Question about the difference between a potion and a 1 use wondrous item


Rules Questions

Scarab Sages

I have a question about the difference between a magic potion and a one-shot wondrous item.

Who do I contact and how?

I'm not certain I want to discuss this openly on the boards.

Dark Archive

Patrick Walsh wrote:

I have a question about the difference between a magic potion and a one-shot wondrous item.

Who do I contact and how?

I'm not certain I want to discuss this openly on the boards.

... Ummm... Posting on the boards isn't a good way to avoid a discussion of it on the boards :) Though I want to reply with my thoughts I will abstain in respect of your wishes.

Paizo Employee Developer

My impression is that a potion is literally just a spell-in-a-can, and a wondrous item doesn't necessarily "just" duplicate the exact effects of a spell. Potions are generally beneficial effects... a one-use wondrous item may not be.

Of course, without specifics, we can only vaguely poke at your question. :) Hope you can get it answered.

Dark Archive

Mike Kimmel wrote:

My impression is that a potion is literally just a spell-in-a-can, and a wondrous item doesn't necessarily "just" duplicate the exact effects of a spell. Potions are generally beneficial effects... a one-use wondrous item may not be.

Of course, without specifics, we can only vaguely poke at your question. :) Hope you can get it answered.

I both agree and disagree with this statement as it didn't cover some of the very core differences.

Dark Archive

The game does have a fair number of one use non-potion wondrous items, such as feather tokens or universal solvent or dusts, or, that cheesiest of all 'non-potions,' the elixirs (of hiding, tumbling, swimming, vision, etc.).

Of the top 32, the Steadfast Gut-Stone is a one-use magic item, and, like an elixir, is imbibed (although it's effects are much less 'spell in a can' than an actual potion, as it doesn't replicate a 1st - 3rd level spell).

The big difference appears to be that the potion is supposed to emulate a spell, and last as long as the minimum casting level, while an elixir / wondrous item can do something unique, like let the drinker breath fire X number of times.

Paizo Employee Developer

As far as I know, a potion does not merely "emulate" a spell- it "casts" the exact spell on you, plain and simple. Oh, and there's that 3rd-level cap thing. Potions don't have descriptions or unique names. They just have spell names. You look up the spell to see what it does.

Scarab Sages

Draeke Raefel wrote:
... Ummm... Posting on the boards isn't a good way to avoid a discussion of it on the boards :) Though I want to reply with my thoughts I will abstain in respect of your wishes.

Yeah, I know, but noone seems to have a "click here to send a private message" button and I'm failing at seeing a "Contact Us" link either. So I'm putting up a "Help Me" sign here.

Dark Archive

Patrick Walsh wrote:
Yeah, I know, but noone seems to have a "click here to send a private message" button and I'm failing at seeing a "Contact Us" link either. So I'm putting up a "Help Me" sign here.

Not specifically for this sort of question, I'd imagine, but there's always customer.service@paizo.com

Contributor

The boards are really a better place for this sort of question, anyway. The community will respond to your board post more quickly than an employee will, especially when you post early in the morning.

Dark Archive

Mike Kimmel wrote:
As far as I know, a potion does not merely "emulate" a spell- it "casts" the exact spell on you, plain and simple. Oh, and there's that 3rd-level cap thing. Potions don't have descriptions or unique names. They just have spell names. You look up the spell to see what it does.

I can get behind your definition now. You did forget one very obvious difference though... A potion has to be a potion whereas a wondrous item can be anything not covered under the other magic item types : )

Paizo Employee Developer

Draeke Raefel wrote:
Mike Kimmel wrote:
As far as I know, a potion does not merely "emulate" a spell- it "casts" the exact spell on you, plain and simple. Oh, and there's that 3rd-level cap thing. Potions don't have descriptions or unique names. They just have spell names. You look up the spell to see what it does.
I can get behind your definition now. You did forget one very obvious difference though... A potion has to be a potion whereas a wondrous item can be anything not covered under the other magic item types : )

Well, that part is, as you say... obvious. :)

Scarab Sages

Sigh.

OK, here's my real question:

Why isn't Snapleaf a potion with a different means of consumption?

