|
When I read the description for creating potions, it says that I cannot make a potion from a spell with a range of personal. However I've come across many potions that are of personal range spells in various sources. Is this just my misreading, or are these unintentional overlooks.
Thanks
Studpuffin
Edit: thought this link might help. Its just over half-way down the page. Magic Item Creation
The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.
This seems pretty clear... :(
"Various sources" do a lot of wonky things with the rules, you'll find....
|
|
"Various sources" do a lot of wonky things with the rules, you'll find....
So I have noticed. :P
Some of them seem to be popping up in various places like in Shackled City AP, like the potion of Glibness. We're looking at rules as a whole between PFRPG and 3.5 as we gear up to move to our next campaign (which will likely be Second Darkness) and we just noticed these rules for the first time ourselves. It seems to be present in 3.5 as well as Pathfinder, but only in one place. I can understand how it would be overlooked, but just wanted to make sure the rules i'm reading are correct.
In the quote I gave it would seem that personal spells would be the perfect kind of spell for a potion, then it goes on to say you cannot. What the heck?
In the quote I gave it would seem that personal spells would be the perfect kind of spell for a potion, then it goes on to say you cannot. What the heck?
My understanding is that its something of a safety valve on the system. Potions, unlike wands and scrolls, can be used by anyone. Personal range spells are (often) intended to only be used by the classes whose spells lists they are on. Potions would provide too-easy access to these spells, without even the requirement of Use Magic Device ranks.
Most of the time this isn't a big deal: a potion of blink probably won't break anything that a potion of displacement wouldn't have.
On the other hand, a potion of shield gives the same benefit of a tower shield, while letting the two-handed weapon wielder keep their big ol' axe. For a low-low cost. It's the same problem as the unlimited-duration animated shield under 3.0 and 3.5, except cheaper.
On the other hand, a potion of shield gives the same benefit of a tower shield, while letting the two-handed weapon wielder keep their big ol' axe. For a low-low cost. It's the same problem as the unlimited-duration animated shield under 3.0 and 3.5, except cheaper.
If you include the 3.5 books, there's even worse examples. Spell Compendium has a 1st level spell, with a range of personal, that grants a +6 enhancement bonus to strength and a slam attack. (I think it's called Fist of Stone).
Cast by a wizard or a sorcerer, it makes them somewhat useful if they're forced into melee. As a potion drunk by a barbarian, it's much more powerful.
I think it's partially to avoid mayhem like potions of True Strike (which I pray isn't already a potion).
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
From Monte Cook's review of D&D 3.5:
* Some potions are now oils, helping the logic of what can and can't be a potion. Again, clearly one of those things I would have liked to go back and do myself, this is all handled quite elegantly now. I was never satisfied with the fact that flavor issues -- based on what had and hadn't been a potion in 1st Edition and 2nd Edition -- unnecessarily narrowed the options for what spells could be made into potions. (Here's a "behind the curtain" secret about potions: nothing about the limiting of potions, price-wise, has anything to do with balance. It's all flavor. There's nothing unbalancing even if you wanted to make potions of magic missile. It's just weird.)
True Strike in a bottle... that's so wrong.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
How so, Dork Lord? It an expenditure of resources --gold, actions, possibly time spent preparing the elixir, possibly the feat that allows the PC to create the wondrous item-- towards a single attack.
Is it the flavor that disturbs you, or do you feel the mechanics award a disproportional advantage for the resources committed?
I just feel that it's more than overkill for a non spellcasting class to have access to True Strike... just my opinion.
Imagine a Leap Striking Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker Power Attacking after imbibing an elixer of True Strike.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Well, if I'm imagining that, we're still playing D&D 3.5, and that true strike is costing not just a standard action to drink the elixir, provoking Attacks of Opportunity each time, the wizard's item creation feat, skill points dedicated to crafting, and money, but also experience points. For every true strike attack.
If I'm running the table when the power-attacking berserker wants to take every other round swigging an expensive potion rather than disemboweling his opponents, I will be more than happy to allow him to do just that.
|
|
I just feel that it's more than overkill for a non spellcasting class to have access to True Strike... just my opinion.
Imagine a Leap Striking Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker Power Attacking after imbibing an elixer of True Strike.
You mean the one who just spent a Standard action drinking said elixer and then on his next round received a +20 to hit with his first, and only first, attack? So instead of a 40% chance to hit he now has, for that one attack, a 95% chance to hit? Hmm sure seems broken alright. If he was in my party I would beat him severely for wasting the standard action and the exlixer.
