So...tl:dr for people who hate Rei going off on tangents: I would allow it, but only if the player was actively invested in playing this specific idea and had a character concept that fit it. Otherwise I'd just homebrew Experimental Elixir Shitty Wild Chemistry to suck less.
I live for Rei rants 😛. You were a great part of the conversation when I first posted about the build in the Artificer forums and you don't disappoint here. Excellent points, and I have no doubt the build would rub many DMs in a very similar way. Creating this thread was all about gauging just how jarring of an idea it is to people. If the response to this build by my DM was "ponder this sick Alchemist fix before we move forward" I'd be delighted and snatch it up. I happen to have some character concepts around this build I'm rather fond of, but certainly coming up with a way to make Experimental Elixir a workable feature was a huge impetus to the idea. It isn't about amassing as many elixirs as possible so much as finding some way to feel good about the ability since it's such a garbage fire of a feature. If presented with a good fix to the class that also doesn't bother my DMs sensibilities, I'd be all about it.
Without any house ruling? No, I probably would not allow it.
That being said, I like the idea and think it is very creative. My house rule to deal with it would probably just be to impose a limit on how often you can take short rests (similar to long rests). That way, depending on the restriction, they could still functionally use this build to make 2 to 4 extra potions over the length of a normal long rest as opposed to 8. Outside of this situation, saying something like "you have to wait a X hours after a short rest before you can take another one" would also make things more challenging for a party since they know they cannot simply short rest after every single combat encounter if they try to do them quickly.
This is super reasonable and exactly why I added the secondary question of would you allow it with a limit on how many short rests you could take in that 4 hour period. This build is about finding some way to have a decent supply of elixirs that can be controlled. I'd be happy with anything, even just 2 extra elixirs from one short rest, so that I feel like I have some control over the ability and have more freedom to play with them.
I would not allow it. Allowing multiple consecutive short rests - for whatever purpose - just doesn't sit right with me and never has. If you have 2 or 3 hours to kill you get a Somewhat Long Rest which grants the same bonuses as a short rest.
I do think Experimental Elixir is a poorly balanced feature, but I would rather houserule that directly than normalize the exploitation of rest rules.
This is what I expected the default reaction to be. It's a very reasonable reaction to a super questionable tactic.
I'm with the others - I'd never allow it. I find tricks to make a character class you're upset with more interesting to only lead to more issues further down - same reason why I don't have any problems with Coffeelocks either, they just won't work in my campaigns. I despise it when players come up with character concepts that somehow *require* questionable game mechanics... these characters tend to be shallow and uninspiring when put into practice, but obviously your mileage may vary.
I am completely out of the loop... what's wrong with Alchemist? 1-3 random potions per Long Rest, and any number of specified ones that you can choose to make (limited by spell slots)? Handing an item to a character is a free Interact with Object... I think it would be awesome to have a collection of flasks, vials and bottles clinking under your coat, ready to hand out at a moment's notice when it's required.
That being said, I definitely wouldn't be making these on the fly - that's just not an efficient method. But at low levels, using up your 1st level slots to give yourself a bunch of pre-made potions isn't a bad idea at all.
I'm with the others - I'd never allow it. I find tricks to make a character class you're upset with more interesting to only lead to more issues further down - same reason why I don't have any problems with Coffeelocks either, they just won't work in my campaigns. I despise it when players come up with character concepts that somehow *require* questionable game mechanics... these characters tend to be shallow and uninspiring when put into practice, but obviously your mileage may vary.
I am completely out of the loop... what's wrong with Alchemist? 1-3 random potions per Long Rest, and any number of specified ones that you can choose to make (limited by spell slots)? Handing an item to a character is a free Interact with Object... I think it would be awesome to have a collection of flasks, vials and bottles clinking under your coat, ready to hand out at a moment's notice when it's required.
That being said, I definitely wouldn't be making these on the fly - that's just not an efficient method. But at low levels, using up your 1st level slots to give yourself a bunch of pre-made potions isn't a bad idea at all.
alchemist is bad because the only free potion you get is random which is not very useful.
