# Multiple Potion Drinking



## Herremann the Wise (Nov 18, 2004)

Hello Everyone,

This old chestnut came up recently, first time in 3.5 though:

The PC in the hope of being expedient grabbed three healing potions and gulped down the collective contents. They were Cure Moderate Wounds and two Cure Lights.

To what effect:

1) All work immediately
2) All work consecutively in a random order (that is over the next three rounds - one round per potion)
3) All work consecutively from most to least powerful
4) Only the most powerful one works - the others have no effect
5) Only a random one works - the others have no effect
6) Something bad happens
7) Something random happens

Personally, I always thought number 7 was fun if slightly ridiculous. In truth though, my ruling would most likely be 5 or maybe 4. Can anyone help out with something more official or logical?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise


----------



## Man-thing (Nov 18, 2004)

Well according to Ronin Arts' *Forbidden Arcana: Potion Mixology* :
(checking his file)

Drat, can't help you it seems that potion mixology rules only apply to when a character drinks a second potion while a first one is still in effect. Since cures are instantaneous they will not cause problems with each other.  If they did I would have rolled on the table for you.


----------



## Herpes Cineplex (Nov 18, 2004)

You seem to have missed the obvious option:

8) Drinking a potion is a standard action, so a character simply can't drink three potions simultaneously.  Each round the character may choose which potion he is drinking (or choose randomly if he's just uncapping and drinking whatever comes to hand), and the results will be resolved normally, just like the rules say.

--
that hoary old potion miscibility chart was intensely stupid anyway
ryan


----------



## Herremann the Wise (Nov 18, 2004)

Hi Herpes Cineplex,

Your DMing. The player says that they have three vials taped together. They swallow the collective contents. You as the DM say:

Ooh. Yep. This is going to take a while - three rounds actually. Do you just want to swallow one instead? Oh yeah. That would be a little difficult. Can you give me sleight of hand check. DC 12 please?

Alternatively, consider that the three have been poured together into a cup and the cup's contents are skulled.

Either way, I would rule this a standard action. It does not seem feasible to say it take's longer and thus why I did not want to include your version 8.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise


----------



## x12b20 (Nov 18, 2004)

Disclaimer: I wrote Forbidden Arcana: Potion Mixology.

A potion is usually a single ounce of liquid, so it wouldn't be much of a problem to pop the tops from three vials and down them all at once.

The real issue here is what kind of precedent you want to set for your game. 

If you choose option#1, players will most likely begin combining potions ahead of time to maximize their effectiveness, which could potentially be problematic (and how do you stop them from combining four or five potions or claiming that they can stack effects?).

Options #2 and #3 can get a little problematic with potions that last a while.

#4 breaks down when both potions have the same level of power.

#5 is probably your best choice if you want this sort of thing to have the least impact on your game.

#6 should keep them from moxing potions in the future, but now you have to decide what "bad" things you want to happen if they do.

#7 is the most interesting option but you have to decide what random things can happen. This is the option I use in my campaign and why I wrote the PDF.


----------



## Grayhawk (Nov 18, 2004)

To avoid this kind of situation in the future, I'd spell out that you can only drink 1 potion per round. If someone asks for a reasoning, it's because _it's magic. That's how potions work. If you mix several of 'em up in a cup, to be able to drink more than one simultaneously, the potions negate each other. Same thing if you try to drink from several vials at the same time. For a potion to take effect, you must drink it pure and undiluted._ (Disclaimer: I'm not saying that that's how the rules put it, but it seems to be a suitable explanation for why the rule is the way it is.)

Unless, of course, you'd like them to be able to do so, in which case it would be a house rule and in which case you'd have to make up house rules for how to handle it.


----------



## pbd (Nov 18, 2004)

*Multiple potions*

The replies so far seem to be more about if the character could actually drink 3 potions in a round or not, rather than what will hapen when he does.  

From the context it seems that the Herreman has already allowed the player to grab and drink the potions, so I won't question that for now.

