I'm not sure I'm understanding somethings about item creation correctly.
Let's say we have a 1st level gnome alchemist who rolled well and has a total of of 18 int. He takes skill focus: Craft (Alchemy), and Obsessive: Craft (Alchemy). So he has a Craft (Alchemy) skill of 1+3+1+4+3+2=14, so he can take 10 for an automatic result of 24. For the sake of my question he has unlimited funds.
Ok, he wants to make a 1st level Cure light Wounds potion. Easy peasy he has the formulae and meets all the prereqs, it's a DC 6 skill check to create.
Next, he wants to create a 1st level Magic Fang potion. This isn't he knows, in fact it's not even on his formulae list. Potions however are neither spell trigger or spell completion so he should be able to carry on without the missing prereq. The DC to create the potion is now 5 higher for the missing prereq making it DC 11 to create. Still well within his automatic result of 24. So he can do this with no problem?
Finally, he decides he needs a powerful potion. The party fighter has been irritating him and our alchemist decides there needs to be a "mislabeling accident". Time to make a potion of Inflict Serious Wounds, this is a spell he can't possibly know as a formulae and isn't high enough level to use even if he could. It would have a minimum CL of 5, +5 for crafting, +5 for not knowing the spell, +5 for not meeting the Caster Level, for a grand total of DC20 to create, which he still beats by taking 10. So assuming he has the 375gp necessary for his nefarious scheme, does this actually work?
Yes. I have not seen anything in the rules that prevent taking 10. IIRC the developers are supposed to handle magic item creation in a future blog so that might change, but it is legal for now.
Ok, he wants to make a 1st level Cure light Wounds potion. Easy peasy he has the formulae and meets all the prereqs, it's a DC 6 skill check to create.
Yup.
Next, he wants to create a 1st level Magic Fang potion. This isn't he knows, in fact it's not even on his formulae list. Potions however are neither spell trigger or spell completion so he should be able to carry on without the missing prereq. The DC to create the potion is now 5 higher for the missing prereq making it DC 11 to create. Still well within his automatic result of 24. So he can do this with no problem?
Finally, he decides he needs a powerful potion. The party fighter has been irritating him and our alchemist decides there needs to be a "mislabeling accident". Time to make a potion of Inflict Serious Wounds, this is a spell he can't possibly know as a formulae and isn't high enough level to use even if he could. It would have a minimum CL of 5, +5 for crafting, +5 for not knowing the spell, +5 for not meeting the Caster Level, for a grand total of DC20 to create, which he still beats by taking 10. So assuming he has the 375gp necessary for his nefarious scheme, does this actually work?
Actually, you can't create a potion without knowing or having the spell required. The spell itself isn't a requirement or prerequisite that can be bypassed, it's a special condition that has to be met. Specifically, it's not a prerequisite listed in the item's description. It's similar to the requirement that a character's caster level must 3x the enhancement value he or she places on a weapon or armor.
Ok, he wants to make a 1st level Cure light Wounds potion. Easy peasy he has the formulae and meets all the prereqs, it's a DC 6 skill check to create.Yup.
Actually, you can't create a potion without knowing or having the spell required. The spell itself isn't a requirement or prerequisite that can be bypassed, it's a special condition that has to be met. Specifically, it's not a prerequisite listed in the item's description. It's similar to the requirement that a character's caster level must 3x the enhancement value he or she places on a weapon or armor.Next, he wants to create a 1st level Magic Fang potion. This isn't he knows, in fact it's not even on his formulae list. Potions however are neither spell trigger or spell completion so he should be able to carry on without the missing prereq. The DC to create the potion is now 5 higher for the missing prereq making it DC 11 to create. Still well within his automatic result of 24. So he can do this with no problem?
Finally, he decides he needs a powerful potion. The party fighter has been irritating him and our alchemist decides there needs to be a "mislabeling accident". Time to make a potion of Inflict Serious Wounds, this is a spell he can't possibly know as a formulae and isn't high enough level to use even if he could. It would have a minimum CL of 5, +5 for crafting, +5 for not knowing the spell, +5 for not meeting the Caster Level, for a grand total of DC20 to create, which he still beats by taking 10. So assuming he has the 375gp necessary for his nefarious scheme, does this actually work?
That is incorrect by RAW.
In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.
Use Activated: This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.
