3.5 core rules: Can potions be made for spells listed as personal?

[Hua]

Brew Potions says the following:

Benefit: You can create a potion of any 3rd-level or lower spell that you know and that targets one or more creatures.
You are a creature, but targets are defined under 'range' as:
Personal: The spell affects only you.
Then touch, close, medium and long.

Under aiming a spell, it has the following called out:
If the target of a spell is yourself (the spell description has a line that reads Target: You), you do not receive a saving throw, and spell resistance does not apply. The Saving Throw and Spell Resistance lines are omitted from such spells.

Note that they call out personal different from other targets, like below.
Range: Personal or touch Target: You or creature touched


for an example, can you make a potion of Shield? It is not listed in the DMG as potions you can find as loot, nor are any spells that have personal as a designation, at least as far as I have noticed.



Does that mean you cannot make a potion of a spell that is personal only, such as Expeditious retreat?
Bonus question: Does the same hold for wonderous items?

[Ramza00]

Rules as Intended Core Only the answer is no. Personal spells can not be potions.

But in outside sources this changes with the custom magic item Gremma's Cauldron, page 217, Expedition to Undermountain

5000 gold, halves time to craft potions, and weighs the same as a kettle. It can also turn scrolls into potions.

Now when you make scrolls such as personal scrolls into potions you also have to spend extra GP to make up the price difference between scrolls and potions.

[AnimeTheCat]

Specifically from the DMG:


The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target; therefore, spells such as shield other cannot be stored in potion form. Spells with a range of personal cannot be mad einto potions, so spells such as shield never exist in potion form.

So unfortunately no, you can't make personal range potions unless you do what Ramza00 said. However, if you're the DM, you're well within your rights to let it happen. Nothing would break.

[Troacctid]

You probably want skull talismans from Frostburn. They're twice the cost of potions, but they can include personal spells, and they go all the way to to 9th level.

[Elkad]

Tattoos can also store personal powers. Also at double cost.

Between that and skull talismans, allowing Personal potions (also at double cost) seems a reasonable houserule.

[Darrin]

If you just want a Core solution, you can "Craft a Wondrous Item" that costs the same as a potion and works just like a potion, but is not actually a potion. You can call them elixirs, pills, or breakable tiles if you like. No limit on spell level, and no limit on targets.

[AnimeTheCat]

If you just want a Core solution, you can "Craft a Wondrous Item" that costs the same as a potion and works just like a potion, but is not actually a potion. You can call them elixirs, pills, or breakable tiles if you like. No limit on spell level, and no limit on targets.

I was always curious as to why elixirs and stuff were wondrous items and not potions... seems to me that it would be easier to remove the restrictions on potions (allow 0-9 spells, and make them all the same thing with the same formula for calculating cost and have elixirs, pills, biscuits, cookies, etc all made via brew potion.

"you reach in your bag, pull out, and eat your cookie of cure light wounds."

Yes, definitely going to see how this goes in my future games.

[Altair_the_Vexed]

While I don't want to refute the statements everyone else has made regarding Personal spells, I don't see that the rules actually say this. I've looked again today, and I still don't see it...
Personal spells are described as targeting "you", and potions can be made from spells that target creatures or objects.

I've always considered the distinction to be between spells that target creatures and object, and those that target areas.
Of course you can't make a Potion of Fireball! But I really don't see a reason in the rules why you can't make a Potion of Expeditious Retreat.

[AnimeTheCat]

While I don't want to refute the statements everyone else has made regarding Personal spells, I don't see that the rules actually say this. I've looked again today, and I still don't see it...
Personal spells are described as targeting "you", and potions can be made from spells that target creatures or objects.

I've always considered the distinction to be between spells that target creatures and object, and those that target areas.
Of course you can't make a Potion of Fireball! But I really don't see a reason in the rules why you can't make a Potion of Expeditious Retreat.

well.. to quote myself from upthread:

Specifically from the DMG:


The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target; therefore, spells such as shield other cannot be stored in potion form. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions, so spells such as shield never exist in potion form.
So unfortunately no, you can't make personal range potions unless you do what Ramza00 said. However, if you're the DM, you're well within your rights to let it happen. Nothing would break.

Bolded the important part for emphasis. It's literally right in the rules on that page when discussing potions.

[Evil DM Mark3]

But I really don't see a reason in the rules why you can't make a Potion of Expeditious Retreat.

Well the RAW has been given, the reason behind it is important to bear in mind (and may explain why potions are so restrictive).

Aside from some wonderous items potions are the only magic items that can let you cast a spell you can't cast, unless you invest in Use Magic Device. There are some Range: Personal spells that would be a lot more powerful if they could be cast on a 3rd party and being able to have the fighter cast high level spells in the middle of a melee can also be more powerful than having a spellcaster cast them.

Imagine, if you will, a fighter downing a potion of Anti-magic field. As awesome as the moment of "sod all your magic tricks its now just me and my hitting stick" would be it also makes the spell much more potent than it was intended to be and could easily become the default way to beat evil wizards, which makes those encounters rather lame. Even a potion of True Strike, as pants as that spell is, is a scary prospect in the hands of an assassin.