A while back (and we may be talking 10 years, but I think less), either Dragon or Pyramid published an article on different ways to represent potions. Examples that I remember were rune magic (magic rune inscribed on a piece of slate or clay that was snapped in half to activate the effect) and bone magic (same thing but with bird bones and the like). The game mechanics were the same (one use, "consumed" at use, source subject to crushing), but the flavor was different.

Snapleaf is a glass leaf or twig that is "activated" (generally assumed by the comments to be broken, although the write-up does not specify how it is activated) and provides a one-shot effect (in this case, feather fall and invisibility, both 3rd or less in level). Note also that it doesn't take a slot, just like a potion as well. In fact, you can eeasily substitute "potion on a rope" for "(glass leaf) worn around the neck".

Why is this different, specifically?

Is it because there are two effects? What if it only had one?

Is it because you don't drink it? How can you tell, there isn't any description.

I'm not 100% convinced there is an issue here, but I'd like a solid explanation why there isn't, preferably from the Paizo folk or the judges.

Dark Archive

Patrick Walsh wrote:

Sigh.

OK, here's my real question:

Why isn't Snapleaf a potion with a different means of consumption?

A while back (and we may be talking 10 years, but I think less), either Dragon or Pyramid published an article on different ways to represent potions. Examples that I remember were rune magic (magic rune inscribed on a piece of slate or clay that was snapped in half to activate the effect) and bone magic (same thing but with bird bones and the like). The game mechanics were the same (one use, "consumed" at use, source subject to crushing), but the flavor was different.

Snapleaf is a glass leaf or twig that is "activated" (generally assumed by the comments to be broken, although the write-up does not specify how it is activated) and provides a one-shot effect (in this case, feather fall and invisibility, both 3rd or less in level). Note also that it doesn't take a slot, just like a potion as well. In fact, you can eeasily substitute "potion on a rope" for "(glass leaf) worn around the neck".

Why is this different, specifically?

Is it because there are two effects? What if it only had one?

Is it because you don't drink it? How can you tell, there isn't any description.

I'm not 100% convinced there is an issue here, but I'd like a solid explanation why there isn't, preferably from the Paizo folk or the judges.

It changes the usage of the spells( decreased durations ), has multiple effects, takes an immediate action instead of a standard action, and has a description that isn't a potion. While previous editions may have mentioned alternate items that could be used in place of potions, those are dependent on non-Core sources. I think that explains the major differences.

Paizo Employee Developer

What Draeke said.


and much more, i will see when i get to compiling it all.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

My understanding is that potions directly mirror spells (except in a handful of sacred-cow cases, such as love potions) and that they affect the person who activated them. This is good, because it means you can make a potion of any spell you can cast up to 3rd level, which is a lot of options. Its bad because there are few or no unique effects.

Wondrous items are a catch-all category, so technically, anything that doesn't fall under the purview of another item type can be a wondrous item. I think that the snapleaf is very much not a potion because it uses two consecutive spell effects (you become invisible, but not until you hit the ground) and also because of the swift-action activation.

Now, if someone came to me describing the snapleaf as a capsule of fluid that you hold in your mouth and then swallow when you need it, and said "I want to make this with my Brew Potion feat", I'd probably humor them. I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

Dark Archive

Hydro wrote:

My understanding is that potions directly mirror spells (except in a handful of sacred-cow cases, such as love potions) and that they affect the person who activated them. This is good, because it means you can make a potion of any spell you can cast up to 3rd level, which is a lot of options. Its bad because there are few or no unique effects.

Wondrous items are a catch-all category, so technically, anything that doesn't fall under the purview of another item type can be a wondrous item. I think that the snapleaf is very much not a potion because it uses two consecutive spell effects (you become invisible, but not until you hit the ground) and also because of the swift-action activation.

Now, if someone came to me describing the snapleaf as a capsule of fluid that you hold in your mouth and then swallow when you need it, and said "I want to make this with my Brew Potion feat", I'd probably humor them. I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

I don't think the "Potion of Love" exists anymore... It is an elixer of love and is a wondrous item.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Draeke Raefel wrote:
I don't think the "Potion of Love" exists anymore... It is an elixer of love and is a wondrous item.