Slight correction. Elixers and Potions require a move action to drink.
Another slight correction: you're wrong.
(From the PRD, sorry for the formatting.)
Standard Action Attack of Opportunity1
Attack (melee) No
Attack (ranged) Yes
Attack (unarmed) Yes
Activate a magic item other than a potion or oil No
Aid another Maybe2
Cast a spell (1 standard action casting time) Yes
Channel energy No
Concentrate to maintain an active spell No
Dismiss a spell No
Draw a hidden weapon (see Sleight of Hand skill) No
Drink a potion or apply an oil Yes
Etc.
dot dot dot.......And here I was thinking most of the changes pathfinder made were good ones... drinking a potion in combat was usually a bad idea before, now it's completely pointless.
(Courtesy of d20srd.org, sorry for the formatting.)
Table: Standard Action
Action Attack of Opportunity1
Attack (melee) No
Attack (unarmed) Yes
Attack (ranged) Yes
Activate a magic item other than a potion or oil No
Aid another Maybe2
Bull rush Yes
Cast a spell (1 standard action casting time) Yes
Concentrate to maintain an active spell No
Dismiss a spell No
Draw a hidden weapon (see Sleight of Hand skill) No
Drink a potion or apply an oil Yes
I just feel that it's more than overkill for a non spellcasting class to have access to True Strike... just my opinion.
Imagine a Leap Striking Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker Power Attacking after imbibing an elixer of True Strike.
You mean the one who just spent a Standard action drinking said elixer and then on his next round received a +20 to hit with his first, and only first, attack? So instead of a 40% chance to hit he now has, for that one attack, a 95% chance to hit? Hmm sure seems broken alright. If he was in my party I would beat him severely for wasting the standard action and the exlixer.
With the right set of feats and classes, that one shot is dealing sick amounts of damage. The +20 from TS is canceling out the penalties from Power Attack and Supreme Power Attack as well as other feats.
As far as playing 3.5, we play Pathfinder but our DM allows us to use certain 3.5 feats so it's still something to consider.
That may be true, but how many fights (especially against the big bad enemy) are going to be over in one round? Most fights in the games I've been in have lasted at least 3-4 rounds.
Well over 100 damage in one hit... possibly over 200. I personally don't like TS as a spell anyway, so this may just be my bias. I'll admit that.
That may be true, but how many fights (especially against the big bad enemy) are going to be over in one round? Most fights in the games I've been in have lasted at least 3-4 rounds.Can you honestly tell me you think that pulling this tactic results in a net-benefit that's worth more than two rounds worth of normal combat? (Not even mentioning the cost of the elixer because by level 8 or so it becomes pretty much irrelevant, but if it isn't available except by party crafting then the time required to make them becomes a very significant cost)
I've always thought true strike was only worthwhile to cast in the surprise round where you are limited to a standard action. If you have to use a full action to cast true strike you are burning a lot of potential hits past 6th level.
Also, if your caster has a really nice touch attack spell that he doesn't want to miss. Again best used in the surprise round.
Heck, I'm not trying to sell it, just saying it can be situationally useful.
And let's not forget that Power Attack works differently now. In 3.5 a big attack bonus could be traded for an even bigger damage bonus. That's really true anymore. TS is situationally useful, even very useful, but not overpowered.
I wasn't arguing that TS + Power Attack is broken... I was arguing that True Strike + Power Attack plus Supreme Power Attack + Leap Strike + Leap Attack + Reckless Attack is broken.
Wait... Power Attack got changed? *reads* Well I'll be a monkey's uncle. 2-3 extra damage per 4 BaB doesn't seem like a whole lot... wow, it got nerfed to bits.
|
I liked Monte's concept of using variant potions (which he mentioned in a sidebar in the first Book of Eldritch Might, IIRC), including potions of monster summoning (that you threw to the ground) or whatever.
If I was really bothered by the idea of personal only spells becoming unbalanced (which I'm not), I'd just make a house rule that you can brew up potions of Personal spells, but they cost twice as much.
Reflavoring 'Brew Potion' to 'Create One-Use Item' would be fine, IMO. Bob brews up elixirs with his chemistry set. Jane crafts single-use runestones that release their spell when thrown down. Steve folds up elegant origami paperfolds that unleash magic when unfolded. Sally does something similar with celtic knotwork, weaving complicated patterns into fabric, which are then untied to free the magic trapped within.