I don't see anything inherently wrong with creating a character concept around a mechanical interaction the player finds interesting and wants to explore. I believe it was actually Heironymus who suggested a character seed I found interesting for this multiclass - a snake-oil salesman Charlatan character whose business was flagging, and who was desperate enough for a boost that he turned to questionable rituals to try and get a leg up on the competition. The character was a Charisma-first critter whose artifice was weaker than their warlocking (sort of) and relied on deception and misdirection more than raw intelligence - as well as the secrets from their patron. I thought it was a really neat take on the alchemist idea, far more creative than the shitty cackling "LAAWWWL I wonder how many "accidental" explosions I can cause today hahaha I'm sooo wacky aren't I adorable?" Izzet League frizzy-haired ****abilly that is absolutely banned forever from any game I run.
The Alchemist is terrible because it has by far the weakest level 5 combat boost of all artificer subclasses, and its Experimental Elixir ability is beyond useless. You get one to three Wild Chemistry randomized rolls on your table of Less-Than-First-Level weak magic-beer buffs, and those are all guaranteed to be absolutely the wrong elixirs for the day. To get the right elixirs you need to burn all of your extremely limited spell slots, and by RAW burning a slot of 2nd level or higher wastes the slot, as "upcasting" an Elixir creation gets you nothing. So you have to burn all your spellcasting to have weak elixirs instead, and in battle it costs your action to create one, your action to hand it to someone else, and then their action to consume it. Three. Some DMs also require that the character who receives the elixir must first use a Ready action to prepare "Use An Object" before they're allowed to take an elixir from you "out of turn", which means a fourth action and a reaction is required between "I need this guy to drink this beer" and "This guy has drunk this beer."
The alchemist is an absolutely godawful fighter, it is a weak healer, it is a weak support character, and it is horribly resource inefficient. Alchemists are worse at everything than every other artificer subclass, and they only ever approach usable when someone uses a specific multiclass combination to shore up a few of its underperforming abilities. The Alchemist/Life Cleric is popular for double-boosted heals, this Meth Doctor approach allows you to produce enough Shitty Wild Chemistry elixirs in a day for at least one or two of them to be the 'right' elixir, and I've seen some interesting theorycrafting on Alchemists combined with Arcane Trickster rogues, making use of that multiclass combinations limited spellcasting to create elixirs that aid in noncombat infiltration since creating and consuming an elixir doesn't require spell components and so is stealthier than shouting magic words.
But a straight-up, regular alchemist? Mechanically, it's just a waste of time. Some folks have had great success with the class, Spikepit comes to mind, but it's generally in spite of the Alchemist's weakness. And even Spikepit's Hjalmaar works primarily because he did most of the character's leveling up with the 2017 and 2019 versions and has obtained numerous helpful items and special abilities along the way, not because the Rising Alchemist is any damned good.
I don't see anything inherently wrong with creating a character concept around a mechanical interaction the player finds interesting and wants to explore. I believe it was actually Heironymus who suggested a character seed I found interesting for this multiclass - a snake-oil salesman Charlatan character whose business was flagging, and who was desperate enough for a boost that he turned to questionable rituals to try and get a leg up on the competition. The character was a Charisma-first critter whose artifice was weaker than their warlocking (sort of) and relied on deception and misdirection more than raw intelligence - as well as the secrets from their patron. I thought it was a really neat take on the alchemist idea, far more creative than the shitty cackling "LAAWWWL I wonder how many "accidental" explosions I can cause today hahaha I'm sooo wacky aren't I adorable?" Izzet League frizzy-haired ****abilly that is absolutely banned forever from any game I run.
Aye that was me Yurei. I ended up coming up with how the Alchemist meets his patron and it tickles me quite a bit, but I won't go into the details here. Not the place. I don't think there is anything wrong with character concept stemming from a particular mechanical interaction either. I don't really care where an idea comes from. If the end product is a compelling character that gets someone jazzed to play, what does it matter how the thing started?
Also, yes, the Alchemist is a real heaping mess. Bad (like real bad) 3rd and 5th level abilities is a recipe for disaster. If you want any abilities to deliver in a class it's the low and mid level ones. I could not imagine trying to play one without some clever multiclassing of some kind. Bleh.
