Poisoncraft: Cracking the Cost Code

I'm cross-posting this from my Scramble entry over at One Bad Egg because I figured there'd be plenty of people here interested in the last part. I've seen a couple of older discussions on this thread misapprehending the poison rule in the DMG.

I’m knee-deep in development of Poisoncraft. I recently had a design breakthrough that had been giving me some fits. One of the core features of the Poisoncraft line is the poison creation system. And one of the core goals of the poison creation system is both a unified design and the ability to account for poisons already released by Wizards. That’s not always an easy thing. I remember when I was working on the original Poisoncraft, I had a terrible time trying to account for the absurdly low cost of drow poison indicated in the DMG. In the end, I had to fudge a little.

With Fourth Edition, the designers have done a great job of applying a unified design theory to just about everything. This makes the reverse engineering job that much easier, natch. Still, there’s always some fly in the ointment. This time around, it was the discrepancy between the costing of poisons in the DMG and the Adventurer’s Vault. We have poisons of similar level and effect with pretty drastic price differences. For the longest time, I couldn’t crack the code. Until yesterday....

I identified an extremely subtle yet crucial and ultimately satisfying discrepancy between the poisons themselves. The poisons in AV are one-shot consumables; they are effective for a single target and a single attack. The poisons in the DMG are effective for an entire encounter (more on this in a bit). Though it is not expressly identified in either text, this distinction gives us two classes of poisons. Part of the confusion comes from the fact that they are both simply referred to as "poison". To avoid this confusion I’ve tentatively titled them transient poisons and persistent poisons. Once we make this distinction, it is a relatively simple matter to develop creation systems for both.

As a bonus, these two classes of poison bring with them a larger design space as well. Now I can have poison families with rules for one class of poison, utility powers that only affect one class of poison, etc. How about a metapoison feat that allows a transient poison to last for two attacks? In play, these two classes of poison are susceptible to different strategies. A transient poison would do the trick for an assassination attempt; a persistent poison would be the better choice against the big battle with the BBEG.

Now, as promised, a note about the persistent quality of DMG poisons. The text is a little obtuse, and I’ve seen more than a few people misread it. However, I’m certain that the rule is as I read it. The text indicates: The poison takes effect the next time the weapon hits and deals damage. The poison’s effect is a secondary attack against the same target. If a poisoned weapon hits multiple targets, the poison attacks only the first target hit. Apply a Poison: Apply poison to a weapon. This is a standard action. Poison applied to a weapon loses its potency at the end of the encounter or after 5 minutes have passed. Some people have read the phrase "the poison attacks only the first target hit" to mean that the poison affects that first target and then stops being effective altogether. However, that interpretation improperly discounts the introductory clause "If a poisoned weapon hits multiple targets". The term "target" has a specific meaning, i.e., the subject of a specific single attack. It should not be confused with its general use as a synonym of enemy or opponent. It is evident that the limitation is there to avoid giving a disparate advantage for using poison to classes with a greater number of multiple-target weapon attacks. Compare the impact a persistent poison that affected all targets would have on a dual-wielding ranger as opposed to a warlock.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yeah, but a lot of those poisons are things people have to inhale or consume, which presumably they only do once, not things that you can apply to your weapon and have it hit repeatedly.

If you want to be non-charitable about things, it could also easily be that poisons were intentionally overpriced out of the range where PCs could use them to make it clear that poison was an evil thing and the PCs, being good guys, don't use it. Alternatively, you could not ascribe malice, at which point they just made poisons useless by accident.

(And then they rethought that for the AV, I guess.)
 



Yeah, but a lot of those poisons are things people have to inhale or consume, which presumably they only do once, not things that you can apply to your weapon and have it hit repeatedly.
On the contrary, I think those vectors lend themselves nicely to multiple attacks in a single encounter.

Drop some ingestion poison into the community wineskin. If it's transient, the first to drink is exposed. If it's persistent, anyone who drinks from the skin is attacked.

How about a new weapon, a grenade that releases a mistlike inhalation poison. If it's transient, only the first to enter the square is exposed. If it's persistent, anyone who enters the square for the remainder of the encounter is attacked.

As I said, lots of applications. I'm excited.

Now, as for whether this was intentional or just a happy accident....
 

How about a new weapon, a grenade that releases a mistlike inhalation poison. If it's transient, only the first to enter the square is exposed. If it's persistent, anyone who enters the square for the remainder of the encounter is attacked.
Although, a transient inhaled poison grenade would be fine for a single-round AoE attack. A persistent poison is more like tear gas or chlorine gas.
 


Remove ads

Top