PDA

View Full Version : Regarding Vials



Purple Cloak
2007-12-27, 01:45 AM
just out of curiosity, does anyone out their record the empty vials from used up potions, as you never know when you need an empty vial :P

i know i have use one to extract giant wasp venom and a member of my group, being a shadow caster can create glowing ink a number of time per day, and as such keeps a stock of it, for 2 examples my roup has used them for

Cuddly
2007-12-27, 02:14 AM
My players keep track of everything, including most empty containers.

Irreverent Fool
2007-12-27, 02:28 AM
It depends on the character. Some will toss them over their shoulders just to hear the satisfying 'smash'. Additionally, if I start carrying a lot of glass around, DMs start making it break.

One particular character of mine carries around 10 potion-sized diamond flasks, practically unbreakable. If he has a potion, he'll transfer it to one of these.

Another keeps a couple carefully wrapped up in his backpack in case the need arises, but doesn't worry about every single one.

So I suppose I do keep track of what happens to them, but I don't always need to record it. :)

Kurald Galain
2007-12-27, 05:49 AM
I prefer leather flacons; they don't break when falling or smashed against a wall. Sure, a dedicated opponent can sunder or shatter them, but most opponents have more important things to do.

But yeah, one thing I'm seeing a lot is the magically disappearing potion bottle. Especially in computer games.

CactusAir
2007-12-27, 06:11 AM
hell as a DM, I make players buy Flint if they want to light fires (or they can make a DC10 survival check to rub sticks together), and anyone who forgets a bedroll has to make a DC 15 concentration check to get rested when sleeping.

I'm tottaly in favor of keeping track.. My character alwasy have an empty flask or two prepurchased to store goodies in... vials are for some reason more expensive than flasks despite being much smaller.

Purple Cloak
2007-12-27, 06:06 PM
But yeah, one thing I'm seeing a lot is the magically disappearing potion bottle. Especially in computer games.

thats alway struck me as odd, at least the giant made a point of the empty bottle after miko used one :smallsmile:

but its good to see im not the only one, that or we are all equily picky, take your pick :smallbiggrin:

but i would make a point with the flint if the party pyromancer didnt have a fire elemental familiar, i guess it kind of makes the point moot :smallbiggrin:

but im going to have to rember the breaking vials point, i think he carrys a 'lot' of them :smallamused:

MammonAzrael
2007-12-27, 06:19 PM
One particular character of mine carries around 10 potion-sized diamond flasks, practically unbreakable. If he has a potion, he'll transfer it to one of these.


Your DM should have you stumble across a potion that explodes violently when exposed to air. :smallbiggrin:



But yeah, one thing I'm seeing a lot is the magically disappearing potion bottle. Especially in computer games.

That's because the vials are actually part of the potion, hardened to carry it. After drinking the contents, the characters eat the vial, to gain the full effects!

mabriss lethe
2007-12-27, 11:09 PM
In one of the worlds I tend to play in, There's a homebrew sort of scavenger magic that players can learn. Expended wands, the residue from used potion vials, broken magical items, even used magical scrolls (if they're fresh enough)... whatever. They can all be "recycled" using this form of magic. So yes, I tend to keep track of those thing. It's not always the most efficient use of power, but it's fun.

kemmotar
2007-12-27, 11:23 PM
Actually...DMs can just be mean enough and throw at you a creature that uses shatter...try telling your characters they can still drink the potion leaking through their backpacks while they still can:smalltongue:
I once met a guy that made it specifically clear that he wanted "flasks" of cure X:smalltongue:

About empty bottles...i do keep track of them...once gave the DM a nightmare...filled 5 empty potion bottles with holy water from a temple...i later used them against an army of undead...good times...gotta love splash damage:smallbiggrin:

Mark Hall
2007-12-27, 11:42 PM
hell as a DM, I make players buy Flint if they want to light fires (or they can make a DC10 survival check to rub sticks together), and anyone who forgets a bedroll has to make a DC 15 concentration check to get rested when sleeping.

PLEASE tell me that's not the official Survival DC for fire-by-friction. That's a royal pain in the BUTT.

Irreverent Fool
2007-12-27, 11:43 PM
About empty bottles...i do keep track of them...once gave the DM a nightmare...filled 5 empty potion bottles with holy water from a temple...i later used them against an army of undead...good times...gotta love splash damage:smallbiggrin:

The holy water in your world must actually be useful then. As a splash weapon, it's hardly worth the standard action to throw it even against CR 1/2 skeletons. Makes me mad, it does.