The alchemist/arcane trickster is an interesting idea. I'll have to look into that. Infiltrator Armorer is some stiff competition in the artificer/AT combo though.
I am completely out of the loop... what's wrong with Alchemist? 1-3 random potions per Long Rest, and any number of specified ones that you can choose to make (limited by spell slots)? Handing an item to a character is a free Interact with Object... I think it would be awesome to have a collection of flasks, vials and bottles clinking under your coat, ready to hand out at a moment's notice when it's required.
That being said, I definitely wouldn't be making these on the fly - that's just not an efficient method. But at low levels, using up your 1st level slots to give yourself a bunch of pre-made potions isn't a bad idea at all.
Without the extra spell slots from warlock, the potions are fairly unimpressive effects for the cost of a spell slot. The healing one for example gives 2d4+int as opposed to cure wounds doing 1d8+int, (1d8+int+int after level 5) useful, but lackluster compared to other subclasses.
Also, rather than using up your 1st level slots at low levels to get potions, it seems far more likely you'll want them for spells at low levels. With artificer being a half caster, you don't get a whole lot of spell slots so I wouldn't be surprised to see people holding onto the first level ones up to level 5 or 9 even.
It's possible to overcome the action economy woes with work - a haemonculus, a familiar, and an unseen servant can all be potion delivery mules, for example. The larger problem, as others have noted, is how bad the potions themselves are and the randomness of the free potion(s).
You're a lot better off just playing a different artificer and grabbing proficiency in herbalism kits.
I am not a fan of stretching the rules to what is debatable RAW and certainly not RAI even if the chemlock is not OP.
A short rest is AT LEAST an hour, of light activity, 4 hours of light activity is a single short rest. You can argue I will rest for an hour go for a 5 minute run and have another short rest but that is what I mean by stretching the rules.
RAW long rest and trance are nonsensical and contradictory. A long rest is AT LEAST 8 hours with a maximum of 2 hours light activity rather than sleeping, so a 12 hour rest with 9 hours sleep and 3 hours of light activity is not a long rest but 8 hours of 6 hours sleep and 2 hours of light activity is. I house rule long rest as at least 8 hours with at least 6 hours sleep. A 4 hour trance gives the equivalent of a human having 8 hours sleep, but the rules do not say what benefits a human gets with 8 hours sleep, though RAI it is clearly referring to a long rest.
I rule that you can take a short rest in periods between periods of intense activity. I think this is implied by the DMG referring to adveturerers typically needing 2 short rests a day.
Hah, I didn't expect to walk into a hornet's nest of emotional opinions.
Nothing wrong with concepts:
a snake-oil salesman Charlatan character whose business was flagging, and who was desperate enough for a boost that he turned to questionable rituals to try and get a leg up on the competition. The character was a Charisma-first critter whose artifice was weaker than their warlocking (sort of) and relied on deception and misdirection more than raw intelligence - as well as the secrets from their patron.
But this thread is specifically about letting a character play with a disputed rule (short rests inside a long rest) for his character, not just multiclassing. Multiclassing is entirely inside the rules set and not controversial at all.
I thought it was a really neat take on the alchemist idea, far more creative than the shitty cackling "LAAWWWL I wonder how many "accidental" explosions I can cause today hahaha I'm sooo wacky aren't I adorable?" Izzet League frizzy-haired ****abilly that is absolutely banned forever from any game I run.
Pretty blatant strawman and not really an argument for the Alchemist's viability as a class at all. Crazed scientist might not be entirely original, but it's a common trope that others have played, no reason to get upset over it? I may not like the stereotypical edgy character in my games, but letting players play the role is more fun than banning an entire role. I hope you're having productive session-0s.
The Alchemist is terrible because it has by far the weakest level 5 combat boost of all artificer subclasses, and its Experimental Elixir ability is beyond useless. You get one to three Wild Chemistry randomized rolls on your table of Less-Than-First-Level weak magic-beer buffs, and those are all guaranteed to be absolutely the wrong elixirs for the day.
