The price of 1 / day permanent items vs consumables


Rules Discussion

51 to 100 of 116 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
1/day definitely are the most dependable or reliable; but you can craft consumables in batches of 4 and sell them for 50% a piece. While a Wand of Mage Armor is obviously the way to go, having a handful of consumables ends up giving more buffer space than 1/day items can.

it takes the same time to craft a batch (4) and costs about the same, or very slightly less, as a 1/day item.

so, if you craft a batch because you expect to get a "handful" of uses of them, you're almost universally better off crafting that 1/day because after just 4-5 uses of the 1/day, you're already pulling ahead.

i mean, i assume you'd craft a "batch" if you expect at least 4 uses of said effect. And at 5 uses, the permanent pulls ahead, so why not enjoy it for the rest of your career as well...

That's why my personal "houserule/errata proposition" was actually just to change the price to be "per batch".

then the 4-5 uses =permanet, which seems way off and makes crafting them irrelevant, switches to 16-20 use =permanent. Which does actually have a tangible difference, AND it promotes crafting them as well (since now, for a "handful" of uses, consumables are better than a permanent)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd rather buy extra wands to be honest.

Part of the problem is that even without worrying about wands or daily items, consumables are ridiculously expensive. Most of your permanent gear upgrades are worth 4-6 on level consumables. The average consumable is worth 2-3 weeks worth of downtime using the Earn Income activity with an at-level task. Three weeks, one potion.

It gets muddy because it's hard to directly compare pieces of gear that do entirely different things, but... using one potion per encounter for a day is going to effectively set you back a whole level of magic weapons compared to someone who doesn't... or three months of downtime if you're using Earn Income to do it.

I get that consumables shouldn't be too freely available, but I just find it really hard to justify buying them with the way they're currently priced.


Squiggit wrote:
using one potion per encounter for a day is going to effectively set you back a whole level of magic weapons compared to someone who doesn't...

Do you honestly believe that this is what people are saying they would do? Because from the examples posted it seems pretty clear that it isn't what people are saying they would do.


shroudb wrote:

so, do you also think that you can't use first aid on yourself to stop a bleeding? But you can full on use TReat wounds and every other medicine skill on yourself?

because "first aid" also uses the same exact language.

I do think you can't use first aid on yourself because it uses the same exact language - but treat disease and treat poison don't, and then treat wounds explicitly states you can target yourself instead of just leaving it at "one living creature" which could be interpreted to include the one using the action.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hoarding all your money to buy healer's gloves sounds great, but falls apart if you ever need two heals in one day.

Or die because you didn't have healing before that.

Consistent usability is generally better for that purpose - as it should be - but lacks the flexibility and reusability potential of the consumables. And of course there's nothing stopping you from using both.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
using one potion per encounter for a day is going to effectively set you back a whole level of magic weapons compared to someone who doesn't...
Do you honestly believe that this is what people are saying they would do? Because from the examples posted it seems pretty clear that it isn't what people are saying they would do.

No, I don't. That's the point though.

Throwing one acid flask per fight is not exactly an absurd amount of firepower, I mean the Alchemist can literally spam them at higher levels even and isn't considered any sort of DPR god.

Yet if you try anything like this in 2e you will absolutely bankrupt yourself in a couple of days at best and completely trash your ability to keep up with basic magic items. Even dropping to one consumable a day is still putting some serious strain on your bank account in the long run.


Squiggit wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
using one potion per encounter for a day is going to effectively set you back a whole level of magic weapons compared to someone who doesn't...
Do you honestly believe that this is what people are saying they would do? Because from the examples posted it seems pretty clear that it isn't what people are saying they would do.
No, I don't. That's the point though.

So your point is that people can't use consumables in some ridiculous hypothesised way? I mean, sure, you're right. But why make that the point?

I've never seen anyone in PF1e use consumables every fight as their primary method of contributing to a fight. Perhaps you have. And perhaps you enjoyed it in which case I can understand why your sad that it can't be done in PF2e. But I can honestly say I've never seen anyone use consumables in the way your saying (outside of wands of CLW which are no longer mandatory in the adventurer's kit) and I don't understand why they would.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
using one potion per encounter for a day is going to effectively set you back a whole level of magic weapons compared to someone who doesn't...
Do you honestly believe that this is what people are saying they would do? Because from the examples posted it seems pretty clear that it isn't what people are saying they would do.
No, I don't. That's the point though.
So your point is that people can't use consumables in some ridiculous hypothesised way? I mean, sure, you're right. But why make that the point?

