# Masterwork Potion Belt



## stegma (Aug 14, 2006)

Would anyone know which book the Masterwork Potion Belt is located in?

My DM hasn't heard of this item but it clearly exists.  I just want to make sure this isnt a made up item that everyone adopted since I cant find it in any of my books. 
(not that I have them all)

Potion Belts: Allows you to carry 6 potions and retrieve them as a free action. 
A masterwork version holds 10 potions.

Thanks greately!


----------



## mikebr99 (Aug 14, 2006)

stegma said:
			
		

> Would anyone know which book the Masterwork Potion Belt is located in?
> 
> My DM hasn't heard of this item but it clearly exists.  I just want to make sure this isnt a made up item that everyone adopted since I cant find it in any of my books.
> (not that I have them all)
> ...



The MW potion belt is in the FR campaign setting... 
holds 10 potions... retrieving is a free action. market value = 60gp.

Mike


----------



## frankthedm (Aug 14, 2006)

mikebr99 said:
			
		

> The MW potion belt is in the FR campaign setting...
> holds 10 potions... retrieving is a free action. market value = 60gp.
> 
> Mike



That is a 3.0 book was it not? Did it make it into the Player's guide to fearun?

Sunder, a DM's best friend.


----------



## mikebr99 (Aug 14, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> That is a 3.0 book was it not? Did it make it into the Player's guide to fearun?
> 
> Sunder, a DM's best friend.



Yes, FRCS was 3.0... and none of the new equipment was updated in FR PgtF. So it can still be used as-is.

Sunder... and Power word, Pain as a 1st level spell. 

Mike


----------



## iceifur (Aug 15, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> That is a 3.0 book was it not? Did it make it into the Player's guide to fearun?
> 
> Sunder, a DM's best friend.





Yes, but so is "rocks fall, everyone dies." The game is set up so that a DM can bone their players at any time. A DM could, of course, *talk* with their players to determine whether a given item is appropriate to the campaign, but that would just be silly.


----------



## Vurt (Aug 15, 2006)

How is this item overpowered?  Retrieving it is a free action instead of a move-equivalent one, sure, but it still takes a standard action to actually drink the darned thing.  So one can still only quaff one potion per round.

This seems to me to be useful primarily for downing healing potions while trying to get away from something!  What am I missing here?

Cheers,
Vurt


----------



## wayne62682 (Aug 15, 2006)

If I am not mistaken, I think the price was errata'd to 6gp instead of 60.. since the regular, non-masterwork version costs 1gp and can hold 6 potions.  Paying 59 additional gp for 4 additional potions seems, well, a little ridiculous to me.

Potion Belts are great; every character I ever play (whether in FR or not) has one.  Why these things were'nt added to the PHB I'll never know, but they are an amazing item to have.  Every adventurer should own one.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Aug 15, 2006)

wayne62682 said:
			
		

> Why these things were'nt added to the PHB I'll never know, but they are an amazing item to have.



 Because the idea is comical.  The PH has some laughs perhaps, but not joke items like that.


----------



## Deset Gled (Aug 15, 2006)

Vurt said:
			
		

> How is this item overpowered?



The alternative to this item is a feat (Quickdraw), or a 20000 gp item (gloves of storing).  This item costs under 100 gp.

Changing something from a move action to a free action is a huge deal.


----------



## Nac_Mac_Feegle (Aug 15, 2006)

Itsa good item, and soon falls by the wayside once you get your first magic belt, because you cant wear both. Belt of Giant strength over the potion belt anyday TYVM.

Feegle Out


----------



## Vurt (Aug 15, 2006)

Deset Gled said:
			
		

> The alternative to this item is a feat (Quickdraw), or a 20000 gp item (gloves of storing).  This item costs under 100 gp.
> 
> Changing something from a move action to a free action is a huge deal.




I think Quickdraw is more useful for pulling things other than just potions.  If you could store weapons in a masterwork potion belt I might feel this arguement carried more weight.  Let me propose a new feat instead: Quickdraw (potion), which only allows one to quickdraw a potion.  How is that not a wasted feat for most characters?  It compares poorly even to the lowly Alertness, in my opinion.

But I agree, changing something from a move action to a free one is a big deal, but only with the caveat that that something is regularly useful in practice.  In general this usually involves things one attacks with.  But the specifics in this instance seem to greatly mitigate that.

