D&D 5E Where can I find Informaion on 5E Potions?

[empireofchaos]

Well, I can explain the bizarre rules on potion concentration (or lack thereof), but for the life of me, I can't tell you why someone would spend their life craftin' potions instead of adventurin'.

To each their own!

Adventurin' can come in a lot of different packages. I had a party take over an apothecary's store, and one character took up an herbalism skill, and wants to make potions during downtime. Can this activity root the character in the setting more than killing random dungeon monsters? I say yes. Along the way, he and the party learns about component suppliers (including unscrupulous ones), and may learn where the previous owners fled to. So is the better GM move to say the component cost/time investment is comparable to/slightly more than the cost of scribing a scroll, and open up possibilities, or to throw the book at them, and make doing this virtually impossible? Seems like a pretty clear choice to me, but as you say, to each his own.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I want to note that the DMG errata has the rules of crafting updated to say that crafting potions and scrolls only costs half the price of other magic items of the same rarity.

That means crafting a potion of invisibility actually only costs 25000gp and not 50000gp.

 

[CapnZapp]

A few points.

First, the above quoted portion is correct. An invisibility potion would be much more desirable than a mere scroll (not to mention who could use it).

Second, 5e assumes there is no magic economy. Does that mean you can't create one? Naw. Do what's fun. If y'all want "Ye Old Magic and Dragon Emporium" selling assorted Heads of Vecna, more power to you. But because it is not assumed in the game, it isn't baked into the rules, which means that ...

Third, direct translations from 3/3.5e can be dangerous. Can you create that magic item economy? Sure. But it will be a lot more difficult than, say, converting Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh.

Which is exactly why anyone saying "just make your own magic economy" is so tedious.

I want WotC to make it for me.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Which is exactly why anyone saying "just make your own magic economy" is so tedious.

I want WotC to make it for me.

What if they make it for you wrong?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I suppose when crafting potions not present in the DMG, the DM needs to make the call whether a potion reproducing a 'concentration effect' requires concentration or not. Frankly, I'd rather craft the version not requiring concentration.

Depends how much extra it costs. The closest thing to a comparison that I can think of is the Artificer Wizard subtype: the potions that give similar effects as a spell, but don't reference a spell require a higher level slot. ( Water Breathing doesn't, but the spell doesn't require concentration and would affect more targets for longer.

 

[CapnZapp]

What if they make it for you wrong?

Huh?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Huh?

What if you don't agree with their system: their base assumptions or purpose are different to yours and you don't like the result?

For example, should a magical property on a weapon or armour cost the same no matter what weapon or armour it is applied to?
Should the prices of +1, +2 and +2 weapons represent a linear rise? Logarithmic?
How should an extra d6 of fire damage compare to and additional +1 to hit and damage? What about force damage? Should it be a set price of combine for a total cost like 3.5 did?

Is there even a wealth-by-level standard? What level should PCs in a standard campaign be able to afford an X? Who defines what a "standard" campaign is?

 

[Pandaemoni]

Which is exactly why anyone saying "just make your own magic economy" is so tedious.

I want WotC to make it for me.

I think the reason they did not is that it's hard. The "magic items are rare" motif (which implies there being no regular trade in them) means there are a lot fewer variables to account for in balancing the game. No "wealth-by-level" standards (and greater freedom to spend character wealth on story points like "buying a castle" or "founding a church" since doing so won't adversely impact character power by diverting resources away from the next magic item). No worrying about players skewing the system by earning "too much" money selling potions then buying better magic items than the level limits assume they will be able to afford. So I understand why WOTC chose not to go that route.

 

[CapnZapp]

What if you don't agree with their system: their base assumptions or purpose are different to yours and you don't like the result?

For example, should a magical property on a weapon or armour cost the same no matter what weapon or armour it is applied to?
Should the prices of +1, +2 and +2 weapons represent a linear rise? Logarithmic?
How should an extra d6 of fire damage compare to and additional +1 to hit and damage? What about force damage? Should it be a set price of combine for a total cost like 3.5 did?

Is there even a wealth-by-level standard? What level should PCs in a standard campaign be able to afford an X? Who defines what a "standard" campaign is?

Read 3rd Ed and all your questions shall be answered