Why is using one consumable per fight ridiculous? Am I missing something here? If you've been convinced that one consumable per fight is ridiculous, then that seems like proof to me that you've become so indoctrinated by expensive consumables that you don't even consider other possibilities.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

In my experience, most players in most RPGs instinctively refuse to use consumables apart from the most cost-efficient healing items (because, even if it seems like an emergency, what if a bigger emergency comes along later?) or just sell them because they like permanent items better. If you save your life with a Potion of Fly, you've lost hundreds of gold pieces forever, and that's no fun; it makes victory feel like a failure.

So maybe a game where this attitude is actually the optimal strategy is a good thing.


Using the WBL chart NOT as the absolute whole amount your players' party is destined to earn for the entire campaign life, but rather as the intended end result by the time they reach Level X in the chart might help with this issue.

That way, your character's magic item ownership potential is NOT "ruined forever" because you "wasted" potions frequently...


Strill wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
using one potion per encounter for a day is going to effectively set you back a whole level of magic weapons compared to someone who doesn't...
Do you honestly believe that this is what people are saying they would do? Because from the examples posted it seems pretty clear that it isn't what people are saying they would do.
No, I don't. That's the point though.
So your point is that people can't use consumables in some ridiculous hypothesised way? I mean, sure, you're right. But why make that the point?
Why is using one consumable per fight ridiculous? Am I missing something here?

I've just never seen it. Either you have better things to be doing in a fight or the fight is so meaningless your just using up s%+!ty consumables you have no purpose for and arent worth selling (e.g. wizards using up low level scrolls cause he might as well do that or go on delay for the fight).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Downie wrote:
If you save your life with a Potion of Fly, you've lost hundreds of gold pieces forever, and that's no fun; it makes victory feel like a failure.

...uh... it... what?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thenobledrake wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
If you save your life with a Potion of Fly, you've lost hundreds of gold pieces forever, and that's no fun; it makes victory feel like a failure.
...uh... it... what?

Potion of Flying 100gp.

Greater Potion of Flying 1,000gp.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=189


Saros Palanthios wrote:

LOL at the way this thread is derailing in a completely different direction than the last one

apparently the topic of consumable prices is just cursed

If you mean we haven't started arguing over how you turn stone into whisky yet, there is still time :)

More seriously (but not a whole lot more), I can always start a third thread...


Cyouni wrote:

Hoarding all your money to buy healer's gloves sounds great, but falls apart if you ever need two heals in one day.

Or die because you didn't have healing before that.

Consistent usability is generally better for that purpose - as it should be - but lacks the flexibility and reusability potential of the consumables. And of course there's nothing stopping you from using both.

Yes, but please don't use healing to justify the general price structure.


I think a big realization for me is that I want to know whether or not:

1. consumables exist in game to be items used exclusively in one shot adventures and otherwise as coin boxes dressed up in fancy clothing to avoid the repetition of just finding more gold all the time?

2. Consumables are priced out of utility for most characters as a default so that characters like alchemists will be able to gain special feats and abilities to use them regularly but doing so requires actual character investment, not just wealth investment. (wizards crafting wands and scrolls for example).

3. The rules are fine, most people don't look this deeply at the wealth system and will use a potion because they have it, and why not, and who cares if it could have been sold for something better, something better is probably hiding in the next treasure chest anyway, and clearly the problem is me and my table and I need to figure out the house rules that will keep coin counter from being the mini-game which breaks the campaign.


Unicore wrote:
I think a big realization for me is that I want to know whether or not .... most people don't look this deeply at the wealth system and will use a potion because they have it, and why not, and who cares if it could have been sold for something better

Or perhaps your understanding of the situation is incorrect.

You would have to give up a 6th level consumable to get a 2nd level magic item (magic items are basically non-existant at level 1). And there's nothing really groundbreaking for a level 1 item that I would feel I have to absolutely sell my 6th level consumable for. Because that's what your comparing it to. It's not "sell my consumable and get an equal level item" it's "sell my consumable and get a substantially lower level item". Now of course you could sell every consumable you got at that entire level (plus a bit extra) and buy an equal level item. But is that 1 item really worth the cost of 8 different situational abilities and forgoing ALL consumables for more than 1 level? I've only seen a couple of people making that argument, and they're basing it off theorycraft rather than actual play.

