its spell slots/cantrip selections for utility/exploration/Adventure and the Artillerist can output as much punch as an Evocation wizard with its turrets and enhanced damage cantrips - thus saving its spell slots for the aforementioned utility/exploration/Adventure - where does an Alchemist whose 'defining class feature' is a bunch of weakened first-level spells it still has to pay spell slots for fit in?
Please do not contact or message me.
I don't think I've argued that the Alchemist is as powerful as the Battle Smith or the Artillerist, I am just saying it isn't as terrible as everyone is making it out to be. I agree that if you are a min-maxer (of which I am not) then there is no reason to choose the Alchemist over the Artillerist or Battle Smith.
That being said, there are examples of less optimized archetypes within other classes that fulfill a thematic niche more than anything: Berserker, Arcane Archer, Beastmaster, Wild Magic Sorcerer, et cetera.
Do I think the Alchemist could use improvements? Yes.
Is it trash? I'd say no.
I think the only thing I am a little miffed about is the extreme swings Wizard has done with the Artificer. Like a pendulum swinging from one extreme to another, from the 2017 Artificer, to the 2019 Artificer to the Official Artificer. It feels as though Wizard made extreme changes between one to the next and to the final one. To the point to where there isn't any opportunity to minutely balance it further.
I think this Alchemist is a step in the right direction (wasn't a fan of the Homunculus), but it's too late to deliver any feedback for improvements. It is already printed.
Additionally, like Yurei1453 stated, we are all arguing when we don't have all of the facts in front of us. Yes we know the class features, but we don't know all of the infusions, or the changes to the spell list. For all we know there may be infusions that have prerequisites for a specific Archetype (Like an Alchemist Satchel, which was hinted at by Jeremy Crawford to be an Infusion), which may change they way we perceive these classes further.
Arcane weapon is not in the game. Sorry to say.
The effects of experimental elixir need to be buffed to the point that, even at 3rd level when you have THREE spell slots, 9/10 it would be useful to make one than to just prepare a spell and cast it. If alchemist was a full caster, I would not have this problem, but it is not a full caster, and therefore I do. I do actually know the facts. I have seen the full leaked class, infusions included.
I've looked at the Eberron Artificer Preview Snapshots, and don't see where Arcane Weapon was removed. Just curious where that information came from? If that is the case then that is a shame.
A book readthrough video on youtube.
I thought the book wasn't due out until 22nd
Idk how it happened but I found one, arcane weapon is gone now.
Quick question for the Alchemist. Is there anything stopping you from just using up the last of your spell slots before you take a long rest to make a potion? If you keep doing that, you should be able to eventually build up a collection of them, hopefully.
Yes - the potions vanish when you complete a long rest.
Please do not contact or message me.
@Henribecquerel If that were possible I think we would be having a very different conversation. However, the elixers only last until the end of your next long rest, so unless you had a really permissive DM (which I am, but others are not) then building up a collection unfortunately isn't possible.
Alternatively there's allowing the mixing potions variant option in the dmg (handwave that these are elixirs and not potions?)
Experimental elixir would be worth it just for the 1/100 chance that one effect becomes permanent. More likely to poison yourself or waste a potion, but those are pretty good odds.
Wouldn't be the best idea for every group, but it's got some interesting implications.
Wow, so the potions lose their potency and disappear after every long rest? That does stink and I can understand why everyone would be so annoyed by that. If I was DMing, I would definitely lose that aspect of it. Imagine if all potions worked like that.
But the alchemist makes eperimental elixirs- not potions. They're totally different. What kind of alchemist makes potions anyway?
They're also made without consuming any resources.
I'd imagine that it would be standard for Alchemists to spend every day of downtime turning all of their spell slots into elixers and then stockpiling a hoard. Add a single level of Warlock and suddenly all they're allowed to do is make elixers and take short rests so they can make more.
If they can sell their elixers, then you just let them break any illusions of an economy before they even hit level five. If for whatever reason nobody will buy them, then you've still given them nearly infinite uses of every elixer.