Should potions of longevity be put back in the game?

[Terath Ninir]

One of the stranger changes in 3e is that they cut out all magic that can extend a character's lifespan. Even things that have no conceivable reason to stop working -- like Timeless Body -- still click off when you hit the end of your lifespan.

This is strange for a number of reasons. I've never heard any of the designers comment on it -- and, while I can't read everything, I *have* looked for any commentary on this. It seems odd that one can be chopped up, digested, and then have the remains disintegrated, and be brought back without a scratch -- but magic can't do anything about the fact that you have grown "too old".

The biggest odd thing about it, though, is that I've never played in a campaign that had more than 20 years of game time pass -- and it's usually far less than that. Magic that staves off old age would theoretically be nice -- you can imagine your character living on for centuries -- but, practically speaking, it has little to no game power. A spell or item that reduced your age by 10 years -- like the old potion of longevity -- doesn't really have the game value of a raise dead spell.

You can come up with ways that a potion of longevity would be a useful plot device, such as putting in a needed but very old NPC, but you can do that with anything. If you really look at how the game is played, and how long a campaign is really going to last, it's hard to see why anti-aging magic should be banned. Following my logic with raise dead from above, an anti-agin spell should be *at most* a 5th level spell. It might be the ultimate dream here in the real world but, in D&D game worlds, it's more interesting than it is important.

So I say, bring on the potions of longevity! What say y'all?

 

[Glyfair]

I think it's partially to balance the removal of everything that unnaturally ages PCs as well (although some has started to creep back in). Almost certainly to avoid the complications of dual ages and the D&D aging system.'

That said, it's easy enough to put back in. I know 3rd party publishers have used it.

 

[Stalker0]

From a pc perspective, it doesn't matter. From a world perspective it matters a lot.

If high level character can become effectively immortal they will. That means the world will start filling up with these immortal high level characters. I mean, what's to stop them otherwise?

 

[Terath Ninir]

Being able to stay young doesn't make you immortal -- or even close to immortal, given all the frenzied berserkers and tarrasques and drug-addled pixies there are in your average D&D world. Old age is really the *least* likely end for any sort of person in a D&D world, if you look at the hazards they face.

Not to mention that a spell like fireball is really a lot more powerful on a practical level. It's incredibly common, available to just about any wizard who hits 5th level, and can lay waste to an entire 20 ft. radius circle of ordinary people without even breaking a sweat. Compared with the ability to destroy an army, being able to stay 18 forever really isn't all that impressive.

I would also submit that most of the D&D worlds are *already* littered with high-powered characters far beyond the age they should have died at, anyway. Elminster is *how* old, again?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Taking away potions of longevity just increases the number of non-evil liches in the world, IMO.

I'd say revising the aging system makes more sense than tossing away magic that speaks to one of humanity's most enduring dreams.

 

[Glyfair]

I'd say revising the aging system makes more sense than tossing away magic that speaks to one of humanity's most enduring dreams.

But, one that effects the game (from a mechanical standpoint) the least. As CZ points out, most games last less than 20 game years. That sort of magic becomes more flavor than mechanics, and should be more campaign specific.

That being said, it was such a part of pre-3E D&D that they should have had a section in the DMG about how to customize such things for a campaign world.

 

[Arkhandus]

That means the world will start filling up with these immortal high level characters. I mean, what's to stop them otherwise?

Other high level characters.

 

[frankthedm]

I want life extending magic. I also want living too long wear on one's sanity.

And remember too much downtime and not training cost experience points. The DMG does call this out.

 

[frankthedm]

One of the stranger changes in 3e is that they cut out all magic that can extend a character's lifespan. Even things that have no conceivable reason to stop working -- like Timeless Body -- still click off when you hit the end of your lifespan.

This is strange for a number of reasons. I've never heard any of the designers comment on it -- and, while I can't read everything, I *have* looked for any commentary on this. It seems odd that one can be chopped up, digested, and then have the remains disintegrated, and be brought back without a scratch -- but magic can't do anything about the fact that you have grown "too old".

What say y'all?

I assumed it was a part of the 3e mentality of out with the old, in with the [dungeon] punks.

 

[Uder]

I'm currently playing an 80-year-old Wu Jen... so of course I voted yes. Which of course is probably why they cut it. It's too easy for spellcasters to just write down "80" (or even 50-60, I'm forgetting the exact breakdown) and get a nice bump to the abilities that matter.

Of course, my AC is only 7, I have 14 hit points (at 11th level!) and I nearly always miss even with ranged touch attacks, so maybe it evens out.