How does the Pathfinder Alchemist Compare to the 3.5 Artificer?

[wayfare]

I'm thinking about running a Girl Genius game for my homegroup that uses the Alchemist and Artificer classes as "spark only" classes. Are they roughly equivalent in power, or are there some advantages to either class.

Thanks for the input

--wayfare

[Acanous]

Alchemist compares to Artificer like Sorceror compares to Wizard.
The Alchemist gets a handfull of really cool abilities that they can do as many times as they have ammunition for, while the Artificer gets a wider variety of things, which require long preperation or casting time.

They're both good classes, which can contribute well to any party.
If your campaign has a lot of down time, the Artificer will start to outshine the Alchemist, and if it has not much downtime, the alchemist will start to outshine the artificer.

Of course, they both have abilities they have to build, but the Alchemist uses up less time doing so, on average.

[Gavinfoxx]

Don't people often consider the Alchemist Tier 3? Or was that just one guy?

[Psyren]

Artificer is stronger - much stronger. But it's also harder to play, so a newer player would generally have an easier time with the Alchemist.

[charcoalninja]

Don't people often consider the Alchemist Tier 3? Or was that just one guy?

I would think it would be tier 3, a solid, powerful class, but it doesn't have the power to shatter the game like a Tier 1 or 2. I haven't looked at its endcap abilities too closely so I could be wrong.

[Mooncrow]

Don't people often consider the Alchemist Tier 3? Or was that just one guy?

That sounds about right; there aren't many completely overpowering things that an Alchemist can do, but it has a solid skillset and stays useful through the usual level range. High Tier 3 maybe, especially if you bring the alchemist into a 3.5 ruleset.

But, there's nothing wrong with running the two together; in a normal game, the difference between T1 and T3 isn't all that massive.

[Gnaeus]

I think they are a pretty clear T3.

They can melee with mutagens and poison. They have good ranged options with bombs. They have extracts and potion creation for utility, and their extract list lets them use some good wands. So pretty clearly above tier 4.

But they have no 9th level spells, and nothing particularly game breaking on their list. You really can't break into Tier 2 without higher level powers.

An artificer, on the other hand, can do anything. Given the pathfinder errata that says that you need spell prereqs to brew potions, Artificers are probably even better at brewing potions than alchemists (which is kind of sad. I really hate that errata. Alchemists should be able to brew any potion they want.)

[Xtomjames]

Well I'd argue the Alchemist isn't comparable to the Artificer. They're a good combination though (especially in gestalt) but if you're looking for power the Artificer all the way. You don't need that much downtime to create items, especially with some of the feats that exist that reduce total creation time, and you can make far more powerful weapons and magical items than what you could accomplish with the Alchemist. That said the Alchemist does have one thing going for him, bombs...okay two things, bombs and alchemical buffing.

[CTrees]

Alchemist compares to Artificer like Sorceror compares to Wizard.
The Alchemist gets a handfull of really cool abilities that they can do as many times as they have ammunition for, while the Artificer gets a wider variety of things, which require long preperation or casting time.

They're both good classes, which can contribute well to any party.
If your campaign has a lot of down time, the Artificer will start to outshine the Alchemist, and if it has not much downtime, the alchemist will start to outshine the artificer.

Of course, they both have abilities they have to build, but the Alchemist uses up less time doing so, on average.

I'd put it at the Alchemist comparing to the Artificer like a bard compares to a Wizard, really. Alchemists are good, solid characters, but (especially once the opitimization picks up) they just don't compare to the T1 classes.

[Acanous]

Maybe, but IIRC, Artificer doesn't get T9 infusions, either, and the infusions require a very long casting time. Most of Artificer's power comes from building Staff/wand/Ring/Scroll of whatever high-level spells they want, and UMDing them into play.

Given that these items do cost some to lots of prep time to craft, in a low-downtime game, Alchemist would have two edges over artificer: Faster in-combat abilities, and quicker out-of-combat crafting for their abilities.

[shadow_archmagi]

Maybe, but IIRC, Artificer doesn't get T9 infusions, either, and the infusions require a very long casting time. Most of Artificer's power comes from building Staff/wand/Ring/Scroll of whatever high-level spells they want, and UMDing them into play.

Given that these items do cost some to lots of prep time to craft, in a low-downtime game, Alchemist would have two edges over artificer: Faster in-combat abilities, and quicker out-of-combat crafting for their abilities.