The issue is what would happen when you drink multiple potions; my own thinking is that healing potions would just be additive, you get 2d8 + x + 1dx + x + 1d8 + x (x is the xaster level bonus for each potion).  The magic is all the same kind, healing.  It is just stronger in the cure moderate wounds potion than in the two cure lights.  As for other potions I like options 4 or 5.  This is more of a game balance issue than anything else though.  If you could just drink a bunch of potions at once and get all the effects, high level characters would just have a bunch of prepackaged bundles of bufing potions and drink them all down when they need the boost.  That just doesn't smack me as right.  The healing potions, though, I think should be the exception to this rule and just be additive; it is the same kind of magic here.


As an aside, on the issue of if the character can drink three potions in a round, remmeber a round is 6 seconds.  Time it it is longer than you think.  You can do a lot in six seconds.  This whole standard action/move action stuff is a guideline and it is a shame to follow a "rule" that is just isn't realistc (yes I know this is a Fantasy game with magic and isn't very realistic, but the game is applying basic metaphysics to fantsy situations.  But just imagine a 21 foot giant weighting 12,000 pounds, it would be so dense that it couldn't walk on anything but rock or it would break through).  Look at your clock and imagine grabing three vials, popping a cork from each one and drinking them all at once.  If I remembeer a potion is usually in a vial not a jug, so the amount of liquid isn't a problem (imaging three shot-sized amounts).  Also, I have spent a decent amount of time in a lab woking with test tubes and know that you can easily pop a cork off ingle handed and it doesn't take very long.

pbd


----------



## Saeviomagy (Nov 18, 2004)

x12b20 said:
			
		

> A potion is usually a single ounce of liquid, so it wouldn't be much of a problem to pop the tops from three vials and down them all at once.




My suggestion:

Potions are not roughly the density of water. They are magical after all. One of these properties is that they are unnaturally light - about 1/10th the density of water.

Which means that instead of being about 28 millilitres, they're 280 millilitres. 

Or a bit more than a cup of liquid.

And you need to drink and swallow the whole thing for it to take effect.

Now it's suddenly reasonable that you can't drink more than one potion at a time. Even if you do pour them all into your mouth at once, they still take a bit to swallow.

And of course there's a reason for potion bottles to be of a decent size, instead of tiny little thimbles...


----------



## drnuncheon (Nov 18, 2004)

I'd charge them a move-equivalent action to prepare each potion - that is, to get them held correctly in the hand, uncapped, and situated so that you don't spill half of them down your shirt instead of your throat - and a standard action to drink them all.  I'd require both hands to arrange the potions that quickly, and it would provoke an attack of opportunity.

All would take effect normally, however.

The PC would get a slight benefit for this - downing 3 potions would only take 2 full rounds, as opposed to 3 standard actions - but the drawbacks are significant enough that it probably wouldn't be used often.

If the vials were taped together, they'd still have to uncork each and avoid spilling it - also provoking an Attack of Opportunity. Try taping three shot glasses together and downing them without splashing most of it all over your face.

As for pre-mixing the potions, that's when I'd have them start cancelling each other out, having random effects, becoming toxic, etc.  Alternately:

"OK, that's a move action to get out the cup, a move action to retrieve the first potion, a move action to pour it into the cup, a move action to retrieve the second potion, a move action to pour it into the cup,  a move action to retrieve the third potion...wouldn't it be easier to drink these separately?"

All of these, of course, are intended for people who try this during a fight.  If they're not in combat time, then why worry about it? Just say they drink the potions and move on.

J


----------



## Herremann the Wise (Nov 18, 2004)

Hello again,

From the DMG:

_A typical potion or oil consists of one ounce of liquid held in a ceramic or glass vial fitted with a tight stopper. The stoppered container is usually no more than 1 inch wide and 2 inches high._

Thus I have no issue allowing the player to consume three times this in terms of the amount of liquid. 

and

_In terms of activation:
Drinking a potion requires no special skill. The user merely removes the stopper and swallows the potion._

Does this mean that unstoppering the vial is part of the activation? Does the vial need to be airtight? Am I probing too deeply into this?

Apologies for asking the question but it just seems like the rules don't cover all the options logically.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise


----------



## Grayhawk (Nov 18, 2004)

Herremann the Wise said:
			
		

> Apologies for asking the question but it just seems like the rules don't cover all the options logically.



