Craft:Alchemy to identify a potion?

[welby]

so am I blind? If I recall, in 3.0 alchemy used to be it's own skill and had rules for identifying potions. Now that it's a craft skill, can it still be used for that? Do you still need a alchemy lab?

Someone please point me to the rules in 3.5.

 

[Pax]

Now you use Spellcraft to identify potions (don't ask me WHY, but ... *shrug* ...).

 

[welby]

Now you use Spellcraft to identify potions (don't ask me WHY, but ... *shrug* ...).

wtf? This is just begging to be house ruled. Since I'm stuck at work, mind telling me the check and if there's a cost involved?

 

[Len]

DC 25, no cost, takes 1 minute, no retry.

 

[silentspace]

Also, to craft alchemical items, you need to be a spellcaster! Sort of like Brew Potion has a caster level requirement. So it appears that vials of acid and tanglefoot bags are a sort of magic in 3.5.

 

[Scion]

province of mages, not necissarily magic.

Although greek fire would definately seem like magic in most circumstances!

Crazy rules changes though ;/ anyone have any idea why it may have been changed in that way?

 

[Len]

I can see how someone would say that it's more consistent to have all the crafting skills under Craft (whatever), and then it makes sense to use a Spellcraft check to identify a magic potion.

But it still seems like one of those 3.5 changes that no-one actually needed.

 

[AuraSeer]

Alchemy lets you make or work with alchemical items, like sunrods or thunderstones. Though the creation process apparently requires some magic ability, the finished products are not magical in any way. (Alchemist's fire burns just fine inside an andimagic field.)

Potions are not alchemical items, they're magic items-- spell energy in liquid form. They are inherently magical, do not function in an antimagic area, and have no relation to any craft skill. You wouldn't let a Craft(alchemy) check identify a magic scroll or a staff of power, so why should it work for potions?

 

[Anubis]

Indeed. In addition, now identifying potions isn't so clunky either. Spellcraft and be done with it. I like this change very much.

 

[Steverooo]

Now you use Spellcraft to identify potions (don't ask me WHY, but ... *shrug* ...).

I have a theory, anyway... This goes back to a complaint that I had in the 3e days, pre-3.5, about how PCs lacked the skills needed to do their jobs... Some of the examples that I used were Rangers not having Knowledge (Geography) as a class skill, and then I also reminisced about how ALL 1e Mages could identify potions, but now they couldn't, unless skilled in Alchemy...

A lot of the complaints that I had, in that thread, seem to have been picked up on, in 3.5e. Fighters still don't get Knowledge (History) for knowing about battles, but Rangers got Knowledge (Dungeoneering & Geography), as well as the (Nature) they already had, and now all Wizards (who SHOULD have Spellcraft, but still don't have to) can once again ID potions... which is "part of their job", IMHO.

For what it's worth, though, I also specifically said that Alchemy should still be useful for IDing potions, too. In my game, it still is (and still costs, for chemicals). YMMV.

So, I don't know that the change was "senseless" (as I believe someone said, above)... It goes to the role of the Wizard - who in the party would you expect to be the source of arcane knowledge? Who would you expect to identify the potion? The Ranger with one Rank of Alchemy?