Can I make an Elixir of True Strike?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 52 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I know "potion" is not legal, but what if I make something very like a potion as a wondrous item?

How much would it cost?


Some effects are not meant to be. Ask yourself if a +20 to hit could be a tad too good to have from a cheap and easily replenishable source. As a spell true strike is good but not too good because of its limited utility (your wizard friend can do many other things with that slot than memorizing and casting true strike), as an always avaiable effect it would become way too powerful.


An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.


No.

If you were meant to have it, it'd be set up as a potion. Stop trying to get around the restrictions that are there for a reason


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

It's up to your GM. Yes, you could, in theory, make an Elixir of Truestrike.

I would never let it be purchased from a shop "at will." I would let a player craft it if there were no alchemists or investigators in the party to abuse it with Alchemical Allocation.

Double the cost of a potion, like other Elixirs based on spells, is the starting point. It might cost more if the GM determines it should for your game's economy.


Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.

Not only can an Alchemist create an Extract of it, (s)he can even share it via infusion.

Liberty's Edge

turing85 wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Not only can an Alchemist create an Extract of it, (s)he can even share it via infusion.

The problem of doing that is that it is unclear if the extract become inert after a day or not.

If it become inert it open up the option of having an alchemist selling very cheap "24 hours potions" (the cost would be the same as paying someone to cast a spell or very similar).
It the extract persist after 24 hours there is a problem as the alchemist has a used up infusion slot until the extract is used

PRD wrote:


The extract created now persists even after the alchemist sets it down. As long as the extract exists, it continues to occupy one of the alchemist's daily extract slots.


Diego Rossi wrote:
turing85 wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Not only can an Alchemist create an Extract of it, (s)he can even share it via infusion.

The problem of doing that is that it is unclear if the extract become inert after a day or not.

If it become inert it open up the option of having an alchemist selling very cheap "24 hours potions" (the cost would be the same as paying someone to cast a spell or very similar).
It the extract persist after 24 hours there is a problem as the alchemist has a used up infusion slot until the extract is used

PRD wrote:


The extract created now persists even after the alchemist sets it down. As long as the extract exists, it continues to occupy one of the alchemist's daily extract slots.

I understand your point. My point of view:

As you can see, the authors used inert in the Alchemy class feature and perists in the Infusion text. The RAI is that an Alchemist does not start preparing "countless" extracts, setting them down directly after creation and then "cherry picks" the ones he needs. The wording is still unclear, though, and can be misinterpreted. I would argue that, though the liquid itself forming the extract, sill exists after 24 hours, the extract looses its effects as normal and thus the extract ceases to exist.

On the other hand, letting the extracts persist over the 24h time barrier would stop the players from selling extracts to make gold. If an Alchemist wishes to prepare a new Extract, (s)he can simply pour old Extracts in her/his posession before starting to create new ones.


Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List.

'fraid Not. It's on their list, but...

SRD wrote:
Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements


...So how is it on their list if they can't use it?


VRMH wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List.

'fraid Not. It's on their list, but...

SRD wrote:
Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements

This is funny. The FAQ I linked in my first post is from 2013. As far as I know, there is only one Edition of the Advanced Player's Guide, printed in 2010. Either this FAQ directly violates the RAW or there is something we are missing.


Renata Maclean wrote:

...So how is it on their list if they can't use it?

Because it is still useful.

Quote:
Although the alchemist doesn't actually cast spells, he does have a formulae list that determines what extracts he can create. An alchemist can utilize spell-trigger items if the spell appears on his formulae list, but not spell-completion items (unless he uses Use Magic Device to do so). An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion—the effects of an extract exactly duplicate the spell upon which its formula is based, save that the spell always affects only the drinking alchemist. An alchemist can draw and drink an extract as a standard action. The alchemist uses his level as the caster level to determine any effect based on caster level.

So the alchemist could activate a wand of true strike, even though he can't make an extract of it.


Renata Maclean wrote:

...So how is it on their list if they can't use it?

Alchemist is one of the absolute worst written classes, and their spell list is very improperly thought out. If your GM does not afford you special benefits, you can't use half the spells on your list.

Note though, that at the least, you can still use scrolls and wands of True Strike.


Yes, if the GM allows it. There are no real restrictions on wondrous items, and as for someone saying on because there are no potions there is a rule that prevents it from being a potion.

The rules say-->Potions cant be made from personal spells and true strike is a personal spell.


VRMH wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List.