I really don't see why they would have to. The rules state that drinking a potion is a standard action, even if they don't bother to explain _why_ it's a standard action.

And if your players aren't satisfied with a 'them's the rulez' reply, I offered a possible explanation in my post above


----------



## nhl_1997 (Nov 18, 2004)

Each DM is free to run things as he or she sees fit, but keep this in mind:

If you in any way make it possible to "activate" more than one potion with a single standard action, you are making potions more powerful compared to other standard action activating items.  Would you also allow someone to activate three scrolls with a single action?  Would you allow someone to activate three wands at once (I think there is a feat in the Complete Arcane allowing someone to activate two wands at once.)

One option to keep things more "balanced" is to invent a feat allowing the consumption of two potions simultaneously?  Perhaps, allowing multiple potions to be activated in your campaign wouldn't cause any balance issues due to the possibility for "random effects."  Another option, screw balance....  just go with what makes sense (perfectly reasonable alternative.)


----------



## TDRandall (Nov 18, 2004)

Well, official would be "you can't get the effect you want in the way you want them" and I'd go #4 using the "overlapping similar effects rule" and "sorry you wasted your two other potions".  Since that detracts from the fun here and you seem to be searching for an out (though that would make it more house-rule forum fodder), let's try to whip up something "logical" instead....

If you wanted to stick closest to the rules while still having fun, I would state that the bulk of the round when imbibing a potion is due to the time it takes to actually swallow the amount of liquid volume in a typical potion.  Therefore, since they are swallowing three times the volume of liquid, it takes three rounds (well, standard actions, I guess) to do so.  But then be ready to field request by the players for a feat to either concentrate a potion to smaller volume with same effect or "chug" the existing larger volume quicker.

If you wanted to allow the three-at-once-in-one-round, I would lean towards #2.  I would actually probably roll the amount of HPs to be gained back and then average it out per round, since the contents indeed mix.  Then your logic becomes that it takes a round for the throat/stomach to ingest the typical amount of potion volume/power contained within; since you drank 3X the typical volume it takes 3 rounds to get the complete effect.  You'll want to decide whether odd points go in the earlier round(s) (initial rush to the system) or later round(s) (body has more to work with in later round so gets better effect then) and then be consistent.

Glad to see someone put the "mixing potions is bad" rule back in even if it can't be used in this case.  (But why not?  Couldn't one say that while the effect has completed, the base of the potion is still present for "mixing" purposes?  Then you end up limiting them to what, one every 10 minutes or so? )  It seemed a complete change from the old days by having everyone in a party say "ok, every one have their multiple buffing potions ready?  Let's prepare for combat... 1 (gulp), 2 (gulp), 3 (gulp), ... charge!"

Sorry, rambling on with nothing official.  Take it or leave it, use it or don't.  I'd say I'm apathetic tonight, but I just don't care.


----------



## TDRandall (Nov 18, 2004)

Holy smokes!  I knew I had left this window open for a while before getting back to it, but 8 responses between the last one I saw and my last reply?  Wow you guys are fast!


----------



## Impeesa (Nov 18, 2004)

Here's a similar question for all of you "can't swallow that much at once" people: Say I've got a PC with the Swallow Whole ability. He's strapped a couple potion vials together beforehand, and at some point during combat he draws the bundle and tosses it back whole with a quick chew to break the vials. What effect does it have? 

--Impeesa--


----------



## TDRandall (Nov 18, 2004)

Is that purely a hypothetical?  Without resorting to some rather bizarre (or high CR/EL/ECL/whatever the correct term is) monsters I can't think of any really viable PC that could ever do that.

But if you want to push the case - why doesn't a monster that swallows a PC whole get the benefit of all potions the character may be wearing? (assuming they break, which it seems at least SOME should)


----------



## Herpes Cineplex (Nov 18, 2004)

Herremann the Wise said:
			
		

> Your DMing. The player says that they have three vials taped together. They swallow the collective contents. You as the DM say:



I, as the GM, say "What, are you TRYING to be a jerk?"  


