blargney the second said:
I agree.
And I still think the 250gp is right for EP potions.
I think 250gp was right for a 3E potion of
Enlarge... a spell which had negligible combat application at CL1-4, but was of some use at CL5.
I think there is nothing in the 3.5 pricing rules for potions (rules, note, not guidelines, when it comes to potions, wands, and scrolls) that mandates - or permits - an increase in price for a spell with a casting time of more than one action.
I think that the formula tells us, with no room for argument, that a potion of enlarge person with a base price of 250gp is caster level 5, because the pricing formula for potions is exact, not a guide.
I think that there is nothing preventing someone from crafting a CL1 potion of the same spell, for a base price of 50gp.
If it were a ring, or a wondrous item, or a rod, stating CL1 and 250gp, that's fine - the designers decided the guideline gave too low a cost, and upped it to what felt reasonable. But it's not - it's a potion. Which means that a base price of 250gp tells us it's CL5.
Why would one first-level potion, unlike all the others, be listed at CL5? Because in the previous edition, that was the CL that made sense, and nobody thought to change it when they typed up the revised table.
Not all items adhere to these formulas directly. The reasons for this are several. First and foremost, these few formulas aren’t enough to truly gauge the exact differences between items. The price of a magic item may be modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. The pricing of scrolls assumes that, whenever possible, a wizard or cleric created it. Potions and wands follow the formulas exactly. Staffs follow the formulas closely, and other items require at least some judgment calls.
What's the formula potions follow
exactly?
Code:
Spell Effect Base Price Example
Single use, use-activated Spell level x caster level x 50 gp Potion of CLW
-Hyp.