Again, sounds more emotional than an argument backed up with logic. At 3rd level, you're making 4 Elixirs per day (3 chosen by you). The Curing one is slightly better than Cure Wounds, the Swiftness one is as good as Longstrider, Resilience is incomparable to any spell because it doesn't require concentration, Boldness is Bless without the ability check increase but without concentration, Flight is the only form of level 1 Flight you can get, and Transformation is the equivalent of a 2nd level spell. None are worse than First-Level, nor are they magic beer.
At level 6, you're making 6 Elixirs per day (4 chosen by you). At level 15, 7 Elixirs per day (4 chosen by you).
To get the right elixirs you need to burn all of your extremely limited spell slots, and by RAW burning a slot of 2nd level or higher wastes the slot, as "upcasting" an Elixir creation gets you nothing.
Why would you need more than the 4-7 elixirs? You save the 2nd level slots for other things, like spells. At level 5 you're getting better damage on all the damage spells you need, and the rare occasion when you might need another healing one.
At level 9...
You make 6 elixirs, 4 of which you can choose. So you make a Healing one and give it to your Rogue who has a tendency to get hit (2d4+5 hp + 2d6+5 temp hp = 10+12 = 22 hp bonus. A Bold one and give it to your Warlock who uses Eldritch Blast (and another 12 temp hp), and a Resilience one to your Fighter tank (another 12 temp hp). That's 46hp, and you've only used up 3 potions for the day. The other 4 you could have backups for the existing ones, an emergency healing one in your own hand. Either way, it's at the very least 72 average temp hp per day, with all sorts of buffs attached.
So you have to burn all your spellcasting to have weak elixirs instead, and in battle it costs your action to create one, your action to hand it to someone else, and then their action to consume it. Three. Some DMs also require that the character who receives the elixir must first use a Ready action to prepare "Use An Object" before they're allowed to take an elixir from you "out of turn", which means a fourth action and a reaction is required between "I need this guy to drink this beer" and "This guy has drunk this beer."
With 5/6/7 elixirs, you should never be making these in battle - that's probably where you're getting hung up the most. The Alchemist class seems to be built around the idea of preparation, not waiting until battle starts before making a potion. You have 5 per day at the very start - give them away at the start of the day at the very least. At level 5, if you're not using your actions to cast fire/acid/poison/necrotic/poison spells, you're doing it wrong. We're talking 2d6+4 (11 average) damage for each target of Acid Splash for a total of 22 average damage (unless rolling once doesn't count when targeting multiple targets?). Or Acid Arrow, doing 4d4+5+2d4 (22 average) damage in one shot with a potential for critical damage of 39 average damage.
I get that it's a slow burn class... but the emotional side can sometimes ruin a good class before looking at it more statistically.
But this thread is specifically about letting a character play with a disputed rule (short rests inside a long rest) for his character, not just multiclassing. Multiclassing is entirely inside the rules set and not controversial at all.
There is no "short rests inside a long rest" going on. Elven Trance means the character gets the full benefits of a Long Rest in 4 hours. They then spend the next 4 hours looping between making elixirs and taking short rests while everyone else is finishing their long rests.
But this thread is specifically about letting a character play with a disputed rule (short rests inside a long rest) for his character, not just multiclassing. Multiclassing is entirely inside the rules set and not controversial at all.
There is no "short rests inside a long rest" going on. Elven Trance means the character gets the full benefits of a Long Rest in 4 hours. They then spend the next 4 hours looping between making elixirs and taking short rests while everyone else is finishing their long rests.
And the disagreement is because many people don't think that elves being able to trance for 4 hours instead of sleeping enables them to complete a long rest any faster than any other race. They can be on watch during the extra time, or doing other light activities. But the whole making experimental elixirs and taking short rests is a problem because they're not done with their long rest.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yes that's fine. People can homebrew how Trance works however they want. I'm much more curious about how people feel about the implementation of short rests in a loop, which was the reason I created the thread. Timing between short rests is one of those things that is firmly in the hands of the DM with basically no guideline in the RAW.