I think there's a very good chance we are going to find out that consumables are actually appropriately priced and are worth hanging on to for that time when they come up. Of course, we won't know for sure without months of playing the game. Or we can just confidently proclaim we already know the answer and ignore everything that might be raised counter to that point.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
Unicore wrote:
I think a big realization for me is that I want to know whether or not .... most people don't look this deeply at the wealth system and will use a potion because they have it, and why not, and who cares if it could have been sold for something better

Or perhaps your understanding of the situation is incorrect.

You would have to give up a 6th level consumable to get a 2nd level magic item (magic items are basically non-existant at level 1). And there's nothing really groundbreaking for a level 1 item that I would feel I have to absolutely sell my 6th level consumable for. Because that's what your comparing it to. It's not "sell my consumable and get an equal level item" it's "sell my consumable and get a substantially lower level item". Now of course you could sell every consumable you got at that entire level (plus a bit extra) and buy an equal level item. But is that 1 item really worth the cost of 8 different situational abilities and forgoing ALL consumables for more than 1 level? I've only seen a couple of people making that argument, and they're basing it off theorycraft rather than actual play.

I think there's a very good chance we are going to find out that consumables are actually appropriately priced and are worth hanging on to for that time when they come up. Of course, we won't know for sure without months of playing the game. Or we can just confidently proclaim we already know the answer and ignore everything that might be raised counter to that point.

I did not mean for my option 3 to sound sarcastic. I actually meant that it was a legitimate possibility that everyone else does think this is fine and the problem is me and my table. I'll take your response as a vote for that.

Level 6 consumables are:

Salve of Antiparalysis - 40gp

level 6 Healing potion - 50gp

Potion of resistance - 45gp

potion of swimming - 50gp

Truth potion - 46gp

Iron cube - 50gp

Dust of appearance -50gp

alchemical: Antiplague, antidote, - 35gp

the alchemical ones actually feel pretty useful for the cost and I have not looked closely enough at alchemy in PF2 to say whether it is a problem or not. It could be great. 45-50gp for the equivalent of 2nd levels spells with a decent duration boost over 12gp scrolls? Maybe that is close enough for most tables to hold on to when they find them (probably not my table). Will anyone buy or make them? Certainly not, right?
Which is why I think option 2 might be true and we just don't see it yet: There will be classes or feats that make crafting potions much more affordable/in the scroll range.


Unicore wrote:
I actually meant that it was a legitimate possibility that everyone else does think this is fine and the problem is me and my table.

Can you go into detail as to what the actual problem has been at your table? Has your group been selling high level consumables for low level permanent magic items? Have they been hoarding up all their consumables until they could convert it into gold?

I've seen a lot of yelling on this topic and no actual tabletop accounts so I'd definitely be interested to hear what problems your group has been having (also out of interest what level they are and how long you've been playing PF2e for. That could help me anticipate problems down the road).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Strill wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
If you save your life with a Potion of Fly, you've lost hundreds of gold pieces forever, and that's no fun; it makes victory feel like a failure.
...uh... it... what?

Potion of Flying 100gp.

Greater Potion of Flying 1,000gp.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=189

It was not the pricing of potions I was dumbstruck with confusion by, but thank you for trying to assist.

It's the idea that victory could be made to feel like failure because a thing designed to be used had been used to make it happen. The alternative being the character being a corpse with a nice potion on it for someone else to come along and loot, I am fully lost how a player could feel like it is a failure to have succeeded at the expense of a potion - and confused as to why if a player did feel that way it would be treated as anything other than "that's a you problem, dude. gotta get over that."

The Exchange

One thing to keep in mind is that the games designers appear to assume that characters will spend about 50% of their total wealth on consumables in PF2 (comparison of expected WBL p609 and replacement PC WBL p611).


No, those tables don't support the assumption of that being how characters spend - the only thing those tables have to do with characters spending habits is illustrating what form their income is assumed to have taken.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
Unicore wrote:
I actually meant that it was a legitimate possibility that everyone else does think this is fine and the problem is me and my table.

Can you go into detail as to what the actual problem has been at your table? Has your group been selling high level consumables for low level permanent magic items? Have they been hoarding up all their consumables until they could convert it into gold?