'fraid Not. It's on their list, but...

SRD wrote:
Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements

As you mentioned, the Alchemist description says:

APG, Alchemist wrote:
Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements (alchemist extracts that duplicate divine spells never have a divine focus requirement).

But that same description also says:

APG, Alchemist wrote:

Alchemists gain access to a variety of formulae, allowing them to make extracts of the following spells.

...
true strike
...

That appears to be a direct contradiction in the rules.

It is further complicated by this FAQ.

FAQ wrote:

Alchemist and infusions: Can I use the infusion discovery to create an infused extract of a personal-range formula (such as true strike), which someone else can drink?

Yes, you can. The design team may decide to close this loophole in the next printing of the Advanced Player's Guide.

You would need to be able to make Extracts of True Strike in order to make Infusions of True Strike, so this FAQ suggests that you can make Extracts of True Strike.

Additionally, although not official, there is this four-post exchange with James Jacobs (who wrote the first draft of the Alchemist description).

With all of that, I would tend to resolve the apparent contradiction in favor of allowing Extracts of True Strike. Perhaps the formula list is a specific rule that overrides the general rule that they can't make Extracts with focus components. Or maybe the focus component rule is just wrong.

Edit: Partially ninja'd by turing85. :)


turing85 wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Not only can an Alchemist create an Extract of it, (s)he can even share it via infusion.

and did that PO my DMM when I used such infused extracts to buff my fighter (or was it Paladin?) patron... he hadn't realized that this infusion schtick was grand to help people benefit from self-only spells, and a fighting man with truestrike hits even the most hardened foe.


Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.

Extracts are still personal only.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Extracts are still personal only.

That's what Infusion is for.


QuidEst wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Extracts are still personal only.
That's what Infusion is for.

I don't think that you can make an infusion that violates potion rules. (No Elixirs of Shield folks!) The Chierguon has specific exceptions to that ban, but True Strike isn't one of them.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Extracts are still personal only.
That's what Infusion is for.
I don't think that you can make an infusion that violates potion rules. (No Elixirs of Shield folks!) The Chierguon has specific exceptions to that ban, but True Strike isn't one of them.

The FAQ mentioned earlier specifically addresses True Strike. Infused extracts can be made from self-only spells- anything an Alchemist could make a personal extract of. (Not sure why you're bringing up elixirs, though.) Currently, that's kind of their schtick, passing out buffs that other classes couldn't otherwise get.


QuidEst wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Extracts are still personal only.
That's what Infusion is for.
I don't think that you can make an infusion that violates potion rules. (No Elixirs of Shield folks!) The Chierguon has specific exceptions to that ban, but True Strike isn't one of them.
The FAQ mentioned earlier specifically addresses True Strike. Infused extracts can be made from self-only spells- anything an Alchemist could make a personal extract of. (Not sure why you're bringing up elixirs, though.) Currently, that's kind of their schtick, passing out buffs that other classes couldn't otherwise get.

If I remember correctly though, those infusions take up a slot until consumed.


wraithstrike wrote:

Yes, if the GM allows it. There are no real restrictions on wondrous items, and as for someone saying on because there are no potions there is a rule that prevents it from being a potion.

The rules say-->Potions cant be made from personal spells and true strike is a personal spell.

Where? I cannot find it under brew potion feat, potions or creating potions in the magic items chapter.

To be made into a potion the spell must target one or more creatures, true strike targets “you” “you” are a creature.
This opens the question for interpretation. Unless you can point me to where in the rules it states that personal spells cannot be made into potions

Silver Crusade

Thunderrstar wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

Yes, if the GM allows it. There are no real restrictions on wondrous items, and as for someone saying on because there are no potions there is a rule that prevents it from being a potion.

The rules say-->Potions cant be made from personal spells and true strike is a personal spell.

Where? I cannot find it under brew potion feat, potions or creating potions in the magic items chapter.

To be made into a potion the spell must target one or more creatures, true strike targets “you” “you” are a creature.
This opens the question for interpretation. Unless you can point me to where in the rules it states that personal spells cannot be made into potions

Elixir is a wondrous item, not a potion.


Thunderrstar wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

Yes, if the GM allows it. There are no real restrictions on wondrous items, and as for someone saying on because there are no potions there is a rule that prevents it from being a potion.

The rules say-->Potions cant be made from personal spells and true strike is a personal spell.

Where? I cannot find it under brew potion feat, potions or creating potions in the magic items chapter.