Wow, you're right. Same with the potion (now elixir) of fire breath.

Scarab Sages

Hydro wrote:
Wondrous items are a catch-all category, so technically, anything that doesn't fall under the purview of another item type can be a wondrous item. I think that the snapleaf is very much not a potion because it uses two consecutive spell effects (you become invisible, but not until you hit the ground) and also because of the swift-action activation.

Point of note: the effects are not consecutive, they both happen at once, but the invisibility continues after touching the ground while the FF terminates.

Still, point taken.

I still have trouble with the answer: "its a wonderous item because it doesn't call itself a matched set of potions and it has a shorter duration". What if the effects were instantaneous (like minor healing and lesser restoration combination)?

(Apologies if the spell names are off - I'm at the DayJob and can't pull out the rulebook or hit the SRD.)

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

You are correct; I misremembered.

A healing-and-restoration-combined item would also be a wondrous item, not a potion. It might be a boring wondrous item, but it would still be a wondrous item, especially in light of recent 3.P changes: a potion HAS to be a single canned spell, plain and simple.

I don't think that the snapleaf is a boring wondrous item because I feel that it combines two spell effects in a cool and interesting way, but that's purely a matter of taste.

Contributor

The main thing differentiating the snapleaf from a potion is that the snapleaf has TWO effects built into it, while a potion is ALWAYS a single spell effect. You can't make a potion of invisibility and feather fall, it has to be one or the other--because there isn't a spell that turns you invisible and saves you from falling.


If it differs at all from the spell it emulates, it cannot be a potion. Potions are defined as spells-in-a-bottle. The only thing that is valid as a potion is an item that can be consumed orally to cast a single specific spell on the imbiber only, with no deviation from that allowed. Any other similar item is by definition a wondrous item (rods, staves, wands, and rings are not consumed, and weapons and armor are neither consumed nor generally emulate spells).

Scarab Sages

Ok, so the main thing is, potions only have one effect, ever. That's something I can work with.

Thanks to all who commented and helped guide my learning.

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2009, RPG Superstar Judgernaut

As an example, you could potentially turn a snapleaf into a drinkable item...but it would still be a wondrous item because its actual effects do not simply duplicate a feather fall and invisibility spell, as noted by the duration and activation requirements. If you did turn it into a drinkable item, it would become an elixir, which is still different from a potion.

For instance, if you go down the design path that you're contemplating, why isn't an elixir of love a potion instead? Why is it viewed as a wondrous item? If you examine the reasons why, I think you'll have your answer on why a snapleaf isn't either.

Just my two-cents,
--Neil

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

I actually didn't realize that the unique potions were gone in pathfinder (I came into this discussion with the notion that "potion" was a much fuzzier term than it actually is). Guess I learned something too. :)

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2009, RPG Superstar Judgernaut

Hydro wrote:
I actually didn't realize that the unique potions were gone in pathfinder (I came into this discussion with the notion that "potion" was a much fuzzier term than it actually is). Guess I learned something too. :)

This is an example of that whole "grow as you go" aspect of the RPG Superstar contest. No one...and I mean, no one...comes in fully-formed to take on that mantle. You earn it as you go. And even then, you don't come out fully qualified to write the second edition of the Pathfinder RPG yet, either. ;-)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hydro wrote:
I actually didn't realize that the unique potions were gone in pathfinder (I came into this discussion with the notion that "potion" was a much fuzzier term than it actually is). Guess I learned something too. :)

They were gone in 3.5 as well. Potions were strictly described as "spells in a vial" so to speak. Another thing that disappeared in 3.x was those special scrolls that could be used by any idiot that could read i.e. Scroll of Protection from Dragon Breath.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

LazarX wrote:


They were gone in 3.5 as well.

Okay, apparently I knew even less than I thought I did. That's what I get for using my battered old 3e DMG well into my 3.5 days.

Contributor

LazarX wrote:
They were gone in 3.5 as well. Potions were strictly described as "spells in a vial" so to speak. Another thing that disappeared in 3.x was those special scrolls that could be used by any idiot that could read i.e. Scroll of Protection from Dragon Breath.

