OSR Potions identification in B/X. How do you handle it?

[conankeep]

Disclaimer: If you are wondering why such a trivial question produced such a large thread. Here is the "bottom line" I've got from it.

Magic item identification in B/X was never intuitive for me as a DM but I can deal with the majority of common magic items, the potions however is something that always bothered me.

So now I'm prepping a module that has some neutralize poison potions available as loot in one of the starting rooms.
And the potions are put there for a good reason, there are plenty of poison effects and monsters in the module.
However I'm thinking to myself if the players will even ever use it?
While some potions have a profound effect that can be easily understood from a sip, how do you understand a potion is an antidote?
I guess if one of the players got poisoned and knew it's goodbye they could start chugging unidentified potions out of desperation but still it isn't very likely.
And while we are at it, how are players supposed figure out via experimentation a potion gave them powers to control undead for example? Basically impossible unless players know the list of magic items in the game and have prepared for each occasion, which is metagaming.

Another thing that bothers me is that magic potions especially like those ones most certainly SHOULD be labeled by whoever intended to use them.
At this point I'm so annoyed at this room, I'm thinking of labeling the potions, and putting them in a more logical place as well (not hidden).

Am I overreacting? Should I just trust players to figure it out?
How do you handle unidentified potions in your games with no identify spell?

 

[Sossij]

"Here, [hireling name], a reward for all your hard work!"

I would have someone in town who can identify things. The labeling thing is a good idea, but if they are some mad scientist type, they may not be labeling them as fast as they get them out the door.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

You are overreacting.

In Moldvay Basic, you can identify a magic item by just testing it. This means that you can identify a potion with a sip. It's explicitly stated that potions are identified with a sip.

Source- B47, Moldvay.

Basically- you can identify any item when you find it, but if it's cursed etc., you will suffer the negative consequence. But you will know EXACTLY what it is.

Note that Moldvay warns you that if you ask a hireling to test it, the hireling will expect to keep the item.

 

[Sossij]

The question also is do potions have certain repeatable physical characteristics that mean if you test one, are you covered for any additional potions, unless deliberately obfuscated (like a poisoned potion masquerading as a normal potion of healing, or just a poisoned potion of something)? I would say yes to that, but one could argue that potions could have multiple formulations.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

how do you understand a potion is an antidote?

"you taste it, and you can tell that this could be used as a potion antidote"

how are players supposed figure out via experimentation a potion gave them powers to control undead for example?

"you taste it, and you feel like you could mentally direct undead with this"

Don't overthink it.

I'm thinking of labeling the potions, and putting them in a more logical place as well (not hidden).

Sure! If you'd prefer thats totally fine. Changing how the rules work to suit your table is part of the B/X experience.

Should I just trust players to figure it out?

Players can only know and make decisions based on what you tell them. Err on giving too much info rather than too little.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

The question also is do potions have certain repeatable physical characteristics that mean if you test one, are you covered for any additional potions, unless deliberately obfuscated (like a poisoned potion masquerading as a normal potion of healing, or just a poisoned potion of something)? I would say yes to that, but one could argue that potions could have multiple formulations.

I don't think too hard about it. If I was running this module, and I put a cache of 10 anti-poison potions in a box, I'd probably let them taste one and tell them that the other potions are the same type. More efficient, and in-game, they could all be from the same batch/.

Generally, though, I don't think that all of one type of potion look the same. Id'ing items in B/X is pretty easy and usually pretty perfunctory.

 

[conankeep]

You are overreacting.

In Moldvay Basic, you can identify a magic item by just testing it. This means that you can identify a potion with a sip. It's explicitly stated that potions are identified with a sip.

Well, that's an interpretation. But no, it doesn't actually explicitly state that potions are identified with a sip.
The exact wording is "character can only identify the exact type of item by testing it…" which I think is better interpreted as "there is no way around actually testing the item (for example trying to identify by 'the looks' isn't possible )" without any guarantee for a successful identification.

And I would argue that what you are proposing breaks verisimilitude and common sense. Allow me to explain. In Basic specifically it is not an issue, all potions in the book would have an [almost] immediately noticeable effect. Expert however adds a bunch of potions that would not have such an effect. Antidotes and control undead (or other monsters not likely being present at time of testing) are suitable examples.

 

[conankeep]

Changing how the rules work to suit your table is part of the B/X experience.

I appreciate your post and it so happens I commented on the majority of it in a reply above to another poster, apart from the quote I wanted to address.
Am I changing the rules though? I think "changing a pre-written adventure" is more accurate

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Well, that's an interpretation. But no, it doesn't actually explicitly state that potions are identified with a sip.
The exact wording is "character can only identify the exact type of item by testing it…" which I think is better interpreted as "there is no way around actually testing the item (for example trying to identify by 'the looks' isn't possible )" without any guarantee for a successful identification.

Here's the exact and full language-

IDENTIFYING MAGIC ITEMS: A character can only identify the exact type of item by testing it (trying on the ring, sipping the potion, etc.). If a retainer does this testing, he or she will expect to keep the item.


I am unclear how much more explicitly you can state that that potions are identified with a sip than providing the example of "sipping the potion," and while I might not be the kind of person who deeply dives into rules and language, even my simple-minded approach to language would normally say that this qualifies.

 

[Theory of Games]

Just have the M-U make an INT check. If successful, they identify what kind of potion it is.

B/X doesn't have skills, but in the Rules Cyclopedia there is an Alchemy skill that helps identify chemicals, toxins & potions.