EDIT: Compare with how characters with BAB +1 or higher can draw a weapon for free as part of a move.  In practice this amounts to only fighters at 1st level, and everyone else at 2nd.  The potion belt essentially allows someone to do the same thing with a potion.  After all, what 1st level character is going to drop 60 gp on one of these things at character creation?

EDIT2: Oh, and BTW, gloves of storing only cost 10k, not 20k.

Cheers,
Vurt


----------



## The Forsaken One (Aug 15, 2006)

Deset Gled said:
			
		

> The alternative to this item is a feat (Quickdraw), or a 20000 gp item (gloves of storing).  This item costs under 100 gp.
> 
> Changing something from a move action to a free action is a huge deal.




Strongly disagree with this. Since you conveniently forget to mention what else that feat and item are capable off. These are just potions and as previously mentioned that instead of making it a fullround action worth of things to drink one turning it into a standard action + a by the DM limited amount of free action per round within reason shouldnt be any problem at all.

And as for the magic belt, why not just put your enhancements on the potion belt? Nothing wrong that with, just have a magical potion belt with enhancements and whatever. I do it all the time.


----------



## IndyPendant (Aug 15, 2006)

SRD said:
			
		

> Quick Draw
> 
> Benefit: You can draw a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action. You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action.
> 
> A character who has selected this feat may throw weapons at his full normal rate of attacks (much like a character with a bow).



The problem with the alternative to the potion belt being Quick Draw is that anal retentive GMs will not allow it to work with anything but a weapon, since that is clearly what the feat states it's for.

Therefore, for many Quick Draw is *not* a viable alternative.

Some GMs just like to hose their players.  *shrug*


----------



## KarinsDad (Aug 15, 2006)

The Forsaken One said:
			
		

> Strongly disagree with this. Since you conveniently forget to mention what else that feat and item are capable off. These are just potions and as previously mentioned that instead of making it a fullround action worth of things to drink one turning it into a standard action + a by the DM limited amount of free action per round within reason shouldnt be any problem at all.




It was a big deal for my campaign.

So, I house ruled the masterwork potion belts and scroll bandoliers to be equivalent to drawing a weapon: At a +1 BAB, you can either pull them out as a move action, or you can do a Move and pull them out simultaneously. This still allows someone to pull out a potion as they move to a downed ally and have the ally drink the potion.

But, I seriously think that allowing a character to do a Full Round Attack and still pull out any item (be it a weapon, a potion, a scroll, a shield, or whatever) is a big deal and should not be allowed so cheaply. IMO.


----------



## Vurt (Aug 15, 2006)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> It was a big deal for my campaign.
> 
> So, I house ruled the masterwork potion belts and scroll bandoliers to be equivalent to drawing a weapon: At a +1 BAB, you can either pull them out as a move action, or you can do a Move and pull them out simultaneously. This still allows someone to pull out a potion as they move to a downed ally and have the ally drink the potion.




This sounds like a good compromise.  Incidentally, what was the problem that came up in your game?

Cheers,
Vurt


----------



## moritheil (Aug 15, 2006)

The problem comes when you have someone with exploding energized potions who wishes to take full attack actions to throw them, and gets around the quick draw feat by buying a potion belt.


----------



## Deset Gled (Aug 15, 2006)

The Forsaken One said:
			
		

> Since you conveniently forget to mention what else that feat and item are capable off.




Let me clarify.  I was not attempting to state that this belt is anywhere near as powerful as the other things I mentioned, but I was pointing out the only other ways that it is possible to mimic the power of the belt (Vurt: good catch on the price.  I was going from memory of the last build I made with them, that used a pair).  Note that both of these options are extremely more expensive that this item.  This item may be limited use, but is not limited enough to justify a 99.4% discount.

Looking at changes made from 3.0 to 3.5 makes me believe that WotC is on my side on this one.  In 3.0, the Gloves of Storing only cost about 2000 gp.  In 3.5, their cost went up about 500%.  Also, 3.0 also allowed items to be pulled out of a Haversack as a free action, but was errataed to be a move action.  3.0 Haste would also have helpd a character pull off the same moves, but was revised in 3.5 not not allow any extra actions.  Clearly, extra actions are something that is supposed to be hard to come by.  Allowing a belt to give them for 60 gp is just going too far IMO.