I limit the number of rests that players can take simply by the house rule "Unless you've done something strenuous (like combat) then you can't rest again until 16 hours have passed," for short rests, and "You can only take 1 long rest in any 24 hour period. After taking a long rest, you cannot take a short rest until you have done something strenuous (like combat)."
Yes that's fine. People can homebrew how Trance works however they want.
I think you should reread Trance and Long Rest. Trance doesn't say a thing about rests - it says 4 hours of Trance gives you the benefits of 8 hours of sleep.
Long rests are at least 8 hours long by definition. They include both sleep and light activity. Note that only 6 of it needs to be sleep, but you still need to sit there twiddling your thumbs for two more hours anyway - implying that getting your required amount of sleep doesn't automatically finish the long rest. After rereading both, I feel like there's a bit of a stretch here to say that completing a long rest absolutely falls under "the benefits of 8 hours of sleep." At the very least it is not a houserule to rule that it does not. The wording is ambiguous. In every game I've ever played in the benefit was interpreted as giving you a few extra hours of light activity during the long rest.
Notably, characters who don't need to sleep/trance at all, like Warforged and Tomelocks with Aspect of the Moon, don't get anything saying that they don't have to take long rests or that those long rests are shorter than anyone else's.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Scatterbraind, Trance is covered on the second page of the Sage Advice Compendium. I'm not surprised it's been ruled the way it has in your games, but they have addressed the topic with a clarification.
Huh, I stand corrected. I think that's a terrible ruling without addressing the inevitable attempt at short rest spam that we're discussing here, and Trance was still quite useful without that. But SAC's gonna SAC I guess.
I allow my table 2 short rests an adventures day per the guidance. I allow the party to choose to rest at any time they wish, but the entire party has to agree on it. This way players that have class or racial short rest features are as powerful as they are designed to be.
2 rests, no more. I’ve not had anyone remark badly about it since it empowers the players. I’ve even had a few times where they rested only once. Haven’t had them not rest at all yet though, at least since I started giving them the option.
if I ever have a player actually interested in playing an alchemist, I’ll just buff up the subclass a bit, probably by allowing elixirs to work with a bonus action. Might mess with the spell list a bit too.
the bonus action on the artificer is what’s missing from what I can tell. The artillerist, battlesmith, and alchemist were all created and balanced around being able to do something with their bonus actions. The feedback on the alchemist removed the homunculus, but they never filled that gap with anything for the alchemist. I believe that’s why it looks and feels weak. Maybe I’ll just give them the homunculus infusion for free?
I think the feature is weak enough to allow it, given there's nothing particularly wrong with the ruling.
What is the point of eight Experimental Elixirs? Their effects are so meager that they're rarely worth the Action to consume. I guess eight free healing potions a day is something, but not really worth five levels spent on two mismatched classes.
I live for Rei rants 😛. You were a great part of the conversation when I first posted about the build in the Artificer forums and you don't disappoint here. Excellent points, and I have no doubt the build would rub many DMs in a very similar way. Creating this thread was all about gauging just how jarring of an idea it is to people. If the response to this build by my DM was "ponder this sick Alchemist fix before we move forward" I'd be delighted and snatch it up. I happen to have some character concepts around this build I'm rather fond of, but certainly coming up with a way to make Experimental Elixir a workable feature was a huge impetus to the idea. It isn't about amassing as many elixirs as possible so much as finding some way to feel good about the ability since it's such a garbage fire of a feature. If presented with a good fix to the class that also doesn't bother my DMs sensibilities, I'd be all about it.
This is super reasonable and exactly why I added the secondary question of would you allow it with a limit on how many short rests you could take in that 4 hour period. This build is about finding some way to have a decent supply of elixirs that can be controlled. I'd be happy with anything, even just 2 extra elixirs from one short rest, so that I feel like I have some control over the ability and have more freedom to play with them.
This is what I expected the default reaction to be. It's a very reasonable reaction to a super questionable tactic.
I'm with the others - I'd never allow it. I find tricks to make a character class you're upset with more interesting to only lead to more issues further down - same reason why I don't have any problems with Coffeelocks either, they just won't work in my campaigns. I despise it when players come up with character concepts that somehow *require* questionable game mechanics... these characters tend to be shallow and uninspiring when put into practice, but obviously your mileage may vary.