A potion is not a spell-trigger or a spell-completion item. I think it is silly for you to be able to create a potion that way, but the rules support it.
A potion is not a spell-trigger or a spell-completion item. I think it is silly for you to be able to create a potion that way, but the rules support it.
I'm not saying it is. The text that disallows waiving the spell is found elsewhere:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.
This is the section that allows prerequisites to be ignored. However, the section I bolded it very specific. It specifies that the only prerequisites that can be bypassed are those in an items description.
Now then, let me ask you this: do potions have item descriptions?
It's a loophole to the loophole, I know. It's questionable, but what about crafting isn't at the moment? However, based on the specific wording, by the RAW the spell itself is not something that can be ignored when brewing a potion.
A potion is not a spell-trigger or a spell-completion item. I think it is silly for you to be able to create a potion that way, but the rules support it.I'm not saying it is. The text that disallows waiving the spell is found elsewhere:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.
This is the section that allows prerequisites to be ignored. However, the section I bolded it very specific. It specifies that the only prerequisites that can be bypassed are those in an items description.
Now then, let me ask you this: do potions have item descriptions?
It's a loophole to the loophole, I know. It's questionable, but what about crafting isn't at the moment? However, based on the specific wording, by the RAW the spell itself is not something that can be ignored when brewing a potion.
Yes potions have item descriptions. All magic items do. If you look at each magic item type it has the prereqs listed.
As an example.
Creating Potions
The creator of a potion needs a level working surface and at least a few containers in which to mix liquids, as well as a source of heat to boil the brew. In addition, he needs ingredients. The costs for materials and ingredients are subsumed in the cost for brewing the potion: 25 gp × the level of the spell × the level of the caster.All ingredients and materials used to brew a potion must be fresh and unused. The character must pay the full cost for brewing each potion. (Economies of scale do not apply.)
The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.
The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion (or must know the spell, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) and must provide any material component or focus the spell requires.
Material components are consumed when he begins working, but a focus is not. (A focus used in brewing a potion can be reused.) The act of brewing triggers the prepared spell, making it unavailable for casting until the character has rested and regained spells. (That is, that spell slot is expended from the caster's currently prepared spells, just as if it had been cast.) Brewing a potion requires 1 day.
Item Creation Feat Required: Brew Potion.
Skill Used in Creation: Spellcraft or Craft (alchemy)
It may be a loophole, but until errata comes out it is still a rule, and there is no evidence so far that it is a loophole.
|
A potion is not a spell-trigger or a spell-completion item. I think it is silly for you to be able to create a potion that way, but the rules support it.I'm not saying it is. The text that disallows waiving the spell is found elsewhere:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.
This is the section that allows prerequisites to be ignored. However, the section I bolded it very specific. It specifies that the only prerequisites that can be bypassed are those in an items description.
Now then, let me ask you this: do potions have item descriptions?
It's a loophole to the loophole, I know. It's questionable, but what about crafting isn't at the moment? However, based on the specific wording, by the RAW the spell itself is not something that can be ignored when brewing a potion.
I have to disagree here, and you actually quoted the part that proves my point.
Your bolded comment "Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created." states that these are prerequisites, and the very next sentence states that "The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory."
So if it is a pre-req and each pre-req you don't meet raises the DC by +5, then not having the spell on your list just makes it +5 harder to make.
The following sentence specifically states the ONLY exception to the pre-req requirement rule is the item creation feat. I fail to see how by RAW you think having the spell on your list is an additional exception.
Yes potions have item descriptions. All magic items do. If you look at each magic item type it has the prereqs listed.
As an example.
That's not an item description. And if it were, then what are the individual entries for, say, wondrous items?
That's simply the directions for creation of a specific type of item. It doesn't describe any items.
I have to disagree here, and you actually quoted the part that proves my point ...
... So if it is a pre-req and each pre-req you don't meet raises the DC by +5, then not having the spell on your list just makes it +5 harder to make.
I would agree with you, if the spell was listed as a prerequisite to create the item, as defined by the relevant section. However, per a strict reading of the rules, it doesn't fall into that category. It's reasonable to assume that it is, but by a strict reading of the rules that's not the reality.
This is why the official clarification is so desperately needed. We know what the rules say. And then we know that are contradicted elsewhere. We also know they probably don't mean what they say. Likely not in either place. Loopholes upon even greater loopholes, none of which lead to anything that really makes sense.