----------



## Chaldfont (Aug 15, 2006)

This is indeed a good piece of equipment. All my players get these for their characters. Are they unbalanced? I don't think so. The belts lead to the practice of the PCs spending most of their gold on potions. This left them light in other areas, so it all worked out.

It probably also speeds up combat encounters: standard action to drink your barkskin/cats grace/bull's strength/etc. You don't waste as much time buffing up before you get to the fun.

And throw a shatter spell at them every once in a while. Delight in the look on your player's face as TEN potions run down their legs.


----------



## shilsen (Aug 15, 2006)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> It was a big deal for my campaign.
> 
> So, I house ruled the masterwork potion belts and scroll bandoliers to be equivalent to drawing a weapon: At a +1 BAB, you can either pull them out as a move action, or you can do a Move and pull them out simultaneously. This still allows someone to pull out a potion as they move to a downed ally and have the ally drink the potion.




Did you also house rule how long it takes to give a potion to an unconscious person? That takes a full-round action (DMG pg. 229), so the person with the potion in your above example wouldn't be able to complete using it on the downed ally in the same round.


----------



## KarinsDad (Aug 15, 2006)

Vurt said:
			
		

> This sounds like a good compromise.  Incidentally, what was the problem that came up in your game?




I don't recall the exact details since it was a few years ago.

But, a player in my campaign did something like pull out a Scroll of Summon Monster and then start casting the one round spell. I told him he could not do that since it was a move action plus a full round action and he replied that he had purposely purchased the scroll bandolier (or potion belt, or whatever the situation was) just so that he could do this. When I found out the cost, I ixnaed it.

I have a bit of a problem with the "bigger, badder, better" syndrome that WotC has added into the game in the last few years by adding cheap items which allow one class to perform the actions of another class or which allow an item to perform the equivalent of a feat. Items, especially non-magical items, now have to get the DM nod in my game whereas when 3E first came out, this was not the case.


----------



## KarinsDad (Aug 15, 2006)

shilsen said:
			
		

> Did you also house rule how long it takes to give a potion to an unconscious person? That takes a full-round action (DMG pg. 229), so the person with the potion in your above example wouldn't be able to complete using it on the downed ally in the same round.




Hmmm. Never saw that rule.

An unconscious character cannot resist, so giving them a potion should be no different than casting a spell on them.

No wonder they added the masterwork potion belts. They had a bad rule in the DMG and they corrected it with a bad item rule.


----------



## Notmousse (Aug 15, 2006)

Why not wear the potion belt *over* the magic belt?


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Aug 15, 2006)

Chaldfont said:
			
		

> And throw a shatter spell at them every once in a while. Delight in the look on your player's face as TEN potions run down their legs.



 Why would this depend on the potion belt (assuming you allow shatter to work on potions--which is a different argument)?

I can see why in every case listed here where this item is allowed, every PC obtains one ASAP.  It's just _that_ good.  It's _too_ good.  For 1gp, it's a "no duh".  It's no different than merely houseruling that you can retrieve a potion as a free action.  No difference.


----------



## shilsen (Aug 15, 2006)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Hmmm. Never saw that rule.
> 
> An unconscious character cannot resist, so giving them a potion should be no different than casting a spell on them.
> 
> No wonder they added the masterwork potion belts. They had a bad rule in the DMG and they corrected it with a bad item rule.



 It's not about them resisting. Try getting an unconscious person to drink something, however small. It isn't that easy.

Anyway, I like the full-round rule. Different strokes...


----------



## KarinsDad (Aug 16, 2006)

shilsen said:
			
		

> It's not about them resisting. Try getting an unconscious person to drink something, however small. It isn't that easy.




Do you have personal experience with this, or did you make it up?

In real life, you should never give an unconscious person anything to drink (unless maybe he is a diabetic and in need of sugar such as a soda), so I wonder where you get your information. Are you equating the risk factors of drinking while unconscious with some supposed difficulty?



			
				shilsen said:
			
		

> Anyway, I like the full-round rule. Different strokes...