To be made into a potion the spell must target one or more creatures, true strike targets “you” “you” are a creature.
This opens the question for interpretation. Unless you can point me to where in the rules it states that personal spells cannot be made into potions

It's in Creating Potions part of the Magic Item Creation rules,

CRB wrote:
The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.

It is also mentioned in the FAQ that I quoted earlier.


Rysky wrote:
Thunderrstar wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

Yes, if the GM allows it. There are no real restrictions on wondrous items, and as for someone saying on because there are no potions there is a rule that prevents it from being a potion.

The rules say-->Potions cant be made from personal spells and true strike is a personal spell.

Where? I cannot find it under brew potion feat, potions or creating potions in the magic items chapter.

To be made into a potion the spell must target one or more creatures, true strike targets “you” “you” are a creature.
This opens the question for interpretation. Unless you can point me to where in the rules it states that personal spells cannot be made into potions
Elixir is a wondrous item, not a potion.

Nevertheless, I am asking about potions where in the rules does it state that you cannot make a potion with a range of personal.

Silver Crusade

Thunderrstar wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Thunderrstar wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

Yes, if the GM allows it. There are no real restrictions on wondrous items, and as for someone saying on because there are no potions there is a rule that prevents it from being a potion.

The rules say-->Potions cant be made from personal spells and true strike is a personal spell.

Where? I cannot find it under brew potion feat, potions or creating potions in the magic items chapter.

To be made into a potion the spell must target one or more creatures, true strike targets “you” “you” are a creature.
This opens the question for interpretation. Unless you can point me to where in the rules it states that personal spells cannot be made into potions
Elixir is a wondrous item, not a potion.

Nevertheless, I am asking about potions where in the rules does it state that you cannot make a potion with a range of personal.

Ah, dood I keep misreading your posts today >_<


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Extracts are still personal only.
That's what Infusion is for.
I don't think that you can make an infusion that violates potion rules. (No Elixirs of Shield folks!) The Chierguon has specific exceptions to that ban, but True Strike isn't one of them.
Actually, The Infusion discovery makes no such restriction
Quote:
When the alchemist creates an extract, he can infuse it with an extra bit of his own magical power. The extract created now persists even after the alchemist sets it down. As long as the extract exists, it continues to occupy one of the alchemist’s daily extract slots. An infused extract can be imbibed by a non-alchemist to gain its effects.

Nothing there to say that infusion are limited as per potions. It's the alchemist who's limited as to what spells he can make into extracts, but all extracts are infusion worthy

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

If the GM approves of the custom item, you can make whatever you want. Personally, I'd advise against using elixirs in this way because it cheapens Brew Potion if you can just do an end-run around its restrictions with Craft Wondrous Item, which is already the most versatile item creation feat.

IMO elixirs should be reserved for effects that don't already exist as spells.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
turing85 wrote:
The RAI is that an Alchemist does not start preparing "countless" extracts, setting them down directly after creation and then "cherry picks" the ones he needs. The wording is still unclear, though, and can be misinterpreted. I would argue that, though the liquid itself forming the extract, sill exists after 24 hours, the extract looses its effects as normal and thus the extract ceases to exist.

The wording is not unclear, and not just RAI, but RAW. The infused extracts occupy a slot on the Alchemist's daily extract slots, which prevents such "countless" extracts without any other requirements. Their list is most certainly countable as well as not infinite.

W.r.t. making elixirs: it is notable that the AP authors do create personal use potions, though not in abundance.

Liberty's Edge

turing85 wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
turing85 wrote:
Gisher wrote:
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Not only can an Alchemist create an Extract of it, (s)he can even share it via infusion.

The problem of doing that is that it is unclear if the extract become inert after a day or not.

If it become inert it open up the option of having an alchemist selling very cheap "24 hours potions" (the cost would be the same as paying someone to cast a spell or very similar).
It the extract persist after 24 hours there is a problem as the alchemist has a used up infusion slot until the extract is used

PRD wrote:


The extract created now persists even after the alchemist sets it down. As long as the extract exists, it continues to occupy one of the alchemist's daily extract slots.

I understand your point. My point of view:

** spoiler omitted **[/url]

As you can see, the...

The problem is that I can search for an alchemist (in a settlement large enough) with the infusion discovery e buy very cheap and powerful "almost potions" with a 24 hours duration.