What do you mean faster "in-combat"? I mean, once the Artificer has the wand of fireball, it's a standard action; he fires at the same speed as anyone. Twice as fast, if he spends a round to Twin it.

[Chained Birds]

I do recall there being a PF Artificer (3rd party though) who was considered broken.

I find that funny considering who they based the class on. Sort of like saying a PF wizard is broken in my opinion. :smallbiggrin:

[Doc Roc]

I do recall there being a PF Artificer (3rd party though) who was considered broken.

I find that funny considering who they based the class on. Sort of like saying a PF wizard is broken in my opinion. :smallbiggrin:

::Scrunches up face::
After about level 9, PF wizards are almost identical in a lot of scary ways to Original Gangster wizards. Somewhere around here, there's a truly excellent spell-by-spell comparison.

[Cog]

Maybe, but IIRC, Artificer doesn't get T9 infusions, either...
They don't need ninth level infusions; they already get ninth level spells, simply by crafting them.

[Big Fau]

Maybe, but IIRC, Artificer doesn't get T9 infusions, either, and the infusions require a very long casting time.

WotC thought that would have balanced them out.


Infusions ended up being a footnote in the Artificer Handbook. If you're using Infusions, you are probably abusing Action Points and have all ready provided relevant buffs from your items.

[Blisstake]

I do recall there being a PF Artificer (3rd party though) who was considered broken.

I find that funny considering who they based the class on. Sort of like saying a PF wizard is broken in my opinion. :smallbiggrin:

I hope this isn't going where I think it is.

[Eshi]

I would think it would be tier 3, a solid, powerful class, but it doesn't have the power to shatter the game like a Tier 1 or 2. I haven't looked at its endcap abilities too closely so I could be wrong.Alchemist capstone is nothing special. Certainly not like a tier 2 character.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

::Scrunches up face::
After about level 9, PF wizards are almost identical in a lot of scary ways to Original Gangster wizards. Somewhere around here, there's a truly excellent spell-by-spell comparison.Well, there's my incomplete endeavor (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-199228.html), but you're talking about an excellent one :smalltongue:

[wayfare]

I've never played an Artificer -- whats the rationale for them being tier 1? Is there any way to reduce them to tier 2 or 3 without completely re-writing the class?

[nightwyrm]

I've never played an Artificer -- whats the rationale for them being tier 1? Is there any way to reduce them to tier 2 or 3 without completely re-writing the class?

They can simulate other fullcasters and break the WBL guidelines.

[Big Fau]

I've never played an Artificer -- whats the rationale for them being tier 1? Is there any way to reduce them to tier 2 or 3 without completely re-writing the class?

Remove their ability to craft magic items entirely, and then alter the casting times/durations of their Infusions.

[Psyren]

I've never played an Artificer -- whats the rationale for them being tier 1?

They can cast every spell in the game, including metamagicked. Add in the action point abuse tricks to remove the few limitations they had and they're nigh-unstoppable.

[deuxhero]

It's worse than a Wizard, as the skill monkey ALSO emulates full casting with an artificer around.

[wayfare]

It's worse than a Wizard, as the skill monkey ALSO emulates full casting with an artificer around.

Im AFB right now -- what clasue allows them to emulate full casting -- do their item creation abilities extend to making staffs and whatnot? I've always thought of them as wand folks.

[deuxhero]

They extend to anything they have the feat for, and they get most of the feats for free.

[wayfare]

They extend to anything they have the feat for, and they get most of the feats for free.

Ok, what if I wanted to limit them to using wands and extrordinary devices. Would that help. Maybe replace homunculous with a construct familiar to balance it out?

[Aharon]

WotC thought that would have balanced them out.


Infusions ended up being a footnote in the Artificer Handbook. If you're using Infusions, you are probably abusing Action Points and have all ready provided relevant buffs from your items.

Actually, if you're willing to do some book-diving, there are surprisingly good infusions. Even one of the most well-known infusion lines, the weapon enhancement line, has lots of uses.