Same dealio.
I wasn't arguing that TS + Power Attack is broken... I was arguing that True Strike + Power Attack plus Supreme Power Attack + Leap Strike + Leap Attack + Reckless Attack is broken.
Wait... Power Attack got changed? *reads* Well I'll be a monkey's uncle. 2-3 extra damage per 4 BaB doesn't seem like a whole lot... wow, it got nerfed to bits.
Yeah, it did. Combat Expertise, too, altho I'm less sure why. PA got nerfed mostly (I assume) to prevent those grossly distorted damage curves. With all those multipliers you mentioned, some really outrageous builds were possible in 3.5. Now, not so much. It's a lot harder to deal hundreds of points of damage a round now.
Edit: And that's an improvement in my mind. Still don't get Combat Expertise tho. *shrug*
Now, not so much. It's a lot harder to deal hundreds of points of damage a round now.
Edit: And that's an improvement in my mind. Still don't get Combat Expertise tho. *shrug*
So... it's bad for non-casters to have a chance to beat the foe in one round, but you don't care that spellcasters do it regularly?
I think the "God-like Wizard Whose Very Presence Breaks the Game!" is largely a myth. With the new ruleset, even more so. It was only a very small minority of players and GMs who had difficulty with the 3.5 rules. It will be an even smaller minority now. If you want to break it, you can break it. No amount of tweaking is going to change that. The vast majority of gamers are perfectly reasonable. It takes effort to break the game, and most players and DMs would rather expend that effort on having fun. As would I.
|
|
That may be true, but how many fights (especially against the big bad enemy) are going to be over in one round? Most fights in the games I've been in have lasted at least 3-4 rounds.Can you honestly tell me you think that pulling this tactic results in a net-benefit that's worth more than two rounds worth of normal combat? (Not even mentioning the cost of the elixer because by level 8 or so it becomes pretty much irrelevant, but if it isn't available except by party crafting then the time required to make them becomes a very significant cost)I've always thought true strike was only worthwhile to cast in the surprise round where you are limited to a standard action. If you have to use a full action to cast true strike you are burning a lot of potential hits past 6th level.
Also, if your caster has a really nice touch attack spell that he doesn't want to miss. Again best used in the surprise round.
Heck, I'm not trying to sell it, just saying it can be situationally useful.
Have your raven familiar hold a wand of true strike and have him use it on you each turn.
Thats when things start to get REALLY annoying.
Have your raven familiar hold a wand of true strike and have him use it on you each turn.Thats when things start to get REALLY annoying.
No, that's when the raven suddenly gets a great big ol' target on his back....
This is odd... in nearly every other thread I've been in I've been told the Wizard -shouldn't- be dealing damage... now folks are saying that melee types need optimization help to outdo the caster in damage? Am I missing something? (I probably am, with my luck)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
So... it's bad for non-casters to have a chance to beat the foe in one round, but you don't care that spellcasters do it regularly?
Briefly, yes, kr.
Some spells can shut down an opponent in one round. Others need to be lucky and get the opponent to fail her saving throw. But spells are a finite resource per day. Put the party in a situation where they have to go through seven or eight encounters in one pass to accomplish their goals, where you don't allow the "15-minute workday", where the arcane casters can't blow their wad in one fight and then demand that the rest of the party stop and wait for them to renew their spells. Put the party in that situation, and the lasting capabilities of a warrior class shine.
In the "sweet spot" of the game, between 6th and 10th level, a wizard is going to get a couple of good spells in a day. The fighter can keep going, at full capacity, until she drops of hit point loss. That's why a fighter's effectiveness per round shouldn't match the idealized "at his freshest" wizard's capacity.
Your average non-focused melee PC isn't a party member, he's cleanup crew. All he does is dish out damage after the target's been beaten, and if he's caught away from the party he's screwed.
Maybe for one or two combats per day. But the situation is reversed when the wizard is out of spells and reaches for his crossbow.
The utter irony of this rule with potions, is that Craft Wondrous Item can be used to make "Elixirs" that use the same pricing rules, function the same way (in essence they ARE potions by a different name) that allow personal range spells, and have no spell level cap.
I just wanted to point out that there is no blanket rule that an Elixir can be made of any spell. Any Elixir not in the book would therefore require DM approval - which leaves the situation as a game-by-game question, probably where it should be. The same DM could approve additional potions as well.