Find a second level alchemist with the infusion discovery, buy a infusion of Cure Light Wound.
Cost? You pay for his spellcasting services:
Caster level × spell level × 10 gp = 20 gp forl a CL 2 infusion of CLW

against: 25 gp for a cl1 potion.

Same 20 gp for an infusion of Shield or Enlarge person with a CL of 2.

A bargain.

Infusion of CSW? 210 gp vs 750 for a potion.
Greater Invisibility? 400 gp vs unavailable.

That change the balance of the game if you have access to a city.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:


The problem is that I can search for an alchemist (in a settlement large enough) with the infusion discovery e buy very cheap and powerful "almost potions" with a 24 hours duration.

Find a second level alchemist with the infusion discovery, buy a infusion of Cure Light Wound.
Cost? You pay for his spellcasting services:
Caster level × spell level × 10 gp = 20 gp forl a CL 2 infusion of CLW
against: 25 gp for a cl1 potion.

Yes, but I don't see that an alchemist would consider making an infusion (for carryout) to be equivalent to casting a spell, precisely because infusions run the risk of permanently depleting his casting ability. (For example, if you get killed by a rock fall, the infusion stored in your personal portable hole will remain undrunk, and still in existence, possibly for centuries.)

And you'd need to pay the alchemist to compensate for that all-to-real risk.

How much does that CLW infusion? Well, it's 20gp for the spell, EVERY DAY FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE. Assuming I live for 100 more years, that's 36,525 days, or 730,500 gp. But I'll refund most of that if you bring me back the empty bottle after you've used it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Diego Rossi wrote:
The problem is that I can...

You can only do those things if the GM allows it. If he does, why complain? He probably has a better understanding of his campaign's economy than you. If he doesn't but the other players are taking advantage of him, stick up for him. If you're the GM, don't allow it if you don't want to.

If you feel like there should be some reason:

Why would the alchemist undercut himself on the sale of potions?

The alchemist keeps CLW infusions for local, walk-in injuries. He sells potions for use later.

Infusion of Greater Invisibility doesn't exist as a potion. He knows it. He can charge whatever he likes as a unique service. Don't like his price, he tells you to go buy a scroll. Oh, sorry, you can't activate scrolls? Price is now double. Ha ha, says the alchemist.

Bottom line, the GM doesn't need a reason to not let you bypass the expected, standard economy.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:

Yes, but I don't see that an alchemist would consider making an infusion (for carryout) to be equivalent to casting a spell, precisely because infusions run the risk of permanently depleting his casting ability. (For example, if you get killed by a rock fall, the infusion stored in your personal portable hole will remain undrunk, and still in existence, possibly for centuries.)

And you'd need to pay the alchemist to compensate for that all-to-real risk.

As a GM, I'd rule that when the alchemist died, do did any connection to his existing extracts, e.g., the infusion in his portable hole became inert, without chance of reconnecting upon being raised/reincarnated. I'm not sure how to view that per RAW, since this is the rules forum.

Liberty's Edge

Blake's Tiger wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
The problem is that I can...

You can only do those things if the GM allows it. If he does, why complain? He probably has a better understanding of his campaign's economy than you. If he doesn't but the other players are taking advantage of him, stick up for him. If you're the GM, don't allow it if you don't want to.

If you feel like there should be some reason:

Why would the alchemist undercut himself on the sale of potions?

CLW potion: production cost 12.5 GP, sell price 25 gp. You need to have it in your inventory or brewing it take 2 hours (and you can craft only 1 magic item/day).

CLW infusion, production cost 0, sell price 20, gain 20 gp. You can make it in 11 rounds.

Larger gain, less investment in inventory, he can make any level 1 infusion he know, way shorter production time.

With more costly potion the difference in time and opportunity cost of the need to have a large inventory become even more relevant.

Blake's Tiger wrote:


The alchemist keeps CLW infusions for local, walk-in injuries. He sells potions for use later.

Maybe.

Blake's Tiger wrote:


Infusion of Greater Invisibility doesn't exist as a potion. He knows it. He can charge whatever he likes as a unique service. Don't like his price, he tells you to go buy a scroll. Oh, sorry, you can't activate scrolls? Price is now double. Ha ha, says the alchemist.

"He, say the consumer, Jones nextdoor/in the next city sell it at half that." If we assume a standard price for spellcasting services, it is difficult to argue for a custom price "because they are infusion".

Blake's Tiger wrote:


Bottom line, the GM doesn't need a reason to not let you bypass the expected, standard economy.