If they insisted that this is what they are going to do (never mind where they found tape in the campaign setting...), then maybe I tell them that the shape of the vials makes it hard to get the necks close enough together for simultaneous drinking, and so they spill two of them on their shirt and get to roll 1d3 to see which one they actually swallowed.

Or if they say they mix three potions in a cup and drink it?  Perhaps I'd say okay, that'll take three rounds to uncap the vials, pour 'em into the cup, mix it, and drink it...and if you're not being a wanker about it, I'll probably just let all three potions work normally.  If you're annoying me, then, gee, I guess the efficacy of those potions diminishes when they're exposed to the air for that long, and maybe none of them will work.

But if I wasn't in the mood to humor a bad idea, I'd probably just tell them that their idea won't work and that they should just drink one potion at a time like the rules say.


Mind you, I'm not obsessed with following the rules in every situation, but there has to be a good enough reason to make me want to bend them.  This idea (chugging multiple potions simultaneously) just doesn't have any good reasons behind it.  I'm not feeling especially inclined to throw out a perfectly acceptable rule stating that drinking a potion is a standard action which can invite an attack of opportunity just on a whim, and I'm certainly not interested in opening the door for characters to start taping together three _cure light wounds_ potions instead of paying for a single potion of _cure serious wounds_ (thereby saving as much as 600gp and only losing a few extra hit points' worth of curing, no less!).

At some point you really just need to be able to say "Sorry, but NO."

--
good ideas can get the rules bent to fit them: dumb ideas never will


----------



## Li Shenron (Nov 18, 2004)

If one of my player insisted on being allowed swallowing 3 potions at once, from next encounter on I'll have every large/huge-sized monsters drink a barrel of potions with a standard action.

For me, this is really a matter of fair play.


----------



## Kelleris (Nov 18, 2004)

Sheesh, some people taking a tiny bit of creativity real personal-like here.    

I would say, sure, go ahead, but they won't all completely stack.  If I had time (PbP game, say), I'd see how much healing the total value of the potions provides, making up some number between the two closest.  Otherwise, I'd just half a random potion and quarter the last one, in terms of effects.  Faster healing, then, but not a whole lot better than one potion costing the same as the set of three.


----------



## Li Shenron (Nov 18, 2004)

Kelleris said:
			
		

> Sheesh, some people taking a tiny bit of creativity real personal-like here.




I'm all about supporting a player's creativity as much as possible... but there are situations when it could possibly make a precedent that you later can't easily get rid of. Two examples coming to my mind are (1) allowing to use a leather strip on the weapon to drop/pickup as a free action, (2) allowing to store wands or small weapons in your belt to draw/sheath as a free action.

As you see, I'm not very confident when it is about changing the type of action...


----------



## Harold as a Verb (Nov 18, 2004)

Herremann,

I'd allow option #2 or #3, with the corollary that the character is Nauseated for the round following the imbibing.

Justification: There's a _reason_ these potions are carefully crafted in the dose/potency categories available, namely that all drugs - even magical - have a degree of side effect that is compensated for within it's preparation - a counterforce equal to the dose's specific potency to offset it's "upset" on the system. Forcing multiple potions down faster than was intended in their manufacture means there's an awful lot of to-and-fro-ing taking place in the effect-vs-countering_side_effects battle ... and that takes its toll, temporarily, on the character's ability to act.


----------



## ElectricDragon (Nov 18, 2004)

I think the big thing is that the player avoided two attacks of opportunity by doing this. Why should he get so much benefit without any drawbacks? 3x potion-use in one round and avoid two attacks of opportunity while doing so? That is munch.

The archer ties three arrows together and fires them at the giant. Does he do three times damage (with a possibility of 9 times with a crit) and only draw one attack of opportunity?

I would maybe have the player come up with a prestige class that can do this stuff. IMC, I wouldn't allow it without some special training. Even the Swallow Whole creature takes potions at the normal speed, because the ability is for swallowing creatures whole not magical effects stored in liquid.

Ciao
Dave


----------



## LostSoul (Nov 18, 2004)

I'd just say that none of them work.


----------



## Henrix (Nov 18, 2004)

I'd go for no.4, only the most powerful works.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 18, 2004)

pbd said:
			
		

> The issue is what would happen when you drink multiple potions; my own thinking is that healing potions would just be additive, you get 2d8 + x + 1dx + x + 1d8 + x (x is the xaster level bonus for each potion).



