The walking cauldron (Advanced Player's Guide pg. 264) says the following:
Does this mean that it refuses to move if filled with solid food, such as chunks of beef, carrots, onions, and potatoes; or an old ham bone and peas?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’d say that soups and stews are liquids and appropriate for the cauldron, but a roast or casserole would not be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does this mean that it refuses to move if filled with solid food, such as chunks of beef, carrots, onions, and potatoes; or an old ham bone and peas?
If you can find a potion that lists the ingredients of "chunks of beef, carrots, onions, and potatoes", you're good. If not, you're out of luck.
Do you consider stews to be liquids? What about a soup?
(The distance between soup and stew being a viscosity issue in my opinion)
Considering this is primarily an RP item, I'm most likely to allow it unless it seems to cause a problem. I don't really see a benefit to a non-moving cauldron vs a regular one aside from RP.
This is 100% an ask your GM, not the Rules Forum, question.
One could apply that sentiment to literally any rules question. And thus is how the Rules Forum ceased to exist, in a puff of logic.
This is 100% an ask your GM, not the Rules Forum, question.One could apply that sentiment to literally any rules question. And thus is how the Rules Forum ceased to exist, in a puff of logic.
It really isn't the same as it tells you what you can put in: "ingredients for potions or other liquids". The only real question is what liquids count as potion ingredients, and that's a DM question.
|
"ingredients for [...] other liquids"Soup is a liquid.
Therefore, things that are ingredients for soup are "Ingredients for other Liquids"
Therefore, mise en place for making soups or stews (a category of soups) should be fine.
I 100% agree with you here, but this opens up some room for a shenanigans. Like for a cannibalistic goblin to possibly use it as a vehicle. As long as they fit the 2 bulk rule.
I personally would think that entertaining as hell and allow it as long as they arent trying to turn it into a pack mule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"ingredients for [...] other liquids"Soup is a liquid.
Therefore, things that are ingredients for soup are "Ingredients for other Liquids"
Therefore, mise en place for making soups or stews (a category of soups) should be fine.I 100% agree with you here, but this opens up some room for a shenanigans. Like for a cannibalistic goblin to possibly use it as a vehicle. As long as they fit the 2 bulk rule.
I personally would think that entertaining as hell and allow it as long as they arent trying to turn it into a pack mule.
I'd 100% disagree as you can use the exact same argument to let familiars and other creatures ride in it. Creatures have blood so they are an ingredient of blood soup [it's a real thing].
Honestly, if you start down this road, there are really very few things that you can't use as an ingredient for a liquid: I mean, iron ore or iron bars are an ingredient in molten iron after all and things like wood can be turned into charcoal and added to drinks [said to absorb toxins]: the limitations ends up having no meaning.
|
|
"ingredients for [...] other liquids"Soup is a liquid.
Therefore, things that are ingredients for soup are "Ingredients for other Liquids"
Therefore, mise en place for making soups or stews (a category of soups) should be fine.I 100% agree with you here, but this opens up some room for a shenanigans. Like for a cannibalistic goblin to possibly use it as a vehicle. As long as they fit the 2 bulk rule.
I personally would think that entertaining as hell and allow it as long as they arent trying to turn it into a pack mule.
I'd 100% disagree as you can use the exact same argument to let familiars and other creatures ride in it. Creatures have blood so they are an ingredient of blood soup [it's a real thing].
Honestly, if you start down this road, there are really very few things that you can't use as an ingredient for a liquid: I mean, iron ore or iron bars are an ingredient in molten iron after all and things like wood can be turned into charcoal and added to drinks [said to absorb toxins]: the limitations ends up having no meaning.
K, then don't do it at your games. As long as players arnt being disruptive or clearly violating rules as intended, I see no need to be a tyrant about it.
Its not like throwing some onions in it or even letting a small creature ride in it would give any kind of advantage. It would be garbage for travel time and "its ungainly movements are too imprecise to predictably direct in a combat encounter or other situation where seconds and precise locations count" would be more likely to make it a liability to players as a vehicle. Be a funny liability though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As long as players arnt being disruptive or clearly violating rules as intended, I see no need to be a tyrant about it.
But you're not following my point: by the stated reading of intent you agreed with, they'd be 100% justified in thinking creatures are perfectly fine and NOT "clearly violating rules". I think it'd be unfair to point at a player and say they where being disruptive when they wouldn't be the ones to open that door: once you're fine violating intent in any ways, it's hard to quibble over which violation is too far.
Its not like throwing some onions in it or even letting a small creature ride in it would give any kind of advantage. It would be garbage for travel time and "its ungainly movements are too imprecise to predictably direct in a combat encounter or other situation where seconds and precise locations count" would be more likely to make it a liability to players as a vehicle. Be a funny liability though.