Yes, the GM can invoke rule 0, but I like a world with some coherency.

"You can find the spellcasting services you need, but not if the spellcaster is an alchemist" sound like a fiat based on the GM preferences.

Orfamay Quest wrote:


Yes, but I don't see that an alchemist would consider making an infusion (for carryout) to be equivalent to casting a spell, precisely because infusions run the risk of permanently depleting his casting ability. (For example, if you get killed by a rock fall, the infusion stored in your personal portable hole will remain undrunk, and still in existence, possibly for centuries.)

But the infusion can be read both ways: "it is still an extract and last only 24 hours" or "it last forever".

I lean in favor of the second interpretation, but it is not clear at all.


So he doesn't lose the extract slot for centuries, just for the rest of his life. That's not a terribly useful consolation for having the adventurer he gave the extract to be utterly unable to use it in the intervening time.


It does make for some amazing plot hooks around alchemists that are enslaved and forced to burn out all their slots proving Infusions for evil folks.

Sure, they'd have bombs, if they are given the components. Seems like a sweet geas, or similar thing.

Seems like it could be a deal you'd make with another PC, depending on relationships.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Diego Rossi wrote:
Yes, the GM can invoke rule 0, but I like a world with some coherency.

The classes weren't written with the economy in mind, and the economy guidelines weren't written with future classes in mind, so Rule 0 will need to be invoked.

Your math is off on Potions, by the way. It's a 25 gp profit for the alchemist.


25gp profit with 2 hours of work, or 20gp profit with 1 minute of work.

Hmm....


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
_Ozy_ wrote:

25gp profit with 2 hours of work, or 20gp profit with 1 minute of work.

Hmm....

Day 1, Year 1000. Craft potion. No adventurers.

Day 2, Year 1000. Craft potion. No adventurers.
Day 3, Year 1000. Craft potion. No adventurers.
...
Day 11, Year 1000. 10 Potions is a good reserve. I'll rest. No adventurers.
...
Day 83, Year 1000. Adventurers purchase 5 CLW Potions.
Day 84, Year 1000. Craft potion. No adventurers.
...etc.

Actually, no, the adventurers bought a wand of CLW.

Time means nothing to NPCs. The GM creates the economy and the NPC behavior and motives. It's not like there are really alchemists in a world where adventurers are coming in every day to buy potions.


That's a whole lot of sunk cost for crafting potions. In any real economy unsold stock on shelves is losing money. Compare that to the sunk costs of 0gp for an infusion, and the alchemist is still way ahead.

Liberty's Edge

Blake's Tiger wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Yes, the GM can invoke rule 0, but I like a world with some coherency.

The classes weren't written with the economy in mind, and the economy guidelines weren't written with future classes in mind, so Rule 0 will need to be invoked.

Your math is off on Potions, by the way. It's a 25 gp profit for the alchemist.

Sigh, I was in a hurry and looked the first row, but that is for cantrips.

Still he need to sell a 50 gp potion to someone, against a 20 gp extract.

Liberty's Edge

Blake's Tiger wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:

25gp profit with 2 hours of work, or 20gp profit with 1 minute of work.

Hmm....

Day 1, Year 1000. Craft potion. No adventurers.

Day 2, Year 1000. Craft potion. No adventurers.
Day 3, Year 1000. Craft potion. No adventurers.
...
Day 11, Year 1000. 10 Potions is a good reserve. I'll rest. No adventurers.
...
Day 83, Year 1000. Adventurers purchase 5 CLW Potions.
Day 84, Year 1000. Craft potion. No adventurers.
...etc.

Actually, no, the adventurers bought a wand of CLW.

Time means nothing to NPCs. The GM creates the economy and the NPC behavior and motives. It's not like there are really alchemists in a world where adventurers are coming in every day to buy potions.

Time mean a lot to merchants. Especially time during which your money stay still and don't make more money.

A potion on the shelf is an investment with a very late return.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Diego Rossi wrote:
A potion on the shelf is an investment with a very late return.

You're not wrong--applying modern business philosophy--by invoking your own Rule 0.

However, what was the Alchemist doing for the 82 days before an adventurer finally showed up? If he knew some day an adventurer would want a portable CLW, and knew that it wasn't today, why hold a CLW infusion on hand every day to make 20 gp when he could make a potion now and eventually recoup 25 gp? Or better for him, why wouldn't he just charge 50 gp for the infusion (the adventurer won't know the difference) and make 50 gp profit? That's what I mean about not undercutting his own prices.