In regards to the correctness of the method used to create the potion, there is no raw violation of the item creation rules in your nefarious plot. I think.
In regards to the correctness of the DC to create, 5 + (min caster level) + (unmet prereq)*(5) is also correct, but the min. caster level of a 3rd level spell for an alchemist is 7, so in conclusion,
5+7+ 5(unknown spell)+ 5(insufficient caster level for spell) +5(caster level higher than your own level)=27
The last two prereq additions are somewhat circular, since you must set the caster level at 1st because it cannot be higher than your own level, but because the caster level for that spell must be higher than your own level, it does not meet either prerequisite. On the plus side, i don't think you have to add a +5 to the DC just because you're crafting it (unless "+5 crafting" is in regards to another prereq I didn't catch, bringing the total to 32).
OR, a conscientious DM might rule an additional +5 because that spell is not even a class spell for an alchemist, but this is not a raw ruling. Besides an alchemist can learn any "potionable" spell from a wizard's spellbook.
I believe, however, that the nefarious plot can still be executed as planned with a few more modifiers anyways, such as mwk tools, or traits, or maybe feat selection. I think the item creation DC settings are a little vague and complex anyways.
Yes potions have item descriptions. All magic items do. If you look at each magic item type it has the prereqs listed.
As an example.That's not an item description. And if it were, then what are the individual entries for, say, wondrous items?
That's simply the directions for creation of a specific type of item. It doesn't describe any items.
The magic item creation is the only place to get the crafting prereq so of course it is what was being referred to.
As for the wondrous items question
Creating Wondrous ItemsTo create a wondrous item, a character usually needs some sort of equipment or tools to work on the item. She also needs a supply of materials, the most obvious being the item itself or the pieces of the item to be assembled. The cost for the materials is subsumed in the cost for creating the item. Wondrous item costs are difficult to determine. Refer to Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values and use the item prices in the item descriptions as a guideline. Creating an item costs half the market value listed.
If spells are involved in the prerequisites for making the item, the creator must have prepared the spells to be cast (or must know the spells, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) but need not provide any material components or focuses the spells require. The act of working on the item triggers the prepared spells, making them unavailable for casting during each day of the item's creation. (That is, those spell slots are expended from the caster's currently prepared spells, just as if they had been cast.)
Creating some items may entail other prerequisites beyond or other than spellcasting. See the individual descriptions for details.
Crafting a wondrous item requires 1 day for each 1,000 gp of the base price.
Item Creation Feat Required: Craft Wondrous Item.
Skill Used In Creation: Spellcraft or an applicable Craft or Profession skill check.
If you want to say the prereq don't exist so potions can't be created then I can argue that since prereqs are just obstacles to overcome that a lack of prereqs equals a lack of obstacles to overcome.
As an example some feats don't have prereqs so that means anyone can take them.
A potion is not a spell-trigger or a spell-completion item. I think it is silly for you to be able to create a potion that way, but the rules support it.I'm not saying it is. The text that disallows waiving the spell is found elsewhere:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.
This is the section that allows prerequisites to be ignored. However, the section I bolded it very specific. It specifies that the only prerequisites that can be bypassed are those in an items description.
Now then, let me ask you this: do potions have item descriptions?
It's a loophole to the loophole, I know. It's questionable, but what about crafting isn't at the moment? However, based on the specific wording, by the RAW the spell itself is not something that can be ignored when brewing a potion.
Doesn't the same section you quoted specifically mention that spell-completion items as having spell prerequisites. The only spell-completion items I know of are scrolls and they don't have a prereq right up anymore than potions do. That leads me to the the assumption that since they are generic items that duplicate specific spells the prereq is presumed to be the spell in question. If this isn't the case wouldn't this mean the prohibition on crafting scrolls without the prerequisite spell would be meaningless since there isn't a write up listing it by your logic?
If you want to say the prereq don't exist so potions can't be created then I can argue that since prereqs are just obstacles to overcome that a lack of prereqs equals a lack of obstacles to overcome.
As an example some feats don't have prereqs so that means anyone can take them.
I actually agree with this: no prerequisites means no obstacles to overcome, at least as the game defines prerequisites. However, the instructions for brewing a potion contains a line that forces a crafter to know/prepare the spell:
The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion ...