In your interpretation, what would be the reason anyone would pay 300 gp for a _potion of cure moderate wounds_ that heals 2d8+3, when they could pay 150 gp for three _potions of cure light wounds_ and be able to heal 3d8+3 by chugging them at once?


----------



## dagger (Nov 18, 2004)

The 1st Edition DMG had a random percentile chart for this very thing, you should check it out. It has many different effects from bad things like poison, to good things like an increase in potion effectiveness. Maybe someone can post the chart here; I don't have my book handy.


----------



## pbd (Nov 18, 2004)

Staffan said:
			
		

> In your interpretation, what would be the reason anyone would pay 300 gp for a _potion of cure moderate wounds_ that heals 2d8+3, when they could pay 150 gp for three _potions of cure light wounds_ and be able to heal 3d8+3 by chugging them at once?




Why not?

First off, full-round to drink three versus standard action for just one.  

Secondly, just because the rules don't explicitly allow it doesn't mean you should disallow a good idea.  Give the player a break for thinking of something different.  So it may make potions of cure moderate less useful, oh well.

And just for the record I think his should only be usable for healing potions, for other potions only one should be effective.




			
				Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> My suggestion:
> 
> Potions are not roughly the density of water. They are magical after all. One of these properties is that they are unnaturally light - about 1/10th the density of water.
> 
> ...




An ounce is both a weight and volume measure.  Usually with liquids an ounce refers to volume; so 3, 1 ounce potions should add up to 3 ounces total liquid volume.

pbd


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Nov 18, 2004)

The Balance Nazi in me say #5 (random one works).  The rules are not really balanced if you allow mass potion drinking as is.

My personal interpretation of the rules are that potions are not passive substances.  They are really a class of "one-charge anyone-can-use" magic items*.  In general, you must use a degree of concentration to invoke any magic item.  In mechanical terms, that means:
    Action + Magic Item ==> Result
If you do not spend the action, you do _not_ get a result.

Fundamentally, this is not different than bundling 20 Wands of Magic Missile that have the same command word together.

If I were a DM, I would allow the creation of a Super Potions that you can scarf down by the handful as a Full Action, but that would require another craft feat (with Brew Potion as a prereq) and cost about double the usual to make.



* BTW, I see nothing wrong with allowing more flexible potions rules.  Frex, I would allow a "Potion" of Fireball -- a one-shot item that anyone can use to toss a Fireball.  Or even allowing higher levels spells as potions (with DM oversight, of course).  Potions for spells above 1st/2nd level are balanced by their cost.


----------



## kenobi65 (Nov 18, 2004)

Ridley's Cohort said:
			
		

> Fundamentally, this is not different than bundling 20 Wands of Magic Missile that have the same command word together.




For some reason, this made me think of a 20-potion-capacity beer bong.


----------



## LostSoul (Nov 18, 2004)

Staffan said:
			
		

> In your interpretation, what would be the reason anyone would pay 300 gp for a _potion of cure moderate wounds_ that heals 2d8+3, when they could pay 150 gp for three _potions of cure light wounds_ and be able to heal 3d8+3 by chugging them at once?




Because, as any suave adventurer knows, only _commoners_ drink potions of _cure light wounds_.  The big boys only drink the good stuff.  If you want to impress the ladies, pony up the cash for potions of _cure critical wounds_.


----------



## Gaiden (Nov 18, 2004)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> I'm all about supporting a player's creativity as much as possible... but there are situations when it could possibly make a precedent that you later can't easily get rid of. Two examples coming to my mind are (1) allowing to use a leather strip on the weapon to drop/pickup as a free action, (2) allowing to store wands or small weapons in your belt to draw/sheath as a free action.
> 
> As you see, I'm not very confident when it is about changing the type of action...




There are already precedents for what you say and for drinking a potions.

Check FRCS for the bandoleer (I believe) it allows the storage of some number of tiny items that can be drawn as a free action.  Dragon came out with an article last year that had a bunch of innovative items, one being a potion helmet - had protective compartments connected with tubes that allowed you to drink potions as a free action (I think it stored 6 potions).