I was talking about those in a design meeting last month; I miss them. Of course, there's no reason you can't make a one-shot wondrous item that's in paper form that you "read" as a standard action--it just isn't a spell completion item, which all crafted-with-Scribe-Scroll scrolls are.


So if somebody were to submit a parchment of protection from dragon breath to next years contest could it garner your vote Sean? :0P

Contributor

cwslyclgh wrote:
So if somebody were to submit a parchment of protection from dragon breath to next years contest could it garner your vote Sean? :0P

Depends if it ends up as a spell in a can. ;)

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

I'm surprised nobody's brought up what is, in my opinion, the most important difference between a potion and a wondrous item, and the reason brew potion is a feat at all: the player perspective.

The GM decides which wondrous items exist. A player cannot simply say, "I'm making a glass stick which casts cure light wounds when I break it." A player can ask the GM about it, and the GM might say yes... or might say yes, but you have to spend money on research... or might say no.

But, a potion? Can you cast the spell? Check. Make a potion.

Dark Archive

Lief Clennon wrote:

I'm surprised nobody's brought up what is, in my opinion, the most important difference between a potion and a wondrous item, and the reason brew potion is a feat at all: the player perspective.

The GM decides which wondrous items exist. A player cannot simply say, "I'm making a glass stick which casts cure light wounds when I break it." A player can ask the GM about it, and the GM might say yes... or might say yes, but you have to spend money on research... or might say no.

But, a potion? Can you cast the spell? Check. Make a potion.

Perhaps it's just me but it seems like "potion" is a subset of wondrous item that has a very specific set of attributes:

It usually fits in a bottle and is drunk or consumed for its power.
It duplicates a spell.

But there are certainly potion-like objects that are unique enough to be called something else, hence the elixirs, flasks of unlimited booze, flasks of OMGSNAKES, and assorted herbs, roots, etc. that add to a campaign's flavor.

Kinda like how "spam" or "fast food" can be considered "food." (but some will say it doesn't count - especially if they want you to eat healthier)

Dark Archive

tejón wrote:

I'm surprised nobody's brought up what is, in my opinion, the most important difference between a potion and a wondrous item, and the reason brew potion is a feat at all: the player perspective.

The GM decides which wondrous items exist. A player cannot simply say, "I'm making a glass stick which casts cure light wounds when I break it." A player can ask the GM about it, and the GM might say yes... or might say yes, but you have to spend money on research... or might say no.

But, a potion? Can you cast the spell? Check. Make a potion.

that also depends on your gm : ) The GM can always say "no".


Another difference is that potions technically cost half as much, as a Wondrous Item is supposed to have its cost doubled if it doesn't take up a body slot.


Craft wondrous item is just so much more rewarding to take than brew potion, I would have liked it if you could at least brew some special potions like elixers with that feat as well.


This discussion is reminding me of a nifty item type from WoTC's Frostburn supplement. That book describes Skull Talismans, which like a potion can be crafted with a feat and each store one spell that can be cast on a creature. They're described as an alternative that was developed in climates where potions could freeze.

Just like a potion, it takes a standard action (which provokes AoO) to break it and activate it. But the main difference is that it can store a spell of up to 9th level, as long as the skull is large enough to hold all the inscriptions. It also costs twice as much to craft as a potion would. A creature can also activate the skull by breaking it with an attack, which is why my Gnome Druid has a few storing Enlarge Person that she can drop before wildshaping into a large octopus, so she can easily become a huge octopus with one of her tentacle slaps (depending on how you interpret the rules, I suppose...)

The point is, I don't see why a reasonable GM wouldn't allow a Craft Swizzlestick feat, or something similar for a change of flavor, as long as the activation rules and spell storing effects were all identical to a potion. Same thing with a wand or a scroll, really.

Of course, as we've seen, the real difference with a Wondrous Item is that the effect could be anything, as determined by the author (or the GM that allows the item into the game). That said, what would be a good guideline for some sort of Brew Double-Potion feat? It couldn't be that game-breaking, at least not with some restrictions or increased costs, right?

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Question about the difference between a potion and a 1 use wondrous item All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.