The problem with the rule is that in core, a PC at -9 cannot be healed with a potion (shy of his ally already having the potion bottle out and being within 5 feet). That means that 90% of the time, that PC is dead unless there is a caster capable of casting a Cure spell within 20 or 30 feet (or a Rogue with UMD and a Cure Scroll within 5 feet).

Rules that assist in PCs dying are not good rules.

This rule ensures that PCs at -9 have a greater chance to die. Having it be a standard action alleviates that somewhat.


So, you cannot have it both ways. Either the DMG full round rule is good, or the masterwork potion belt rule is good. If the DMG rule is good, then the masterwork potion belt overcomes some of the advantages of the DMG rule and hence is bad (especially considering how cheap it is). If not, then the DMG rule is bad.


----------



## shilsen (Aug 16, 2006)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Do you have personal experience with this, or did you make it up?
> 
> In real life, you should never give an unconscious person anything to drink (unless maybe he is a diabetic and in need of sugar such as a soda), so I wonder where you get your information. Are you equating the risk factors of drinking while unconscious with some supposed difficulty?




Yes, that's what I'm equating. I should have phrased it better.



> The problem with the rule is that in core, a PC at -9 cannot be healed with a potion (shy of his ally already having the potion bottle out and being within 5 feet). That means that 90% of the time, that PC is dead unless there is a caster capable of casting a Cure spell within 20 or 30 feet (or a Rogue with UMD and a Cure Scroll within 5 feet).
> 
> Rules that assist in PCs dying are not good rules.




Criticals, save or die spells, dying at -10 instead of at, say, -20, are all rules that assist in PCs dying. Doesn't make them bad rules to me. They do to you. And I'm to disagree with you. As I said, different strokes. 



> This rule ensures that PCs at -9 have a greater chance to die. Having it be a standard action alleviates that somewhat.




Yes, it does ensure that they have a greater chance to die. Not a problem in my book.



> So, you cannot have it both ways. Either the DMG full round rule is good, or the masterwork potion belt rule is good. If the DMG rule is good, then the masterwork potion belt overcomes some of the advantages of the DMG rule and hence is bad (especially considering how cheap it is). If not, then the DMG rule is bad.




I never said that I want to have it both ways. I think the masterwork potion belt rule is really bad.


----------



## KarinsDad (Aug 16, 2006)

shilsen said:
			
		

> I think the masterwork potion belt rule is really bad.




Well, at least we agree on that.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Aug 16, 2006)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> The problem with the rule is that in core, a PC at -9 cannot be healed with a potion (shy of his ally already having the potion bottle out and being within 5 feet). That means that 90% of the time, that PC is dead unless there is a caster capable of casting a Cure spell within 20 or 30 feet (or a Rogue with UMD and a Cure Scroll within 5 feet).



  Maybe. A less invasive houserule would be that you do not lose a hit point from "dying" while a curative potion is being dripped down your throat.  That's the one I go with, especially since I'm not entirely convinced it's a houserule (it's more like a clarification of an undefined scenario).

Btw, I'd say your houserule rarely ever keeps someone from dying but actually puts them back into the game more quickly.  In other words, it's far more useful for character at -1 to -5 or so than it is for about -6 to -8.  Your houserule doesn't really keep PCs from dying, it just makes it far easier to get them back up immediately.  And, I'm not sure that's a good thing as it really weakens opponents without access to potions and coherent parties.


----------



## KarinsDad (Aug 16, 2006)

Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> Maybe. A less invasive houserule would be that you do not lose a hit point from "dying" while a curative potion is being dripped down your throat.  That's the one I go with, especially since I'm not entirely convinced it's a houserule (it's more like a clarification of an undefined scenario).




It's more like a houserule since if you cannot 5 foot step to get to the downed PC immediately, you cannot take a full round action in order to stabilize him with a potion. Allowing someone to pour the potion down in part of round x and in part of round x+1 would be a houserule as well.



			
				Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> Btw, I'd say your houserule rarely ever keeps someone from dying but actually puts them back into the game more quickly.  In other words, it's far more useful for character at -1 to -5 or so than it is for about -6 to -8.  Your houserule doesn't really keep PCs from dying, it just makes it far easier to get them back up immediately.




Actually, my real houserule is that a PC at -10 or lower can be kept alive if healed up to -9 within a round. This occassionally keeps someone from dying. I was unaware that the standard action for a potion given to an unconscious character even was a houserule.