I've seen a lot of yelling on this topic and no actual tabletop accounts so I'd definitely be interested to hear what problems your group has been having (also out of interest what level they are and how long you've been playing PF2e for. That could help me anticipate problems down the road).

when discussing loot and allocation with my homegroup, everyone has shown concerns about this issue.

but it's still too early to have a big enough sample to make a call based on gameplay. It's just a theorycraft call made from the experience of having run groups for over 2 decades for me at this point.

to be fair though, i'm planning on running my homegroup with the "consumable pricing is per batch" house rule, and running a r20 group with "consumable pricing is per raw" and see the direct impact of said extreme inflation and what it will, or will not, do in a game.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
Unicore wrote:
I actually meant that it was a legitimate possibility that everyone else does think this is fine and the problem is me and my table.

Can you go into detail as to what the actual problem has been at your table? Has your group been selling high level consumables for low level permanent magic items? Have they been hoarding up all their consumables until they could convert it into gold?

I've seen a lot of yelling on this topic and no actual tabletop accounts so I'd definitely be interested to hear what problems your group has been having (also out of interest what level they are and how long you've been playing PF2e for. That could help me anticipate problems down the road).

I too don’t have enough PF2 experience yet to say how it will work out. My initial assumption was “just fine.”

But my table quit PF1 after getting half way through Wrath of the righteous, quoting because mythic was a mess, starting hell’s rebels and then realizing that the problems exposed during mythic play were actually a problem with the wand and scroll wizard owning the table and defining the game by always having the right spell ready to go. PF2 has limited what spells can do some, but the economy of “prioritize scrolls and wands over everything but essential math items” feels possibly worsened because all wands are permanent now and very few permanent items actually call for investment.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
So your point is that people can't use consumables in some ridiculous hypothesised way?

I feel like you're making my point for me if you're describing using a couple consumables over the course of an adventuring day, or even 'a' consumable over the course of an adventuring day regularly, as some ridiculous and absurd scenario completely beyond the pale.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

It seems a lot of people are factoring as if the consumables are at level.
The ones you find are.
The ones you buy to use aren't.
(Or shouldn't be, as shown by effects on wealth.)

A 1st level Alchemist's Fire is effective (perhaps necessary) against a Troll (level 5; +10 damage & stalls 20 Regeneration persistently) or even Troll King (level 10; +10 damage & stalls 30 Regeneration persistently; may shake off). Even the splash does a 31-41 h.p. swing if nobody else hit them with fire that round, and 11 damage on a splash is nice.

A 100 g.p. Potion of Fly is hardly anything when you're 15th level, but flying's quite relevant in many emergencies where you can't wait your turn until the PCs who can use wands get to you. Or Water Breathing, 11 g.p.

I really think the game is balanced toward using consumables at level -4 (or even cheaper). With a few exceptions, sell the ones at level.
Whether that's intentional or not is what I'm wondering.


Castilliano wrote:

It seems a lot of people are factoring as if the consumables are at level.

The ones you find are.
The ones you buy to use aren't.
(Or shouldn't be, as shown by effects on wealth.)

A 1st level Alchemist's Fire is effective (perhaps necessary) against a Troll (level 5; +10 damage & stalls 20 Regeneration persistently) or even Troll King (level 10; +10 damage & stalls 30 Regeneration persistently; may shake off). Even the splash does a 31-41 h.p. swing if nobody else hit them with fire that round, and 11 damage on a splash is nice.

A 100 g.p. Potion of Fly is hardly anything when you're 15th level, but flying's quite relevant in many emergencies where you can't wait your turn until the PCs who can use wands get to you. Or Water Breathing, 11 g.p.

I really think the game is balanced toward using consumables at level -4 (or even cheaper). With a few exceptions, sell the ones at level.
Whether that's intentional or not is what I'm wondering.

that plus the crafting issues (why would you ever craft a batch of consumables if you can craft a permanent at same cost) are the main issues, yes.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

The overcharge mechanics of the wand would have been a really cool addition on trinkets, except have it trigger off the first usage instead of the second. Either the item breaks, or it is destroyed. Especially since they were supposed to be primarily a thing for martial characters anyway, it might actually make them feel more with picking up and actually using if there was a 50/50 chance that it was only going to break and that you'd be able to use it again after repairing it.


thenobledrake wrote:
Strill wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
If you save your life with a Potion of Fly, you've lost hundreds of gold pieces forever, and that's no fun; it makes victory feel like a failure.
...uh... it... what?