PLEASE tell me that's not the official Survival DC for fire-by-friction. That's a royal pain in the BUTT.
DC10 is a pain in the butt??

Methabroax
2007-12-27, 11:49 PM
I thought they had completely nerfed holy water. Man I remember when DnD (way back before it was ADnD) when holy water was awesome.

kemmotar
2007-12-27, 11:55 PM
i don't exactly remember what holy water was supposed to do...but it worked when i tried it:smalltongue:

Maybe it was the source...some kind of fountain in the underground crypts of on of ilmater's abandoned temples...was inhabited by a black dragon...we saved and purged the place..then there was this fountain...our cursed into being an undead party member stepped in and was cured from the disease...after this we realised that it wasn't poisoned and we all drank some...good stuff...undead didn't like it though:smallwink:

Also as mentioned you can bottle poisons you gather...also our resident half-vampire bled his defeated enemies into empty potion bottles so as not to run out of blood...

tyckspoon
2007-12-28, 12:02 AM
DC10 is a pain in the butt??

It's not too hard if you have any real ranks in the relevant skill. It's moderately difficult if you don't.. which reflects my own experiences with friction-based fire kits fairly well (although you will never actually get fire from the stereotypical caveman 'rubbing two sticks together'; you don't get enough speed doing it solely by hand to get an appreciable ember.)


I thought they had completely nerfed holy water. Man I remember when DnD (way back before it was ADnD) when holy water was awesome.

Standard Holy Water, yes. 2d4 per vial, 1 point splash. That's not too bad, but at 25 gp a shot it's too expensive to use as a standard weapon at the lower levels where you'd really like to have it, and too little damage to be much use at higher levels when you can afford to carry lots of it.

kemmotar
2007-12-28, 12:19 AM
too little damage to be much use at higher levels when you can afford to carry lots of it.

unless it's free from the local temple or resident cleric and you're using gourds thrown by some higher str character...maybe a hulking hurler throwing gigantic containers of holy water...hehehe...the answer to zombiegeddon?

Collin152
2007-12-28, 12:25 AM
DC 10 for starting a fire without flint?
No.
Not only is that outrageously easy (Who would carry flint?), but starting a fire that way is hard. Trust me. You can get heat, no problem, but fire? THat takes skill. DC 15, thats better.

Mark Hall
2007-12-28, 12:27 AM
DC10 is a pain in the butt??

Fire by friction is a pain in the butt. DC 10 is criminally low.

Yami
2007-12-28, 01:01 AM
I myself always start the game with flasks of ale, drain the contents and store my potions in those. Never comes up in game, but I try to be prepared.

CactusAir
2007-12-30, 08:07 AM
PLEASE tell me that's not the official Survival DC for fire-by-friction. That's a royal pain in the BUTT.

I would have set it higher but DC 10 is the highest you can make untrained, and I don't want to be *too* cruel to my players.

Unless they piss me off, at which point they get burried under swarmfighting martial adepts.

daggaz
2007-12-30, 09:01 AM
PLEASE tell me that's not the official Survival DC for fire-by-friction. That's a royal pain in the BUTT.

(Quoting about a DC 10 survival check to light a fire by rubbing sticks together)

Yeah, heh. Having done that, I would say its at least DC 25.

Kurald Galain
2007-12-30, 09:08 AM
I would have set it higher but DC 10 is the highest you can make untrained, and I don't want to be *too* cruel to my players.

DC 10 means an untrained, unintelligent commoner gets it right half the time. Clearly that's not the case for this rather difficult way of setting fires.

Me? I'd allow any character with five ranks in survival to do it automatically, and any character without that to automatically fail. Go and try it yourself; unless you actually know how to make fire this way, as opposed to having heard about the possibility some time, you will fail.

Besides, disallowing the PCs a campfire for one night isn't mean. They'll wisen up quickly and either buy flint, or use a Burning Hands spell for the purpose.

BobTheDog
2007-12-30, 09:21 AM
DC 10 means an untrained, unintelligent commoner gets it right half the time. Clearly that's not the case for this rather difficult way of setting fires.

Actually, it means that commoner gets it right ALL the time, provided he's not trying to do it in the middle of battle, or while hanging off a cliff or something like that.

Take 10, gotta love that rule. :smallbiggrin:

CactusAir
2008-01-01, 08:25 PM
Well you've convinced me. DC25 it is.

Heh, if you're really mean, make sorcerors and wizards take craft skills for all thos odd materiel components. PC sorcerors will hate you.