Break the rule or bring in the other listed items if you like, I'd be the last to argue that casters aren't more powerful than everyone else anyway, but there are clear reasons as to why this isn't allowed.

[denthor]

There is a house rule in my game if take the feat brew potion. Then find a master brewer who has taken a second brew potion feat (the house feat). So two feat slots taken you get what you are asking for plus 5th level spells as potions.

In my opinion not really worth it. See invisible as a
potion is nice though.

[Blackhawk748]

Well the RAW has been given, the reason behind it is important to bear in mind (and may explain why potions are so restrictive).

Aside from some wonderous items potions are the only magic items that can let you cast a spell you can't cast, unless you invest in Use Magic Device. There are some Range: Personal spells that would be a lot more powerful if they could be cast on a 3rd party and being able to have the fighter cast high level spells in the middle of a melee can also be more powerful than having a spellcaster cast them.

Imagine, if you will, a fighter downing a potion of Anti-magic field. As awesome as the moment of "sod all your magic tricks its now just me and my hitting stick" would be it also makes the spell much more potent than it was intended to be and could easily become the default way to beat evil wizards, which makes those encounters rather lame. Even a potion of True Strike, as pants as that spell is, is a scary prospect in the hands of an assassin.

Break the rule or bring in the other listed items if you like, I'd be the last to argue that casters aren't more powerful than everyone else anyway, but there are clear reasons as to why this isn't allowed.

Except... We can do that already. Just make a little Magical stick of Anti Magic Field as a single use wondrous item. Yes it cost double but...meh? How many of those sticks would you need anyway?

And in top of that Brew Potion is already capped at 3rd level spells so most of the good stuff is off limits. Yes an Assassin with True Strike would be scary, but he could have that by having someone with Reach or Ocular Spell make it for him. Or just use a different spell that boosts his To Hit roll.

It just feels like a rather dumb restriction

[Altair_the_Vexed]

well.. to quote myself from upthread:

Bolded the important part for emphasis. It's literally right in the rules on that page when discussing potions.

Interesting - I hadn't spotted that was in there.


Well the RAW has been given, the reason behind it is important to bear in mind (and may explain why potions are so restrictive).

Aside from some wonderous items potions are the only magic items that can let you cast a spell you can't cast, unless you invest in Use Magic Device. There are some Range: Personal spells that would be a lot more powerful if they could be cast on a 3rd party and being able to have the fighter cast high level spells in the middle of a melee can also be more powerful than having a spellcaster cast them.

Imagine, if you will, a fighter downing a potion of Anti-magic field. As awesome as the moment of "sod all your magic tricks its now just me and my hitting stick" would be it also makes the spell much more potent than it was intended to be and could easily become the default way to beat evil wizards, which makes those encounters rather lame. Even a potion of True Strike, as pants as that spell is, is a scary prospect in the hands of an assassin.

Break the rule or bring in the other listed items if you like, I'd be the last to argue that casters aren't more powerful than everyone else anyway, but there are clear reasons as to why this isn't allowed.

Granted, some Personal spells are more powerful. Anti-magic field is a straw man, though: it's too high level to make a potion.
I'd also say that using a potion during a fight messes with your action economy, and provokes Attacks of Opportunity, so it's not too big a deal for me.

---

On a separate note, regarding system design, I'm disappointed with how this rule has been written. I'm not now arguing that the rule is wrong, I can see the point of it - just that it's badly done.
It seems to me that this is a case of the creators trying to cover their backs with a special case rule. If they'd worded the feat, or the definition of potion, or the definition of target better, then they'd have achieved the same thing in a more robust manner.
But instead, they've had to make a special case. If they hadn't mentioned that bit in the Creating Potions section, then we'd have potions of Truestrike.

I don't like special case rules - they feel like sticking plasters over the cracks.

(I work in quality systems and technical writing for my day job, by the way - that's probably why it sticks in my craw!)

[Bohandas]

Anti-magic field is a straw man, though: it's too high level to make a potion.

Plus it doesn;t target you, it targets an area centered on you.

[Thurbane]

Anti-magic field is a straw man, though: it's too high level to make a potion.

Just FYI, the Master Alchemist PrC (MoF p.34) means potions of up to 9th level can exist.

If that PrC is in play, of course.

[Hua]

Thank you all.
I was pretty sure there was a restriction about it, but was unable to find it. Guess I just missed it somehow.

FWIW, our group has been playing a long time and used to not allow potions of personal spells, but somehow they got back into the game.
You would be pretty surprised at what impact a potion of Expeditious Retreat on the melee fighter types can accomplish. No foe can ever run away (of course they might fly or teleport or such later). The extra speed at low levels gives a huge advantage in moving around the battlefield. Also as noted how True Strike can impact things. Certainly lets you prep in advance and power attack for max.

Others are good situationally, like divine favor, blink, mirror image, and lots more.

If I am going to remove that goody bag from my next campaign, I wanted to have a solid reason for it beyond it making the DM's life easier, particularly at low level.