If you have ever been to a fraternity party you'll know that 1 ounce is an incredibly small amount.  I personally could chug at least 2 cans of beer in 6 seconds, and I am not all that good at it.

In terms of quantity, there is not contest here, the volume of 3 potions should not be an issue (and let's not have the ridiculous dicussion about a feat called "Chugging").

The question is one of game balance.  If you are concerned about game balance, simply rule that simultaneous consumption of potions ruins them.  I would add the caveat that this only applied to potions of different types.  This means that healing potions (of the same type) would work together.  I think of it this way:  a enterprising brewer might have the not too brilliant idea that it would be more efficacious to create potions in larger quantities and then alliquot them.  So in this particular case, if they were all the same type of potion, I'd say fine.  Of course, there would have to be some sort of control on quantity consumed.

If game balance is still a concern with larger volume consumption, consider costs.  As a GM if you are regulating PC wealth and keeping track of expenditures, larger volumes of potions cost proportionally more.  If the PC's spend their money on larger potions, so be it.  It means they have used up that limited resource far faster than if they spread it out.  In the long run, they will exhaust such resources.  Moreover, if you are considering larger creatures consuming larger quantities, make sure to remember supply limitations.  A great wyrm consuming a proportionally larger potion of healing would probably tap the resources of the entire region, if that region even made that much potion.  You could also argue that each brewer has a slightly different technique and so the only way to get larger volumes is also by the same brewer (otherwise you act as if you were mixing different potions and their effects are ruined).


----------



## jodyjohnson (Nov 18, 2004)

Multiple Wands at the same time with the same command word.

Gallon jugs of alchemists fire and acid doing 8d6+ per shot.

Custom weapons with 3 longsword blades connected to a single hilt doing 3d8 damage per swing or better yet allowing 3 rolls per attack action (crescent blade anyone?).

The list of genius ideas continues.


----------



## pbd (Nov 18, 2004)

jodyjohnson said:
			
		

> Multiple Wands at the same time with the same command word.
> 
> Gallon jugs of alchemists fire and acid doing 8d6+ per shot.
> 
> ...




But remember each one of those "genius" ideas should face scrutiny adn approval by the DM...


----------



## Herpes Cineplex (Nov 18, 2004)

pbd said:
			
		

> Secondly, just because the rules don't explicitly allow it doesn't mean you should disallow a good idea.



...and if a *good* idea shows up, it stands a better than average chance of being allowed.  But "tape three potions together and chug 'em at once" isn't a good idea.  At best, it is simply a stupid idea.  At worst, it is a lame attempt to get several tangible and unbalancing benefits (reduced expense, fewer actions, and fewer potential attacks of opportunity, for example) by specifically ignoring a rule which works just fine in play.

--
if scrutiny has really been applied to this, then there won't be any approval


----------



## MerakSpielman (Nov 18, 2004)

Right. There's a reason the rules say it takes as long as it does to drink a potion, and that reason isn't realism.

If your PCs want to find a way to drink 3 potions in a round, there needs to be a mitigating factor to balance it. Not becuase it's realistic to do so, but because it's broken not to.


----------



## ARandomGod (Nov 18, 2004)

I've thought of an option I haven't seen meantioned... and one I rather like as to give something, but not too much.

Roll each of the potions effects seperately, take the highest numerical result.

Lessee.... two potions of cure light, and one cure mod..

Roll d8+1
Roll d8+1
Roll 2d8+3

Results
5
9
6 (Bad roll on that mod)

You heal nine. 

When asked why, well, the potions each take a certain amount of time to work... they each assessed the damage at the same time, and healed the damage simultaniously, and therefore there was a lot of damage overlap, as two of the potions wasted their magics curing damage that had already been cured. Wow. Now you know why people don't typically do that (But there's still some reason why someone MIGHT).


----------



## ph34r (Nov 18, 2004)

Herremann the Wise said:
			
		

> Am I probing too deeply into this?




Yes.

Why stress out over something that's not that big of a deal. Just say they can drink *A* potion as a standard action and leave it at that. If they want to complain I'm sure they know where the door is.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Nov 18, 2004)

pbd said:
			
		

> An ounce is both a weight and volume measure.