For perspective: In your games, do you have to wait 4 days for an Agile Amulet of Mighty Fists or 6 days to improve your +1 rapier to a +1 Agile rapier, or does your GM consult the community size table and roll to determine if what you want is available? If any version of the latter, then the merchants in your world invest thousands of gold for a product that sits on the shelf for a long time.

Bottom line, my argument is that there's no reason for an alchemist to not charge 50 gp for a CLW, potion or infusion (other than you've decided alchemists fall in the guidelines for routine spellcasting services when they are not spellcasters. And that is OK).


I see only two cases of an alchemist daring to sell a “to go” infusing to any strangers at all.
1. Chirurgeon archetypeand the infusion is a Infused Curative
2. The infusion is made direktely into a Preserving flask
In any other case, the drain on daily uses and risk of permanent extract loss is to great.


Given the fact that preserving flasks are so expensive, I don't see a money conscious commercial alchemist using them, they might be useful to an adventuring alchemist who wants to prepare his infusions long in advance and who travels with the expected user to retrieve the flask once the extract is consumed, but to a commercial alchemist, they completely bork up the pricing of potions and infused extracts and would put the guy selling those behind in the competitivity curve.

As for selling infused curatives "to go", no sane alchemist would sell away their extract slots without knowing when they'll get them back.


Blake's Tiger wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
A potion on the shelf is an investment with a very late return.

You're not wrong--applying modern business philosophy--by invoking your own Rule 0.

However, what was the Alchemist doing for the 82 days before an adventurer finally showed up? If he knew some day an adventurer would want a portable CLW, and knew that it wasn't today, why hold a CLW infusion on hand every day to make 20 gp when he could make a potion now and eventually recoup 25 gp?

Because he doesn't have to 'hold' anything. It takes him 1 whole minute to whip up the infusion using an empty slot.

This isn't 'modern business philosophy', it's basic economics just like basic physics. In pathfinder, a rock will typically fall when you drop it. Similarly, a merchant who spends money to have a product sit on a shelf for a year is losing the opportunity to use that money to make a profit elsewhere.

Sorry, there is no way the CLW potion is economically competitive, especially given that the infusion undercuts the cost by over a factor of 2. The reason he doesn't charge more is because the alchemist down the road would sell for 20gp.


but again, infusions are to be made to be used soon, and not given to unknown parties that may keep them for the gods only know how long. An infusion that's not consumed is one less slot you can use to prepare useful extracts with, so you have a vested interest in it being consumed soon after preparation (I houserule that the alchemist may simply pour the infusion out or otherwise destroy it to regain his slot, but he may not do so if the extract is no longer in his possession).


Yes, the discussion about 'infusion' for sale is operating under the assumption (which I don't believe) that infusions lose power after 24 hours.

If it takes a permanent slot until used, obviously it's not a good choice unless the alchemist gets some large collateral deposit to be returned once the infusion has been used. Something priced like a boro bead (lvl^2 * 1000) could perhaps be an acceptable deposit.

Liberty's Edge

_Ozy_ wrote:

Yes, the discussion about 'infusion' for sale is operating under the assumption (which I don't believe) that infusions lose power after 24 hours.

The problem is that how infusion work in that regard isn't very clear.

They are still extracts and expire after 24 hours? Or "The extract created now persists even after the alchemist sets it down." mean that they persist for an indefinite length of time?

If the second interpretation is true I would make a infusion only if it meant to be drunk the next round and never let it leave my sight.


Thunderrstar wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Thunderrstar wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

Yes, if the GM allows it. There are no real restrictions on wondrous items, and as for someone saying on because there are no potions there is a rule that prevents it from being a potion.

The rules say-->Potions cant be made from personal spells and true strike is a personal spell.

Where? I cannot find it under brew potion feat, potions or creating potions in the magic items chapter.

To be made into a potion the spell must target one or more creatures, true strike targets “you” “you” are a creature.
This opens the question for interpretation. Unless you can point me to where in the rules it states that personal spells cannot be made into potions
Elixir is a wondrous item, not a potion.

Nevertheless, I am asking about potions where in the rules does it state that you cannot make a potion with a range of personal.

And like many you're asking the wrong question. Pathfinder is not about listing can'ts but cans. Potions specfically only allow spells which target "one or more". Personal only spells do not fall into this category.

1 to 50 of 52 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can I make an Elixir of True Strike? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.