The spell isn't considered a prerequisite, as the term is used to define a requirement specifically listed in an item's description. However, it is still a requirement of making the potion. And since only prerequisites are defined as being able to be bypassed, knowing the spell cannot.
Doesn't the same section you quoted specifically mention that spell-completion items as having spell prerequisites. The only spell-completion items I know of are scrolls and they don't have a prereq right up anymore than potions do. That leads me to the the assumption that since they are generic items that duplicate specific spells the prereq is presumed to be the spell in question. If this isn't the case wouldn't this mean the prohibition on crafting scrolls without the prerequisite spell would be meaningless since there isn't a write up listing it by your logic?
That's the thing; everyone pretty much agrees the logic is off base with item crafting. That's why, from a rules standpoint, we can only look at the specific text for each item, and consider the process for creating different items separate. Due to the complexity and sheer magnitude of contradictions, this is a topic where we cannot draw conclusions from similar text or processes in the game, for the simple fact that valid arguments can almost always be found to contradict such conclusions.
I'd think that, raw, there are too many undefinable terms to conclusively agree on what prereqs can be converted to DC and which ones can't, at least in terms of spell knowledge, since potions don't require a spellcraft check to use, yet they do require the spell to be known, like a spell completion/trigger item.
i'd think that, rai, an element of experimentation in the creative process of alchemy and potion making would allow for an alchemist to create a potion of a spell he or she did not know, and that this experimentation would be difficult and unreliable until he or she had developed an appropriate formula at the correct character level.
In regards to the correctness of the method used to create the potion, there is no raw violation of the item creation rules in your nefarious plot. I think.
In regards to the correctness of the DC to create, 5 + (min caster level) + (unmet prereq)*(5) is also correct, but the min. caster level of a 3rd level spell for an alchemist is 7, so in conclusion,
5+7+ 5(unknown spell)+ 5(insufficient caster level for spell) +5(caster level higher than your own level)=27
The last two prereq additions are somewhat circular, since you must set the caster level at 1st because it cannot be higher than your own level, but because the caster level for that spell must be higher than your own level, it does not meet either prerequisite. On the plus side, i don't think you have to add a +5 to the DC just because you're crafting it (unless "+5 crafting" is in regards to another prereq I didn't catch, bringing the total to 32).
OR, a conscientious DM might rule an additional +5 because that spell is not even a class spell for an alchemist, but this is not a raw ruling. Besides an alchemist can learn any "potionable" spell from a wizard's spellbook.
I believe, however, that the nefarious plot can still be executed as planned with a few more modifiers anyways, such as mwk tools, or traits, or maybe feat selection. I think the item creation DC settings are a little vague and complex anyways.
"For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the
caster level of an item at any number high enough to castthe stored spell but not higher than her own caster level."
Since the spell isn't on his list, why would we assume it would have to be based on the alchemist's caster level? So the minimum caster level of whoever can cast it most efficiently I would assume be sufficient.
The default check to create items is 5+CL of the item as far as I understand it.
Wouldn't adding +5 for insufficient caster level, and +5 for a caster level higher than your own be double jeopardy?
If you want to say the prereq don't exist so potions can't be created then I can argue that since prereqs are just obstacles to overcome that a lack of prereqs equals a lack of obstacles to overcome.
As an example some feats don't have prereqs so that means anyone can take them.I actually agree with this: no prerequisites means no obstacles to overcome, at least as the game defines prerequisites. However, the instructions for brewing a potion contains a line that forces a crafter to know/prepare the spell:
The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion ......
The line is also in the other items, and the rule I quoted earlier specifically says only certain items are completely required to have that obligation filled. The potion like the armor and weapons has that line you just quoted, but my quote nullifies it. Of course like I said there will be blog on magic items eventually so all will be revealed. I really do hope potions require the spell, but the way I read it, is that they do not require it.
Wouldn't adding +5 for insufficient caster level, and +5 for a caster level higher than your own be double jeopardy?
You don't actually increase the difficulty by 5 for failing to meet the caster level at all. There's at least one developer post that's been made stating that caster level is not a prerequisite for an item's creation. It's included simply to determine the default skill DC. That said, for potions, scrolls, and wands you cannot set the caster level higher than your own at all.
"For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the
caster level of an item at any number high enough to cast
the stored spell but not higher than her own caster level."
