Potions and Crazyness

cptg1481

First Post
Hey....how many potions is too many?

Does anyone have a system that I could use to sort of tone down the 31 potions one of my PC's has granted himself via the you got 66000gp to spend when creating your PC theory. I mean I have never limited them to certain things but 31 potions (especiallyconsidering how hard I make getting them in game) is a bit much.

I was thinking that (in one of the books) there is that bandoleer type thing that holds 6 but after that they'd have to be in some kind of case or bag and well wrapped and protected vs breakage I mean thier hardness is 1 and the break DC is 13. Thus in the bagg wouldn't they be harder to get at...say a full round action that provokes AoO.

I'm gona rule for now that without the bandoleer one can have two tucked say in his belt or a pocket. Again these are subject to a save when hit. (see below)

I want to handdle it like so:

He can buy the bandoleeer thing and keep 6 potions at the ready but they are subject to a check when he gets hit (open to suggestions here for DC) and the rest are in a potions case that takes a full round action to access (see above). MY proposal for the DC to not break is = to 1/2 of the damage taken by the PC and limited to say 1d3 potions at a time (say his body and the case provide some protection). Also might allow the person's reflex mods or simply dex mods to the roll. (suggestions please)The potions get a bonus to thier rolls = to the caster level of the potion of course.

Likewise the case and its contents should be subject to saves in certain situations (again help would be cool) like falling with say a base save of 13 (where 13 = DC for normal breakage in the DMG) (with a + to the roll = to the caster level like with items) and with a +2 to the DC for every 10 feet fallen. I don't see one falling 100 feet (or any distance) with a bag full of little glass vials and some or most of them not smashing to useless crap.

I am aware of the rules for the destruction of items when they are hit with magical effects, i.e., fireballs and such but I find it hard to believe that in combat a persons potions in little 1 ounce glass vials are 100% safe from falling and normal concussion type damage.

Please help me here...have game tonight...pointing me to existing rules would be cool but not necessary.

A system of saves vs normal damage for little unprotacted glass vials (along with a system of modifiers to the saves fo said vials for additional protactive measures, i.e. padding and thier delay effects for access) is what I'm after.

Thanks all.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


unless this is a one shot why worry about it. The potions will be gone soon enough and that nice 66,000 bank roll he had will be reduced to innefectiveness becuase he should of speant his money on permanent gear.

There is no real by the book way to deal with this except carrying cpaacity and the logic of where thigns fit. By the rules the potions just wont get broken unless someone targets them or he rolls a 1 on a save, and even then only 1 potion should get destroyed.

If you invent some rule to screw him all you'll do is piss him off. If you really don't want him to have 33 potions just tell him that. Say in my campaign world potions are hard to come by I'd appreciate it if you don't start the game with 33 potions it just doesn't make sense in my world.
 

Wow, I can't imagine why someone would want to load up on temporary items. I'm the Arcane Craftsman in my group and I smack around my fellow players when they ask me to waste my XP and time to create temporary items. But, I digress...

I agree with Shard that your first avenue should be communication. Creating rules to hose him may add realism to the potion picking process, but the harsher reality is that he used his resources on one-shot items. That is why this seems like a problem that will easily fix itself in time just by giving him an incentive to use the potions and allowing him to easily use them. His resources will diminish rapidly, never to return. So he may be "king for a day," but what then?
 


I forgot about this.....

Wippit Guud said:
I'd laugh for hours if the party goes up against a black dragon....

... 31 potions, now just colored vinegar...


I'm laughing right now...that sick laugh that evil vilians do when they come up with something good.....

But I guess I could talk to him...but after the 5 16's he claims to have rolled and the 66 out of 68 possible HPs at player conception I am tempted to be well less than reasonable.

Feeling vindictive today, my balck dragon and I shall return the power padagrim back to reasonable in 0.5 seconds. I've been planning on a BBEG Black Dragon as the end game for my current campaign so he could make a teaser of an appearance and be gone ruining potions and such....BUHAHAHAHAHA!
 


But I guess I could talk to him...but after the 5 16's he claims to have rolled and the 66 out of 68 possible HPs at player conception I am tempted to be well less than reasonable.
He is a weenie. A dweeb. A 12-year-old. A rules lawyer. A min-maxer. A munchkin.

Lose him. Lose him now.

By the way, I make all my players roll everything during char creation, in front of me where I can see them as a matter of automatic policy. And I actually trust and enjoy my players immensely, and would be utterly shocked to discover any of them attempting to cheat...: )
 

Wippit Guud said:
I'd laugh for hours if the party goes up against a black dragon....

... 31 potions, now just colored vinegar...

Black dragon? Who needs a black dragon when you have a wizard with a shatter spell prepared... Far more common. ;)

The wizard that I play always has a shatter prepared; just too useful for knocking out swords, shields, and other such gear. If I ever came across a hostile individual who was loaded down with potions, I don't think I'd be able to resist firing off the area-effect version of the spell. :D

-Eraslin
 

IndyPendant said:
He is a weenie. A dweeb. A 12-year-old. A rules lawyer. A min-maxer. A munchkin.

While I agree his attributes and HP are highly suspicious, please -- don't assume that means he's a KID.

One group I joined, years ago, was all over the place in terms of the ages of the players. From a barely-thirteen-year-old boy, up to a couple fellows near or in their 40's.

And that boy was far more likely to seek out good storyline-dependant characters, over the stereotypical "display of ubernumbercrunchy power" thud-and-blunder sort of character we too often assume the youngest gamers invariably play.

Heck, by the time he was fifteen, IMO he was a better GM than I've just about ever managed to be -- definitely in the top six or eight GMs I've gamed with. And he was as good at playing a character as he was at GMing, once the rest of the group started seeing past his youth.

Being young isn't what makes someone a munchkin. Never having been shown how much fun a non-munchkin campaign can be, on the other hand, usually DOES.

...

Sorry, but it's a pet peeve of mine, when being very young is held to be synonymous with being a munchkin, or otherwise sucking at RPGaming. Without those very kids learning to play RPGs, and learning to LOVE playing RPGs, our hobby is doomed.

[EDIT]
Oh, and furthermore -- there's nothign wrong with being a rules lawyer. It's ABUSING the rules that's wrong.

I am proud to call myself a rules-lawyer-ing powergamer. I am not, however, a munchkin. I rules lawyer because I'm obsessed with consistency -- for example, if the rules say the DC to jump a particular 20' pit is X, then, barring a change in circumstances, the DC for jumping that pit should always be 20.

I powergame because, well ... I want to play a mighty hero who isn't just competent at what he does, but is really good at it. For example, if I play a wizard, I don't want to play a UPC-encoded generic village-hedge-wizard; I want to play a wizard with some especial talent. If I play a cleric, I want to be an especially wise and insightful cleric. Etc.

But I don't munchkin, until and unless the campaign is intended for such (i.e. Arenas, which I play in and enjoy).

So in my book, "rules lawyer" isn't an insult.
[/EDIT]
 
Last edited:

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top