Which is just another reason why the imperial system is silly.


> Usually with liquids an ounce refers to volume; so 3, 1 ounce potions should add up to 3 ounces total liquid volume.




Believe it or not, a liquid ounce of water is one ounce in weight. That's the whole grounds for the thing.

And theres absolutely nothing to stop us going with my interpretation - a potion weighs one ounce and contains  10 liquid ounces of fluid.

And hell, if you're going to say "but it comes in a vial that's 2 inches by 1 inch" - for starters that vial can hold up to about 3 fluid ounces...

So in my campaign, a potion is an amount of liquid that is difficult to drink in under 6 seconds. Try drinking 3 at once and either you take 18 seconds choking it all down, or you spill two of them everywhere.


----------



## Henrix (Nov 19, 2004)

LostSoul said:
			
		

> Because, as any suave adventurer knows, only _commoners_ drink potions of _cure light wounds_.




Or as was posted on a fun thread at RPG.net (Unknown Armies style rumour for D&D):


> Potions of cure wounds are addictive. I've known people who've gone for years without drinking a single one. But adventurers can't get by with just one - ever notice?





> Tell me about it. My friend got hooked on those things. This would have been back before I lost my eye. It got to the point where he couldn't get through a day without drinking one. Then it got worse. He had to use more and more powerful cure wounds potions to get the same kick. He was downing two or three potions every hour. And then they stopped working altogether. That's when he switched to inflict wounds. Gods, that's an ugly way to die...


----------



## Henrix (Nov 19, 2004)

But the non-rules answer is surely that potions are magic, you just can't mix them to get increased effect. 
It's like mixing drinks, or food. Mixing chocolate, apple juice, mustard, marshmallows, cognac and whisky together doesn't really make it better.


----------



## Sejs (Nov 19, 2004)

> Your DMing. The player says that they have three vials taped together. They swallow the collective contents. You as the DM say:




"You get potion all over your face."


----------



## Staffan (Nov 19, 2004)

Henrix said:
			
		

> Or as was posted on a fun thread at RPG.net (Unknown Armies style rumour for D&D):



Addiction/tolerance might work as a hand-wave as to why high-level characters need a lot more magic to heal smaller wounds (under the "hp represent attack avoidance, not real damage" theory).


----------



## ARandomGod (Nov 23, 2004)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> Which is just another reason why the imperial system is silly.
> 
> 
> Believe it or not, a liquid ounce of water is one ounce in weight. That's the whole grounds for the thing.
> ...





Yea, but anyone knows that you can, with a little practice, chug way more than that in under six seconds.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Nov 23, 2004)

ARandomGod said:
			
		

> Yea, but anyone knows that you can, with a little practice, chug way more than that in under six seconds.




Three seconds. You have to get it out first, remember?

And I'd be impressed by someone who can put back much more than a cup of water in less than 3 seconds.


----------



## ARandomGod (Nov 23, 2004)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> Three seconds. You have to get it out first, remember?
> 
> And I'd be impressed by someone who can put back much more than a cup of water in less than 3 seconds.





Me too man, me too. Still, all that says is that it's impressive. ^_^


----------



## Aristotle (Nov 23, 2004)

This is a 'spirit of the rules' question...

Of course a person could theoretically drink more liquid than what it describes a potion containing. No it wouldn't take an abnormal amount of dexterity to pop the corks on two potions and tip them into your mouth. Any argument that you couldn't do those things is silly.

The rules say one potion in one standard action, which (IMHO) means the spirit of the rules imply (without class abilities or feats that say otherwise) a character can only benefit from one new potion in any given round.

It's not an issue of how much you can drink. It's an issue of how many AoO's you provoke, how much magic you can make use of in a round, and countless other nuances of game balance.

If the spirit of the rules implies to me that you can only make use of one potion per round and my players demand an explanation for that... I'll give them the simplest plausible explanation I can come up with.

The body can only absorb the magic of one potion at a time. There must be a delay between potions to allow the affects of each one to 'take'. If you try to force more down, only one (randomly chosen) potion takes. If you mix them ahead of time you spoil all of the potions and none of them work.