I am completely out of the loop... what's wrong with Alchemist? 1-3 random potions per Long Rest, and any number of specified ones that you can choose to make (limited by spell slots)? Handing an item to a character is a free Interact with Object... I think it would be awesome to have a collection of flasks, vials and bottles clinking under your coat, ready to hand out at a moment's notice when it's required.
That being said, I definitely wouldn't be making these on the fly - that's just not an efficient method. But at low levels, using up your 1st level slots to give yourself a bunch of pre-made potions isn't a bad idea at all.
alchemist is bad because the only free potion you get is random which is not very useful.
Check out my homebrew subclasses spells magic items feats monsters races
i am a sauce priest
help create a world here
I don't see anything inherently wrong with creating a character concept around a mechanical interaction the player finds interesting and wants to explore. I believe it was actually Heironymus who suggested a character seed I found interesting for this multiclass - a snake-oil salesman Charlatan character whose business was flagging, and who was desperate enough for a boost that he turned to questionable rituals to try and get a leg up on the competition. The character was a Charisma-first critter whose artifice was weaker than their warlocking (sort of) and relied on deception and misdirection more than raw intelligence - as well as the secrets from their patron. I thought it was a really neat take on the alchemist idea, far more creative than the shitty cackling "LAAWWWL I wonder how many "accidental" explosions I can cause today hahaha I'm sooo wacky aren't I adorable?" Izzet League frizzy-haired ****abilly that is absolutely banned forever from any game I run.
The Alchemist is terrible because it has by far the weakest level 5 combat boost of all artificer subclasses, and its Experimental Elixir ability is beyond useless. You get one to three Wild Chemistry randomized rolls on your table of Less-Than-First-Level weak magic-beer buffs, and those are all guaranteed to be absolutely the wrong elixirs for the day. To get the right elixirs you need to burn all of your extremely limited spell slots, and by RAW burning a slot of 2nd level or higher wastes the slot, as "upcasting" an Elixir creation gets you nothing. So you have to burn all your spellcasting to have weak elixirs instead, and in battle it costs your action to create one, your action to hand it to someone else, and then their action to consume it. Three. Some DMs also require that the character who receives the elixir must first use a Ready action to prepare "Use An Object" before they're allowed to take an elixir from you "out of turn", which means a fourth action and a reaction is required between "I need this guy to drink this beer" and "This guy has drunk this beer."
The alchemist is an absolutely godawful fighter, it is a weak healer, it is a weak support character, and it is horribly resource inefficient. Alchemists are worse at everything than every other artificer subclass, and they only ever approach usable when someone uses a specific multiclass combination to shore up a few of its underperforming abilities. The Alchemist/Life Cleric is popular for double-boosted heals, this Meth Doctor approach allows you to produce enough Shitty Wild Chemistry elixirs in a day for at least one or two of them to be the 'right' elixir, and I've seen some interesting theorycrafting on Alchemists combined with Arcane Trickster rogues, making use of that multiclass combinations limited spellcasting to create elixirs that aid in noncombat infiltration since creating and consuming an elixir doesn't require spell components and so is stealthier than shouting magic words.
But a straight-up, regular alchemist? Mechanically, it's just a waste of time. Some folks have had great success with the class, Spikepit comes to mind, but it's generally in spite of the Alchemist's weakness. And even Spikepit's Hjalmaar works primarily because he did most of the character's leveling up with the 2017 and 2019 versions and has obtained numerous helpful items and special abilities along the way, not because the Rising Alchemist is any damned good.
Please do not contact or message me.
Aye that was me Yurei. I ended up coming up with how the Alchemist meets his patron and it tickles me quite a bit, but I won't go into the details here. Not the place. I don't think there is anything wrong with character concept stemming from a particular mechanical interaction either. I don't really care where an idea comes from. If the end product is a compelling character that gets someone jazzed to play, what does it matter how the thing started?
Also, yes, the Alchemist is a real heaping mess. Bad (like real bad) 3rd and 5th level abilities is a recipe for disaster. If you want any abilities to deliver in a class it's the low and mid level ones. I could not imagine trying to play one without some clever multiclassing of some kind. Bleh.