It would be a notable advantage to a familiar that starts with swim Speed as there is NO current way for them to gain a land speed: a little bit of water and your goldfish is good to go and as a bonus, it'd have cover and/or blocks line of sight/effect. Even better it's only a single action to keep it following you, unlike a familiar that requires every round attention.
|
|
you're not following my point: by the stated reading of intent you agreed with, they'd be 100% justified in thinking creatures are perfectly fine and NOT "clearly violating rules". I think it'd be unfair to point at a player and say they where being disruptive when they wouldn't be the ones to open that door: once you're fine violating intent in any ways, it's hard to quibble over which violation is too far.
I think you misunderstood my initial post. I agreed that soup is a liquid and ingredients for soup, fit the "ingredients for potions and other liquids".
I also brought up a separate point that someone could claim that soup can be made of people, specifically a goblin in my example. That i brought up was a possible example of abuse, or what I wouldn't fault a gm for disallowing, but that I, personally, may allow it at my table because its funny and not game breaking (no gear though, just the gob and some water or pickle juice). Both of which are my opinion. If you would find it hard to discern what "violatin" is to far thats on you. I haven't had issues there at my tables.
It would be a notable advantage to a familiar that starts with swim Speed as there is NO current way for them to gain a land speed: a little bit of water and your goldfish is good to go and as a bonus, it'd have cover and/or blocks line of sight/effect. Even better it's only a single action to keep it following you, unlike a familiar that requires every round attention.
If thats the best "advantage" you can come up with, we are fine. Since specific supercedes general, this specific item states "its ungainly movements are too imprecise to predictably direct in a combat encounter or other situation where seconds and precise locations count." Even though this doesn't explicitly mention cover or los, this sounds like its ungainly movements are enough to negate any cover or los one could gain be being in a cauldron.
I guess I'm a very benevolent gm, because I would allow a degree of cover to the poor sap who chose Nemo as their familier. But I would have a bandit run up, grab the cauldro, dump its contents, and try to run off with it. The disadvantages of picking a water bound familer don't even break even with this item. Just spend 5g for the famlier satchel instead of 12g on this.
This isn't a healing potion!
IT'S CLAM CHOWDER!!!
This isn't a healing potion!
IT'S CLAM CHOWDER!!!
I would retort that Clam Chowder is the ultimate poultice for healing cold based damage. Especially when paired with a nice lager.
The restriction on what the Cauldron can carry isn't really a physical restriction, it's a magical one. The Cauldron knows it's purpose; The brewing of potions. It knows what goes into a potion, and it refuses to carry around anything else.
So the only reasonable answer is that the cauldron will carry whatever the GM decides the Cauldron believes are reagents for the brewing of potions. Anything else that is placed in it causes it to stop moving.
It knows what goes into a potion, and it refuses to carry around anything else.
It will carry "ingredients for potions or other liquids".
Which, I notice, could be parsed two ways:
It can carry (ingredients for potions) or (other liquids).
It can carry ingredients for (potions or other liquids).
Given that it is a "suitable tool to Craft potions, oils, or other liquids", I suppose the second meaning is the intended one.
A GM might restrict "liquids" to stuff like poisons and elixirs, but it's not specified. I would think, however, that living creatures would be a bit beyond the scope of 'ingredients'.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you misunderstood my initial post.
I think you misunderstood mine: my point was if you take a loose reading you kind of lose the right to then complain if that loose reading turns troublesome: it's not "clearly violating rules as intended" when the DM is the one that sets the intent. I wasn't commenting on you or me but that hypothetical DM you had in your post that thought it was against intent.
If thats the best "advantage" you can come up with, we are fine.
I gave the example to show it could be an advantage, not that it was an issue. Compared to the other familiar carrying options, it's not bad.
(Item 1)
[Magical] [Transmutation]
Price 13 gp
Bulk 2
The surface of this squat iron table is concave and stands upon sturdy iron crow's feet. Its surface has four holes that are shaped for setting a walking cauldron into. Obedient legs has a land Speed of 25 feet and, when appropriately equipped with a walking cauldron (sold separately), can be used as a suitable tool to Craft potions, oils, or other liquids.
As a single action, which has the auditory and concentrate traits, you can command the legs to either follow you or to stand in place. When following you, the legs do their best to remain within 30 feet of you, but its ungainly movements are too imprecise to predictably direct in a combat encounter or other situation where seconds and precise locations count. It can carry only a walking cauldron atop of itself while following you (regardless of what's in the cauldron), but if overloaded or if you put anything else atop it, it stands in place and refuses to move until 10 minutes after you remove the excess.