Or whatever works for your game...


----------



## Ferox4 (Nov 23, 2004)

dagger said:
			
		

> The 1st Edition DMG had a random percentile chart for this very thing, you should check it out. It has many different effects from bad things like poison, to good things like an increase in potion effectiveness. Maybe someone can post the chart here; I don't have my book handy.




Here, I thought I'd post this just for grins and for old times sake (1e DMG, p.119):

Potion Miscibilty

The magical mixtures and compounds which comprise potions are not always compatible. You must test the miscibility of potions whenever:

1) two potions are intermingled, or

2) a potion is consumed by a creature while another such liquid already consumed is still in effect


Potion Miscibility Table

Dice Score          Result

01                      EXPLOSION! Internal damage is 6-60 hp, those within a 5' radius   
                          take 1d10 hp if mixed externally, all in a 10' radius take 4-24 hp, 
                          no save.

02-03               Lethal poison results, and imbiber is dead; if externally mixed, a 
                         poison gas cloud of 10' diameter results, and all within must 
                         save versus poison or die.

04-08              Mild poison which causes nausea and loss of 1 point each of 
                        strength and dexterity for 5-20 rounds, no saving throw possible; 
                        one potion is cancelled, the other is at half strength and duration. 
                        (Use random determination for which is cancelled and which is half 
                        efficacy.)

09-15              Immiscible. Both potions totally destroyed, as one cancelled the 
                        other.

16-25              Immiscible. One potion is cancelled, but the other remains normal 
                        (random selection.)

26-35              Immiscible result which causes both potions to be at half normal 
                        efficacy when consumed.

36-90              Miscible. Potions work normally unless their effects are 
                        contradictory, e.g. _dimunition_ and _growth_, which 
                        simply cancel each other out. 

91-99             Compatible result which causes one potion (randomly determined) 
                       to have 150% normal efficacy. (You must determine if both effect 
*and* duration are permissable, or if only the *duration* 
                       should be extended.)

100                DISCOVERY! The admixture of the two potions has caused a special 
                       formula which will cause one of the two potions only to function, 
                       but its effects will be permanent upon the imbiber. (Note that 
                       some harmful side effects could well result from this....)


----------



## Dingleberry (Nov 23, 2004)

Back inthe early 3E days, I created an item to get the spirit of that very table back into the game, but I modified it so certain "Compatible" combinations had metamagic effects.  (I also got rid of "EXPLOSION", but only because one of my players indicated that he'd never use the thing if that was an option - of course, he didn't seem to have any problem with the poison...)

Elven Tall Boy
The “elven tall boy” is a long, cylindrical silver flask framed with a trigger mechanism.  When the trigger near the hinged stopper is depressed, both the stopper and another small plug at the base of the flask open.  This allows a character to drink up to two potions (the maximum amount the flask holds) as quickly as a single potion can be drunk from a regular vial.  However, because the potions are taking effect at the same instant, there is a chance of a magical reaction if two different potions are imbibed, as follows:

01	Lethal poison – imbiber must make Fort save (DC 14 plus spell level of each potion); initial and secondary damage 2d6 Con; both potions canceled
02-08	Mild poison  - imbiber must make Fort save (DC 10 plus spell level of each potion); initial damage 2d6 Str, secondary damage 1d6 Strength; both potions canceled
09-15	Immixable – one potion canceled, the other at half efficacy.
16-25	Immixable – one potion canceled, but other functions normally
26-35	Immixable – both potions at half normal efficacy
36-65	Mixable – both potions function normally (unless effects are contradictory)
66-75	Compatible – one potion functions normally, other has its duration doubled as if brewed with Extend Spell (as applicable)
76-85	Compatible – one potion functions normally, other has its effect increased by one-half as if brewed with Empower Spell (as applicable)
86-92	Compatible – one potion functions normally, other has its effect maximized as if brewed with Maximize Spell (as applicable)
93-99	Compatible – both potions are maximized as if brewed with Extend Spell, Empower Spell and Maximize Spell (as applicable)
00	Discovery – one potion canceled, the other has permanent effect.


----------