Potion of Flying 100gp.

Greater Potion of Flying 1,000gp.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=189

It was not the pricing of potions I was dumbstruck with confusion by, but thank you for trying to assist.

It's the idea that victory could be made to feel like failure because a thing designed to be used had been used to make it happen. The alternative being the character being a corpse with a nice potion on it for someone else to come along and loot, I am fully lost how a player could feel like it is a failure to have succeeded at the expense of a potion - and confused as to why if a player did feel that way it would be treated as anything other than "that's a you problem, dude. gotta get over that."

For the price of a Greater Potion of Fly (1,000gp), you could get a wand of Fly (700gp), and cast Fly every single day, while also having 300gp left over. Using the potion is a tremendous waste of resources that you can't get back, and spending that potion in that situation probably loses you more money than you gained from your current adventure.


Yeah that does seem to be problem if you get 1/day perment item that can let you fly for 700gp and a potion of same type costs 1000gp then that seems off. Potion should be 250gp instead and wand for example 1000gp to encourage buying it.

On a sidenote I still see that enconomy of item price is still high prefer if arefacts for example were 1000gp instead of 100,000gp and potions in silvers, make the price seem less extrageted.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm honestly fine if consumables are just supposed to be less of a part of the game. They're fiddly, a bit tricky to track, difficult to divvy up, all just for one usage. I like 1/day wands being the default assumption of the system, it feels more like actual treasure and something you can use and enjoy instead of something you'll avoid using at all costs and feel bad if you actually do finally use it. Potions versus a renewable resource feels too much like Rent-a-center versus just saving up a little more to own something, no matter how cheap they get it's always going to feel like you're being "scammed" a little.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

A greater potion of fly lasts for 1 hour, or as fly 7th, and is a 15th level item (aka level 15 being the minimum you get it, usually).
A wand of fly 4th lasts 1 minute.
A wand of a 7th level spell is 6500 gp.

Zapp wrote:
Cyouni wrote:

Hoarding all your money to buy healer's gloves sounds great, but falls apart if you ever need two heals in one day.

Or die because you didn't have healing before that.

Consistent usability is generally better for that purpose - as it should be - but lacks the flexibility and reusability potential of the consumables. And of course there's nothing stopping you from using both.

Yes, but please don't use healing to justify the general price structure.

This is true of any other consumable versus permanent item. A wand of fly 7th is better if you have to cast it 7 times over 7 days, but sometimes that's not the case. Sometimes you need that twice in a day. Sometimes you need it even more than that.

That's what consumables are good for - being that one-time expenditure that helps to patch holes in a plan.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Strill wrote:
For the price of a Greater Potion of Fly (1,000gp), you could get a wand of Fly (700gp), and cast Fly every single day, while also having 300gp left over.

I must be missing the part of the book where it says 1) all characters always have a spell list, and 2) that spell list always includes the fly spell.

Because in the book I'm reading, it looks like plenty of characters would keep the more expensive potion because the alternative is a 700 gp stick that has no function for them other than perhaps to look cool.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thenobledrake wrote:
Strill wrote:
For the price of a Greater Potion of Fly (1,000gp), you could get a wand of Fly (700gp), and cast Fly every single day, while also having 300gp left over.

I must be missing the part of the book where it says 1) all characters always have a spell list, and 2) that spell list always includes the fly spell.

Because in the book I'm reading, it looks like plenty of characters would keep the more expensive potion because the alternative is a 700 gp stick that has no function for them other than perhaps to look cool.

Then spend 850gp on a pair of Winged Boots.


Cyouni wrote:

A greater potion of fly lasts for 1 hour, or as fly 7th, and is a 15th level item (aka level 15 being the minimum you get it, usually).

A wand of fly 4th lasts 1 minute.
A wand of a 7th level spell is 6500 gp.

Zapp wrote:
Cyouni wrote:

Hoarding all your money to buy healer's gloves sounds great, but falls apart if you ever need two heals in one day.

Or die because you didn't have healing before that.

Consistent usability is generally better for that purpose - as it should be - but lacks the flexibility and reusability potential of the consumables. And of course there's nothing stopping you from using both.

Yes, but please don't use healing to justify the general price structure.