And, PCs cannot always get up immediately in my game either. It requires a DC 15 Will Save or they are stunned for a round. Granted, at higher levels, this houserule will rarely come into play, but at low levels, this offsets the "get back up right away" issue somewhat.



			
				Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> And, I'm not sure that's a good thing as it really weakens opponents without access to potions and coherent parties.




The game is played for the players, not the NPCs. If NPCs do not have potions or coherent parties, too bad. Thousands of NPCs can die in a given campaign and as DM, it is no skin off my nose.

Allowing any PC a chance to save a dying fellow PC, on the other hand, is heroic and fun, especially since they have to give up a round's worth of actions and a somewhat costly single use item to do so. Players remember when Targa the Barbarian saved Elena the Cleric's life.

Limiting healing of dying PCs mostly to divine spell casters is boring and pedestrian. Allowing PCs to sacrifice an item in order to save a fellow PC is not. Some of my best memories of the game are when one of my PCs saved one or more party members.


----------



## Caliban (Aug 16, 2006)

Vurt said:
			
		

> How is this item overpowered?  Retrieving it is a free action instead of a move-equivalent one, sure, but it still takes a standard action to actually drink the darned thing.  So one can still only quaff one potion per round.
> 
> This seems to me to be useful primarily for downing healing potions while trying to get away from something!  What am I missing here?
> 
> ...




You think that's good, try the Potion Bracer from Eberron (Sharn sourcebook, I believe).   It holds 3 potions and lets you drink them as a Standard Action that doesn't provoke an AoO.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 17, 2006)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Allowing someone to pour the potion down in part of round x and in part of round x+1 would be a houserule as well.




Well, it's just an interpretation of the Start/Complete Full Round Action actions.

Strictly, nothing happens until the Complete Full Round Action action is finished.  But I2k, I think, is proposing that if someone has taken the Start Full Round Action action to begin the Feed Unconscious Person a CLW Potion full round action, they are in the process of feeding that person a potion, and the person doesn't lose a hit point that round.  Of course, they won't get any hit points _back_ until the Complete Full Round Action action is taken next round (assuming nothing happens to interrupt their benefactor).

-Hyp.


----------



## Rolzup (Aug 17, 2006)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Do you have personal experience with this, or did you make it up?
> 
> In real life, you should never give an unconscious person anything to drink (unless maybe he is a diabetic and in need of sugar such as a soda), so I wonder where you get your information. Are you equating the risk factors of drinking while unconscious with some supposed difficulty?




There's a nice bit from one of Joel Rosenberg's "Guardians of the Flame" books, in which someone is trying to give a healing potion to an unconscious individual.  He's admonished that he could choke the victim that way, and the response is, "This is a healing potion;  The only way I could injure him with it is to hit him over the head with the bottle."

Which is kinda how I'd always seen it, frankly.


----------



## KarinsDad (Aug 17, 2006)

Rolzup said:
			
		

> There's a nice bit from one of Joel Rosenberg's "Guardians of the Flame" books, in which someone is trying to give a healing potion to an unconscious individual.  He's admonished that he could choke the victim that way, and the response is, "This is a healing potion;  The only way I could injure him with it is to hit him over the head with the bottle."
> 
> Which is kinda how I'd always seen it, frankly.




Agreed.


----------



## Joe Vanlandingham (Dec 18, 2016)

"More Ultimate Equipment" by Mongoose Publishing. 

Potion Belt
Holding up to 10 vials for easy access, the potion belt allows an adventurer to down vital concoctions during pitched battle. One potion may be removed and drunk from a potion belt as a free action each round.
Potion Belt: 65 gp, 1 lb.


----------



## Deset Gled (Dec 19, 2016)

Joe Vanlandingham said:


> "More Ultimate Equipment" by Mongoose Publishing.
> 
> Potion Belt
> Holding up to 10 vials for easy access, the potion belt allows an adventurer to down vital concoctions during pitched battle. One potion may be removed and drunk from a potion belt as a free action each round.
> Potion Belt: 65 gp, 1 lb.




Welcome to the boards!  

That's one heck of a case of thread necromancy.  But it is interesting to compare how 3.5 valued actions at the start of it's release to the end of it's life cycle.


----------