Since the spell isn't on his list, why would we assume it would have to be based on the alchemist's caster level? So the minimum caster level of whoever can cast it most efficiently I would assume be sufficient.
The default check to create items is 5+CL of the item as far as I understand it.
Wouldn't adding +5 for insufficient caster level, and +5 for a caster level higher than your own be double jeopardy?
Well, I'd assume we'd use the alchemist's CL for the spell because he's the one creating the potion using his magical telent, but you could use the a wizard's instead, I guess-- if the alchemist is considered as good as potion making as a wizard is at casting spells, then perhaps you could translate the CL using the wizard's CL, which makes sense, especially if you use a wizard's spellbook to learn the inflict spell (though that would lower the DC by 5 anyways!).
I know it sounds circular, but, raw, you can't set your own CL to 7, of course, so there's the first +5, but you must set it at CL 7 anyways, so there's the other +5. You could rule that it's not fair to charge a character twice for similar prereqs, and I feel the same way, although it makes crafting items uncomfortably easy for me!
boy I screwed up the BBCode on that last post, sorry!
Anyways if the developers have a cited precedence then that's the rule.
Doesn't the same section you quoted specifically mention that spell-completion items as having spell prerequisites. The only spell-completion items I know of are scrolls and they don't have a prereq right up anymore than potions do. That leads me to the the assumption that since they are generic items that duplicate specific spells the prereq is presumed to be the spell in question. If this isn't the case wouldn't this mean the prohibition on crafting scrolls without the prerequisite spell would be meaningless since there isn't a write up listing it by your logic?That's the thing; everyone pretty much agrees the logic is off base with item crafting. That's why, from a rules standpoint, we can only look at the specific text for each item, and consider the process for creating different items separate. Due to the complexity and sheer magnitude of contradictions, this is a topic where we cannot draw conclusions from similar text or processes in the game, for the simple fact that valid arguments can almost always be found to contradict such conclusions.
Also we don't have a potion write up to make a judgment as to what its prerequisites are or not. How can you justify the statement that potions do not have the spell as a prerequisite if there is not entry to base that on?
Just to be clear then, we're not actually looking at a specific text or example, but rather an absence of data rendering it impossible to make a definitive statement one way or the other as to whether potions have spells as prerequisites or not. Is that a fair statement?
The line is also in the other items ...
Doesn't matter, because in the case of those other items the spell is included as a prerequisite within the item's description, making it applicable to waive at a +5 increase to the DC.
As I said, currently we can't look at other items for clarification in such matters; there are too many different and conflicting variables. You instead have to look at the logic of the item on an individual basis:
EDIT Changed to group arguments and conclusions.
Also we don't have a potion write up to make a judgment as to what its prerequisites are or not. How can you justify the statement that potions do not have the spell as a prerequisite if there is not entry to base that on?
Because prerequisites are defined specifically as appearing within an item's description. No description, no prerequisites.
Just to be clear then, we're not actually looking at a specific text or example, but rather an absence of data rendering it impossible to make a definitive statement one way or the other as to whether potions have spells as prerequisites or not. Is that a fair statement?
Not quite. We're looking at highly convoluted and contradicting information. A definitive answer is present, but only through a strict application of logic without any unintentional bias or supposition based on similar occurrences. However, even when that definitive answer is found, it does not make as much sense as it should; the logic is correct, and as a strict interpretation of the rules the process is correct, but the inconsistencies make it appear wrong. Make it feel wrong.
Ultimately, the blog post cannot come soon enough.
Doesn't matter, because in the case of those other items the spell is included as a prerequisite within the item's description, making it applicable to waive at a +5 increase to the DC.
As I said, currently we can't look at other items for clarification in such matters; there are too many different and conflicting variables. You instead have to look at the logic of the item on an individual basis:
Prerequisites to create items can be waived
Prerequisites are specified as appearing within an item's description
Potions do not have item descriptions
Therefore potions do not have prerequisites
Therefore the spell to be placed in the potion is not considered a prerequisite
Therefore the spell to be placed within the potion cannot be waived. Additionally:
In order to create a potion, the crafter must have prepared or know the spell to be placed within a potion
That makes sense to me! I don't think it can get any clearer than that.