The alchemist/arcane trickster is an interesting idea. I'll have to look into that. Infiltrator Armorer is some stiff competition in the artificer/AT combo though.
@Royal: You're awesome and when is session 0? 😋
Without the extra spell slots from warlock, the potions are fairly unimpressive effects for the cost of a spell slot. The healing one for example gives 2d4+int as opposed to cure wounds doing 1d8+int, (1d8+int+int after level 5) useful, but lackluster compared to other subclasses.
Also, rather than using up your 1st level slots at low levels to get potions, it seems far more likely you'll want them for spells at low levels. With artificer being a half caster, you don't get a whole lot of spell slots so I wouldn't be surprised to see people holding onto the first level ones up to level 5 or 9 even.
It's possible to overcome the action economy woes with work - a haemonculus, a familiar, and an unseen servant can all be potion delivery mules, for example. The larger problem, as others have noted, is how bad the potions themselves are and the randomness of the free potion(s).
You're a lot better off just playing a different artificer and grabbing proficiency in herbalism kits.
I am not a fan of stretching the rules to what is debatable RAW and certainly not RAI even if the chemlock is not OP.
A short rest is AT LEAST an hour, of light activity, 4 hours of light activity is a single short rest. You can argue I will rest for an hour go for a 5 minute run and have another short rest but that is what I mean by stretching the rules.
RAW long rest and trance are nonsensical and contradictory. A long rest is AT LEAST 8 hours with a maximum of 2 hours light activity rather than sleeping, so a 12 hour rest with 9 hours sleep and 3 hours of light activity is not a long rest but 8 hours of 6 hours sleep and 2 hours of light activity is. I house rule long rest as at least 8 hours with at least 6 hours sleep. A 4 hour trance gives the equivalent of a human having 8 hours sleep, but the rules do not say what benefits a human gets with 8 hours sleep, though RAI it is clearly referring to a long rest.
I rule that you can take a short rest in periods between periods of intense activity. I think this is implied by the DMG referring to adveturerers typically needing 2 short rests a day.
Hah, I didn't expect to walk into a hornet's nest of emotional opinions.
Nothing wrong with concepts:
But this thread is specifically about letting a character play with a disputed rule (short rests inside a long rest) for his character, not just multiclassing. Multiclassing is entirely inside the rules set and not controversial at all.
Pretty blatant strawman and not really an argument for the Alchemist's viability as a class at all. Crazed scientist might not be entirely original, but it's a common trope that others have played, no reason to get upset over it? I may not like the stereotypical edgy character in my games, but letting players play the role is more fun than banning an entire role. I hope you're having productive session-0s.
Again, sounds more emotional than an argument backed up with logic. At 3rd level, you're making 4 Elixirs per day (3 chosen by you). The Curing one is slightly better than Cure Wounds, the Swiftness one is as good as Longstrider, Resilience is incomparable to any spell because it doesn't require concentration, Boldness is Bless without the ability check increase but without concentration, Flight is the only form of level 1 Flight you can get, and Transformation is the equivalent of a 2nd level spell. None are worse than First-Level, nor are they magic beer.
At level 6, you're making 6 Elixirs per day (4 chosen by you). At level 15, 7 Elixirs per day (4 chosen by you).
Why would you need more than the 4-7 elixirs? You save the 2nd level slots for other things, like spells. At level 5 you're getting better damage on all the damage spells you need, and the rare occasion when you might need another healing one.
At level 9...
You make 6 elixirs, 4 of which you can choose. So you make a Healing one and give it to your Rogue who has a tendency to get hit (2d4+5 hp + 2d6+5 temp hp = 10+12 = 22 hp bonus. A Bold one and give it to your Warlock who uses Eldritch Blast (and another 12 temp hp), and a Resilience one to your Fighter tank (another 12 temp hp). That's 46hp, and you've only used up 3 potions for the day. The other 4 you could have backups for the existing ones, an emergency healing one in your own hand. Either way, it's at the very least 72 average temp hp per day, with all sorts of buffs attached.