I wasn't arguing that TS + Power Attack is broken... I was arguing that True Strike + Power Attack plus Supreme Power Attack + Leap Strike + Leap Attack + Reckless Attack is broken.
Even in 3.5 TS wasn't really a big deal for Power Attackers. That's why they all had Heedless Charge.
Once you hit anything on a 2, then TS really isn't helping you very much.
All True Strike is doing is costing you an action.
Really - non-magic classes can do ridiculous sums of damage in 3.5 and in Pathfinder too. So much so, that Wizards and Sorcerers really can't compare in that regard.
Melees don't need help out-damaging wizards.
They need help getting enough damage to be able to win a fight, instead of being totally dependent on having a wizard to control the battlefield, save or suck, and save or lose the enemy into defeat in the first two rounds.
The two types are inter-dependant. That's not a bad thing, it's called "teamwork"
A wizard can control the battlefield all they want, but the meleer needs to be part of the equation for the tactic to be effective, so it's not like it's a one-sided relationship.
I can't find Heedless Charge anywhere. What book was it in?
If its in your square, chances are they aren't getting to it.
Archers? Magic missiles? Any other non-Reflex save spell?
I can't find Heedless Charge anywhere. What book was it in?
It's not a feat, it's an ability gained by a tactical feat called: "Shock Trooper", and it's in Complete Warrior. It allows you to take any portion (translation: ALL) of the penalty from your Power Attack and apply it to your AC for the round. They require you to apply at least -5 - like you would apply less than everything you can!
Hint: When you do 300 points of damage (and I've seen a great deal more than that with a Lion Totem Barbarian Heedless Charge) to the enemy, your AC of -5 doesn't really matter because they tend not to counter attack when their head is cut in two.
All the tactical feats are pretty good because they are like a bunch of feats rolled into one.
I can't find Heedless Charge anywhere. What book was it in?It's not a feat, it's an ability gained by a tactical feat called: "Shock Trooper", and it's in Complete Warrior. It allows you to take any portion (translation: ALL) of the penalty from your Power Attack and apply it to your AC for the round. They require you to apply at least -5 - like you would apply less than everything you can!
Hint: When you do 300 points of damage (and I've seen a great deal more than that with a Lion Totem Barbarian Heedless Charge) to the enemy, your AC of -5 doesn't really matter because they tend not to counter attack when their head is cut in two.
All the tactical feats are pretty good because they are like a bunch of feats rolled into one.
So long as they didn't have elusive target...
So long as they didn't have elusive target...
For elusive target to work you had to have the power-attacker as your dodge designate. That designation could only be made on your turn (and you had to guess what the charger was, and what he could do)
Winning initiative always kills elusive target.
However, when you could use it, it is a power-attack killer.
When I read the description for creating potions, it says that I cannot make a potion from a spell with a range of personal. However I've come across many potions that are of personal range spells in various sources. Is this just my misreading, or are these unintentional overlooks.
Thanks
StudpuffinEdit: thought this link might help. Its just over half-way down the page. Magic Item Creation
This seems pretty clear... :(
The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.
It seems that this limitation is only on potions. Is that correct?
It seems that this limitation is only on potions. Is that correct?
That is correct. Scrolls, Wands, & Staves can all store virtually any spell (wands up to 4th level). The difference is that all of those require some familiarity with spellcasting to use.
Wondrous, Rods, Rings, etc. are all individual items that must get approved, either by the design staff for the core books, or by a home DM.
For instance, a wondrous item that grants the spell transformation to anyone (and particularly someone who isn't a caster), would be totally out of bounds for me, and probably for most designers.
|
So long as they didn't have elusive target...
For elusive target to work you had to have the power-attacker as your dodge designate. That designation could only be made on your turn (and you had to guess what the charger was, and what he could do)
Winning initiative always kills elusive target.
However, when you could use it, it is a power-attack killer.
Which is most likely to be either the THF hulking Bbn OR the Mounted Lance bearing Paly...
Playing through the STAP we had a Goliath Bbn/ftr/Uncanny trickster w/shock trooper and a Large Goliath greathammer of Impact (19-20/x4 crit). He one shotted BOTH T-Rexs on the Isle of Dread and nearly took out the Dragon Turtle in one hit. Regular Leap attack damage was nearing 400 with crits (of which the dice gods favored hime greatly)!!!!
--Chopping Vrock!