This is true of any other consumable versus permanent item. A wand of fly 7th is better if you have to cast it 7 times over 7 days, but sometimes that's not the case. Sometimes you need that twice in a day. Sometimes you need it even more than that.

and in just 4hours of flight, you're already ahead.

That's what consumables are good for - being that one-time expenditure that helps to patch holes in a plan.

problem is it's not 7 times over 7 days.

it's 7 times over your whole adventuring career.

And again, nothing forbids "multiple wands", so as an example, you could have 6 wands of fly (3rd) for the cost 4200gp and it has the added benefits of being able to split the flight over many intervals in the day, being able to buff your friends with flight for intervals, being able to be a 1h flight like the potion if you wish, and etc


Your giving up even MORE consumables to get wands or fly? That’s, what, 3 levels worth of no consumables for 4 sticks of fly? Let me know how that works out in practice for you.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
Your giving up even MORE consumables to get wands or fly? That’s, what, 3 levels worth of no consumables for 4 sticks of fly? Let me know how that works out in practice for you.

The example in question was giving up ONE Greater potion of Fly, for FOUR wands of Fly.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
Your giving up even MORE consumables to get wands or fly? That’s, what, 3 levels worth of no consumables for 4 sticks of fly? Let me know how that works out in practice for you.

1 potion of fly for 1hour: 1000gp

6 wands of fly (3rd) : 4200

in 4 hours of flight you are already ahead and they are leaps and bounds better since you can split both the duration and the targets as you wish.

in *most* circumstances that you need flight, it's usually better for a whole party to fly for 10minutes rather than 1 person to fly for 1hour.

and if the whole party has to fly, you're suddenly at 4k+ just for the potions needed, while you are still at 4k for the wands.


The more you use wands to make your points on this issue, the more it seems to indicate that wands are mispriced.

Your also going to need to sell 8 potions of fly to get those 6 wands.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:

The more you use wands to make your points on this issue, the more it seems to indicate that wands are mispriced.

Your also going to need to sell 8 potions of fly to get those 6 wands.

well, wands are handy because they have direct equivalents.

for permanents, you could be using winged boots on the whole party.

850 gp for 10mins of flight and at will feather fall every 10minutes.

it's almost the same thing.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
shroudb wrote:


1 potion of fly for 1hour: 1000gp
6 wands of fly (3rd) : 4200
...

in *most* circumstances that you need flight, it's usually better for a whole party to fly for 10minutes rather than 1 person to fly for 1hour.

’m just going to go right ahead and call b*$**%$$ on this claim.

Flying can be as cheap as 100 gp per person if you only need it for 1 minute. So if you need the whole party to overcome an obstacle you are down 400 gp and you can overcome this obstacle as early as 9th level.

Similarly 4 4th level wands cost 2,800 gp and your only able to achieve it at 12th level by forgoing all consumables at 9th level, 10th Level, 12th level and 13th level.

So sure. If you can wait 4 levels to overcome that 9th level challenge and don’t need consumables for the next 4 levels then it is totally valid to wait for wands of fly. For 99.999% of gaming groups, I expect they will use potions of fly.

you know you are just making my point right?

whenever you need around 4-5 uses of a consumable, a permanent is better, since that's the cost that the permanent comes even.

And flight is something that's far too common to not invest in it.

you can start making arbitrary levels, but the fact is that party members pool together their funds if they need to overcome obstacles.


shroudb wrote:


1 potion of fly for 1hour: 1000gp
6 wands of fly (3rd) : 4200
...

in *most* circumstances that you need flight, it's usually better for a whole party to fly for 10minutes rather than 1 person to fly for 1hour.

’m just going to go right ahead and call bull on this claim.

Flying can be as cheap as 100 gp per person if you only need it for 1 minute. So if you need the whole party to overcome an obstacle you are down 400 gp and you can overcome this obstacle as early as 9th level.

Similarly 4 4th level wands cost 2,800 gp and your only able to achieve it at 12th level by forgoing all consumables at 9th level, 10th Level, 12th level and 13th level.

So sure. If you can wait 4 levels to overcome that 9th level challenge and don’t need consumables for the next 4 levels then it is totally valid to wait for wands of fly. For 99.999% of gaming groups, I expect they will use potions of fly.

[EDIT]: I deleted this post to double check the math. Shroud be replied to it in the interim. Hence why it appears after his.


shroudb wrote:
you know you are just making my point right?