With 5/6/7 elixirs, you should never be making these in battle - that's probably where you're getting hung up the most. The Alchemist class seems to be built around the idea of preparation, not waiting until battle starts before making a potion. You have 5 per day at the very start - give them away at the start of the day at the very least. At level 5, if you're not using your actions to cast fire/acid/poison/necrotic/poison spells, you're doing it wrong. We're talking 2d6+4 (11 average) damage for each target of Acid Splash for a total of 22 average damage (unless rolling once doesn't count when targeting multiple targets?). Or Acid Arrow, doing 4d4+5+2d4 (22 average) damage in one shot with a potential for critical damage of 39 average damage.
I get that it's a slow burn class... but the emotional side can sometimes ruin a good class before looking at it more statistically.
There is no "short rests inside a long rest" going on. Elven Trance means the character gets the full benefits of a Long Rest in 4 hours. They then spend the next 4 hours looping between making elixirs and taking short rests while everyone else is finishing their long rests.
And the disagreement is because many people don't think that elves being able to trance for 4 hours instead of sleeping enables them to complete a long rest any faster than any other race. They can be on watch during the extra time, or doing other light activities. But the whole making experimental elixirs and taking short rests is a problem because they're not done with their long rest.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yes that's fine. People can homebrew how Trance works however they want. I'm much more curious about how people feel about the implementation of short rests in a loop, which was the reason I created the thread. Timing between short rests is one of those things that is firmly in the hands of the DM with basically no guideline in the RAW.
I limit the number of rests that players can take simply by the house rule "Unless you've done something strenuous (like combat) then you can't rest again until 16 hours have passed," for short rests, and "You can only take 1 long rest in any 24 hour period. After taking a long rest, you cannot take a short rest until you have done something strenuous (like combat)."
I think you should reread Trance and Long Rest. Trance doesn't say a thing about rests - it says 4 hours of Trance gives you the benefits of 8 hours of sleep.
Long rests are at least 8 hours long by definition. They include both sleep and light activity. Note that only 6 of it needs to be sleep, but you still need to sit there twiddling your thumbs for two more hours anyway - implying that getting your required amount of sleep doesn't automatically finish the long rest. After rereading both, I feel like there's a bit of a stretch here to say that completing a long rest absolutely falls under "the benefits of 8 hours of sleep." At the very least it is not a houserule to rule that it does not. The wording is ambiguous. In every game I've ever played in the benefit was interpreted as giving you a few extra hours of light activity during the long rest.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Notably, characters who don't need to sleep/trance at all, like Warforged and Tomelocks with Aspect of the Moon, don't get anything saying that they don't have to take long rests or that those long rests are shorter than anyone else's.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Scatterbraind, Trance is covered on the second page of the Sage Advice Compendium. I'm not surprised it's been ruled the way it has in your games, but they have addressed the topic with a clarification.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I allow my table 2 short rests an adventures day per the guidance. I allow the party to choose to rest at any time they wish, but the entire party has to agree on it. This way players that have class or racial short rest features are as powerful as they are designed to be.
2 rests, no more. I’ve not had anyone remark badly about it since it empowers the players. I’ve even had a few times where they rested only once. Haven’t had them not rest at all yet though, at least since I started giving them the option.
if I ever have a player actually interested in playing an alchemist, I’ll just buff up the subclass a bit, probably by allowing elixirs to work with a bonus action. Might mess with the spell list a bit too.
the bonus action on the artificer is what’s missing from what I can tell. The artillerist, battlesmith, and alchemist were all created and balanced around being able to do something with their bonus actions. The feedback on the alchemist removed the homunculus, but they never filled that gap with anything for the alchemist. I believe that’s why it looks and feels weak. Maybe I’ll just give them the homunculus infusion for free?
I think the feature is weak enough to allow it, given there's nothing particularly wrong with the ruling.
What is the point of eight Experimental Elixirs? Their effects are so meager that they're rarely worth the Action to consume. I guess eight free healing potions a day is something, but not really worth five levels spent on two mismatched classes.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
For real. I'd much rather just let alchemists bottle spells, using a similar mechanic to glyph of warding.