Example: Warforged/anything else with natural weapons to make use of natural weapon augmentation.
1st level
2 infusions/day, uses for Personal Natural weapon augmentation and personal weapon augmentation (both the only ones in the line with 0gp material component cost):

Stygian (1 negative level), 3/day, 10 minutes MIC
Everbright weapon Ref DC 14 blindness, 20ft. Radius, 1 round MIC
Stunning Fort DC 13, 1 round, can only be added to bludgeoning ammunition (i.e. Slings) HoB
Torturous Fort DC 12/17, 1 round stun, Ghostwalk
Cursespewing Will DC 15 –4 morale penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks BoVD
Exhausting Fort DC 14 fatigued Shining South
Viper on Huge Dagger => Large Viper Serpent Kingdoms
Smoking 20% Concealment Lords of Darkness
Rusting – metal objects that come into contact with it rust, Shining south

and those are just a few selected weapon properties -

Concerning their casting time:
1) Artificers are based on Eberron, which introduces action points and strongly suggests their use.
More importantly,
2) Yes, the casting time is long. However, they usually have a 10 min/level duration, so you don't cast them in battle, anyway. You cast the infusion. Your armor/weapon now has enhancement x. Enhancement x bestows an ability that can be activated y times per day as a swift/standard action.
3) There are also a few artificer infusions with shorter casting times (for example, bull's strength and the other stat+4 spells, magic vestments, magic weapon and greater magic weapon). You probably won't care about the casting time of those, though, because almost all of the useful ones are buffs.

[Doc Roc]

Well, there's my incomplete endeavor (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-199228.html), but you're talking about an excellent one :smalltongue:

I was and remain hugely grateful.

[Dusk Eclipse]

They can cast every spell in the game, including metamagicked. Add in the action point abuse tricks to remove the few limitations they had and they're nigh-unstoppable.

And they also get the psionic items through Secrets of Sarlona ( I think)
; but more importantly as per the MIC you can make Magic items with the Psionic creation feats equivalent, so the PsiTificer gets EVERYTHING!!! (except for mysteries and utterances....)

[Arcane_Snowman]

Ok, what if I wanted to limit them to using wands and extrordinary devices. Would that help. Maybe replace homunculous with a construct familiar to balance it out? No, no it wouldn't. One of the bigger problems with Artificers is that they are considered 2 levels above their own for the purposes of meeting caster level requirements for item creation. Then there's the metamagic shenanigans, which is another very good advantage. Reducing what they can make simply forces them to go for wand specialization, one of the areas where they can get really broken.

[Psyren]

And they also get the psionic items through Secrets of Sarlona ( I think)
; but more importantly as per the MIC you can make Magic items with the Psionic creation feats equivalent, so the PsiTificer gets EVERYTHING!!! (except for mysteries and utterances....)

Almost; the MiC rule lets them use psionic powers to craft magic items whenever the power they would use has an analagous spell. This covers most cases - but not things like, say, Summon Monster or Planar Binding.

PsiArts also explicitly cannot craft anything that has no power or spell equivalent. The example given is a Warlock item that requires eldritch blast, but there are many more, including the mystery/utterance items you mentioned.

So they don't quite get EVERYTHING! but come pretty close :smallsmile:

[Dusk Eclipse]

Should have double checked...:smallredface:

[navar100]

If the campaign has a good amount of dungeon crawls, Elocater will do well. If most if not all combats take place outside, it won't do much. Perhaps the character can take advantage of terrain features with player ingenuity. It's a class for players who like to use a lot of tactics in combat, concerned about where and how to attack more than hit and damage. (Not that there's anything wrong with being primarily concerned about hit and damage.)

[wayfare]

Ok, in order to keep the Artificer in game without out-shining the Alchemist, here is what I propose:

No Craft Scroll
No Craft Potion
No Craft Staff


The Artificer does get Craft Rod (except metamagic rods), Craft Wondrous Item and Craft Wand. Probably craft construct too.

Should I allow Forge Ring?

I an inserting a clause saying that only 1 metamagic feat can be applied to a Wand effect at a time.

Does this help a bit?

[Gavinfoxx]

So the artificer in question just takes those feats manually, then? Or uses wondrous devices?

Really, Artificer is just TOO FREAKING POWERFUL. You'd have to gut the class in a huge number of ways to tone it down to tier 3...

[deuxhero]

Or just exercise DM control over items. Artifcer, in one way at least, is better than most tier 1 characters as they boosts the party as well.

[wayfare]

Yeah, it looks like I am going to have to get my brewin' gloves on!

Would they be able to take those missing feats w/o dips? And for it to really pay off, it would have to be a heck of a dip.

[NamelessNPC]

hm, I don't know much about the artificer, except from reading what other people say in the forum and particularly in this thread, but if his thing is crafting, then it's nothing like the alchemist.
The alchemist gets a gigantic bonus on craft (alchemy), which cannot be used to do very powerful things, and gets brew potion for free. That's it.

The rest of the class features can be divided in two camps: battlefield control bombs, and self-buffs.