In regards to the alchemist specifically, alchemists don't know "spells,' they know formulae, which can get converted from spells, but aren't spells, even though they are referred to as extracts from spells. Does this mean that formulae still count as spells?
... You instead have to look at the logic of the item on an individual basis:...
I think we started arguing semantics as opposed to logic when the item description issue came up. Logically I think the magic item section would be where you go to see what is needed to create the item. You look at the main section, and the individual magic item type section. That is now I came to my conclusion.
I have it houseruled in my game that the spell is needed, just because I can't wrap my head around the idea of creating a potion of a spell you can't cast, but I try to be objective when in the rules forum.
Note that your quote said "Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions." That is enough for me to know that not expecting a printed statblock of every potion is reasonable. All it would do is waste book space. They don't even list individual potion prices anymore like 3.5 did.
The only other option is to say that potions are not items since "all" is pretty specific.
edit:If it said all items that have descriptions you would have more ground to stand on and good night.
In regards to the alchemist specifically, alchemists don't know "spells,' they know formulae, which can get converted from spells, but aren't spells, even though they are referred to as extracts from spells. Does this mean that formulae still count as spells?
That is a good question. I have a feeling it's already been addressed in the FAQ or a post somewhere, but I'm not going to look for it until tomorrow. I have to take pictures at an Easter Egg hunt in six hours. I'm going to bed now.
Night all.
I feel like the whole "no description, no prerequisites" to be a big assumption. Logic based on an assumption is only true if the assumption is true, and I just don't see how we can know. I personally think it confuses the issue to state it as fact.
One more before bed.
Note that your quote said "Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions." That is enough for me to know that not expecting a printed statblock of every potion is reasonable. All it would do is waste book space. They don't even list individual potion prices anymore like 3.5 did.
The statement "Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions." does create a logical fallacy, an obvious inconsistency that doesn't make sense since potions don't have the requisite description to enumerate any prerequisites. However, to take this to mean that prerequisites exist despite lack of a description is an faulty argument, a leap made without basis in logic.
The statement can serve as a logical argument, but it does not generate, nor contribute to, any logical conclusions in this instance. Other than, possibly, that potions cannot be created at all, because the required prerequisites do not exist.
I feel like the whole "no description, no prerequisites" to be a big assumption. Logic based on an assumption is only true if the assumption is true, and I just don't see how we can know. I personally think it confuses the issue to state it as fact.
As I said, it doesn't really make sense. However, it's not really an assumption; can you show me where the description of a potion of cure light wounds lists the spell of the same name as a prerequisite? Because the potion lacks any description at all, it does not list any prerequisites. That's a simple statement of fact.
OK, now I'm really off to bed. Turning off the computer n ...
I have it houseruled in my game that the spell is needed, just because I can't wrap my head around the idea of creating a potion of a spell you can't cast, but I try to be objective when in the rules forum.
As a total aside, this was actually an implication I really liked (as I understood the rules). I envisioned when it came time to brew up a potion, you break out your equipment, go through your list of ingredients, cross referencing the appropriate recipes until you get something to the effect of what you want. If you happen to know the spell that does the same thing and use it in the brewing process it just makes the whole thing easier. Less trapping a spell in a potion and more duplicating it with a potion.
That old hag living up in the hills might be able to cast a fly spell, but if you give her a day, an eye of newt, and some bat wings she'll whip an oil for you that can.
One more before bed.
Note that your quote said "Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions." That is enough for me to know that not expecting a printed statblock of every potion is reasonable. All it would do is waste book space. They don't even list individual potion prices anymore like 3.5 did.The statement "Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions." does create a logical fallacy, an obvious inconsistency that doesn't make sense since potions don't have the requisite description to enumerate any prerequisites. However, to take this to mean that prerequisites exist despite lack of a description is an faulty argument, a leap made without basis in logic.
The statement can serve as a logical argument, but it does not generate, nor contribute to, any logical conclusions in this instance. Other than, possibly, that potions cannot be created at all, because the required prerequisites do not exist.
Hey, I thought you said you were going to bed. :)
In all seriousness though I think the quote you have been using was never intended to mean all items except potions adhere to the general magic item creation rules. I think it was simply overlooked that potions don't have descriptions. It should be reworded of course so the RAW and RAI make sense, at least as much as possible anyway.
What I hope happens is that the statement changes to "even though potions are use activated the actual spell is still required.", or something similar.