Actually I’m not.

My point stands quite clearly. 400 gp for using fly to overcome an obstacle vs 2,800 gp. It would take 28 potions of fly to break even.

The fact you didn’t use those numbers to make your point but instead used the 1,000 gp potion of flight demonstrates for everyone the manner in which you are choosing to discuss this issue.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
shroudb wrote:
you know you are just making my point right?

Actually I’m not.

My point stands quite clearly. 400 gp for using fly to overcome an obstacle vs 2,800 gp. It would take 28 potions of fly to break even.

The fact you didn’t use those numbers to make your point but instead used the 1,000 gp potion of flight demonstrates for everyone the manner in which you are choosing to discuss this issue.

you're talking about 1 minute fly vs 5 minutes of flying there.

that's not really a comparisson.

my own example used the exact same amount of flying time, only better with permanents since you can break this time intervals amonsgst party members and different times in the day.

IF there existed a 1minute fly permanent item, it would again be way better than 1 minute flying potions.

is your point that "potions are better if there is no permanent doing the same thing?" because then... duh?

Do a direct comparison of 2 same things, and the permanent will ALWAYS be better at 4-5 uses.


Strill wrote:
Then spend 850gp on a pair of Winged Boots.

This is where I say "but what about the other boots I've got?" and "but what if I'd rather fly faster than that?"

still looks to me like there are multiple similar items, each with their own reasons to be used, and no one correct or best choice that applies across the entirety of possible characters and circumstances like people are trying to present permanent items that do what can be done via consumable items as.


thenobledrake wrote:
Strill wrote:
Then spend 850gp on a pair of Winged Boots.

This is where I say "but what about the other boots I've got?" and "but what if I'd rather fly faster than that?"

still looks to me like there are multiple similar items, each with their own reasons to be used, and no one correct or best choice that applies across the entirety of possible characters and circumstances like people are trying to present permanent items that do what can be done via consumable items as.

you see, i wouldn't mind if EVERYTHING permanent was "invested" like the boots.

but not everything is.

only worn items are.

you can do a comparisson between magical arrows and alchemical bombs vs Horns of blasting that you can have 10 of them if you wished, and there's the issue.

i really can't understand why so few items are invested when the trait explicitly exists to prevent permanent item spam abuse


1 person marked this as a favorite.
shroudb wrote:
my own example used the exact same amount of flying time, only better with permanents since you can break this time intervals amonsgst party members and different times in the day.

No it didn’t. You claimed a 4th Level wand was better for 10 minutes of flying (which is by no means reliable as your relying on overcharging) vs a 1 hour potion.

But sure. If you need 5 minutes of continuous flight BUT NO MORE once a day your better off with the permanent item. But your not going to get that before 12th level. And your sacrificing the utility provided by consumables for 4 levels to get those wands. Which is really where your argument falls down IMO.

Given you can’t be persuaded on this issue and I don’t game with you, I’m going to move on. Everyone else can decide for themselves whether or not 4 levels of consumables is worth once a day 5 mins of flight for the party and not being able to overcome obstacles with flight for those 4 levels.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not having played much PF2 and received no consumables at this point, but based on my play style (and others players), I never really liked consumables. I always felt like it was throwing money away. The odd time it ended up being useful and worthwhile, but it inevitably ended up being sold or just forgotten in someone’s loot list.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Side thoughts:

One funny aspect is PF1 PFS play warped how common consumables were.
It was always jarring to shift between an AP & PFS play because my PFS PCs had ridiculous amounts of consumables and my AP PCs had maybe a few found items. In PFS, warriors swig Potions of Fly w/o a second thought while I gasp. But they bought them w/ Prestige Points so they were "free".

In an AP, one guy started guzzling really pricey loot potions that would relieve a condition he had. I'm sorry, you at peak performance actually weren't worth those. You can limp.

Another AP gave out lots of expensive, but really useful consumables in part I. That was frustrating, knowing you want to use them, but they were worth more than all your other gear. And you'd better use them at the right time.


Cyouni wrote:

That's what consumables are good for - being that one-time expenditure that helps to patch holes in a plan.

You still talk in generics instead of actually addressing the specific concern raised.

Nobody has disputed what consumables were meant to do. The question is if the design actually meets this goal.

51 to 100 of 116 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / The price of 1 / day permanent items vs consumables All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.