Reagent potency / potion doses

OK, so I've been discussing this idea in other threads, but I thought I'd start a new thread on it so to provide a more focused place of discussion. I made an illustration, too, even though the suggestion is very simple and doesn't need it... for no other reason than it helps focus things.

This is basically two ideas that come together nicely:


FOR POTIONS

That potion containers can come in different sizes, and each size can contain a certain number of doses, or uses.

This would work like charges. So you only drink one dose at a time, until the potion is spent. The example I've been using is phial (1), bottle (4), decanter (10). That's just a ballpark idea.

Some other games have larger potions with greater effect, but you're forced to drink it up all at once. I find this stupid. Plus, a dosage system would work fine with the glyph combat; the number on the glyph would just represent the amount of doses you have available, and you wouldn't have to worry about where the doses are coming from. This would also make bag inventory more tidy, if potions don't stack. If you have a decanter, just pour all your phials in it. Plus, it would allow people to mix potions together, ie. pouring four phials of different types of potions into one bottle.


FOR REAGENTS

That reagents could have different degrees of potency, and this potency could be spent like charges, ie (4/4) -> (3/4), or else be thought of like durability.

This was inspired by Chris Spears' suggestion that low-level spells should have a percent chance of consuming a reagent to balance them against high-level spells, and so mages wouldn't have to carry around hundreds of reagents in their packs. But instead of having a percent chance of consuming a whole reagent, how about only consuming a fraction of its magic?

The idea behind this is that in Earth lore, herbs and other reagents could have different degrees of quality, and the quality of the reagent made them more useful. For example: a mandrake root was considered better if it was fully formed and looked like a man, and this usually meant it was more ancient, and the shape was also a signature of its power; pearls could have different colors and lustre, and this gave them different properties; and the best type of amber was white, and as it soaked up sickness it became yellower, and then there was also grey amber (amber gris).

Using the example of mandrake root, this could mean the difference between a young root and an ancient root, but also the difference between a fresh root and a dried one (herbs in general can be dried). Another possible way to implement this is to have the mandrake dry and shrivel with use until its withered up and useless. Similarly, a black pearl can lose its blackness until it gets white.

At in its simplest form, this could just mean one type of every reagent. One type of mandrake, and that's it, and it would just be displayed in the item information how much potency is left on the item (ie 3/4). This would be equivalent to durability on a weapon, or charges on a wand. However, adding different variants of a single reagent I think enhances both the collecting aspect of the game -- making collecting reagents more fun -- and the lore aspect of the game -- by adding additional lore to each reagent.

Like with the potion uses, when you expend potency from reagents when casting spells, you don't have to worry where its coming from; when you cast a spell, it just draws from your pile of reagents.


* * * *


And the consequence of using these two ideas together:

This means reagents can be conceptually "split," both for spells and for alchemy.

It allows rarer reagents to have more than one use, making the rarity still precious but a little less fragile, and prevents mages from having to carry around bag-fulls of reagents. I just find the image funny of a mage carrying around 100 black pearls, 100 mandrakes, 100 nightshades, etc. It also pares down the amount of reagents necessary for simple low-level spells, like fire arrow.

And I know RG has suggested that the whole reagent economy be player based... but it makes sense for more common herbal reagents to be available dried at apothecaries. The dried ones would of course have less potency than fresh ones, and would not be the older herbs that might be more potent.






Reagent bags:

And of course, this would split reagent piles in the backpack... but I'm thinking we're going to want to get a reagent bag eventually, anyway, even with the current system. A reagent bag, food bag, coin pouch, seed pouch, etc., where when you drag an item in your inventory it knows to go to the respective bag, would be helpful for players to tidy up their inventory.

Note: it would be nice for big pieces of food to have uses too, so a whole roast chicken doesn't need to be eaten all at once.



UPDATE: I updated the post to make some of the ideas clearer, based on input.

 

So in this system most mages would be encouraged to uptake alchemy if they want to be self sustaining ... and would have to craft their "charge" spell potions prior to battle - as apposed to having, conceptually "unlimited" spell uses if they indeed carried - 100 black pearls, etc etc

 

@Margard,

It wouldn't change anything really... just allow you to carry around less reagents, if you have more potent reagents, because they might be able to be used more than once.

See the examples. If a spell requires 1 potency of mandrake, and you have a 4 potency mandrake, it would just take off 1 charge from the root, and would leave it at 3/4. Or otherwise, might shrivel the root up to a smaller potency.

 

I get that - been away for a while - so not up to date with changes ... I guess what I really asking is -

at the moment people cast spells and the reagents disappear from the bag - with this system the mage has to drink while in combat or has to drink prior to battle? And would one have the ability to do so - if it is not an "active" action by the player - it seems just a work around to carrying less

Which may make the mage really strong

 

I also want to say that I like the idea -

However - converting root and using its "juice" in general tends to cause a loss to potency

what if they made an editable supplement (that would preserve potency)

So you would have potions and "cakes" / "pastries" ...

 

@Margard,

Nope, reagents can be expended on either on potions or directly on spells... this doesn't change that.

If people think this isn't clear, I can make the OP more clear about it.

 

It just probably me .. lol

 

:> Lol okay.. if anyone else here thought my original post was unclear, tell me, and we'll know the problem was me and not Margard.

Basically.

* A reagent has a potency, which means am amount of uses/charges that can be spent.
* A potion has a dosage, which means an amount of uses/charges that can be spent.
* A reagent's potency can be spent in the same way a whole reagent can currently be spent. Either in casting a spell directly, or in making a potion, or in making some other magical concoction.

 

I really like this concept for having various sizes or qualities of each reagent, but the only problem I have with it is that there would be possibly 6 different types of every reagent. So our reagents bag will look cluttered having large mandrake, and large mandrake dried, small mandrake, small mandrake dried... etc etc.

If there are 8 different reagents, there would be 48 different types of reagents possible in our bags. I don't plan on taking more than 50 of each reagent with me total. So here's how we keep this, and keep it looking organized...



ORGANIZING MULTIPLE SIZED REAGENTS:

If the game has multiple sizes and potencies for each reagent, then we need a way to organize reagents for mages to use when we leave our houses. I don't think that mages should all become alchemists, but I don't like caring 6 different versions of mandrake, (and every other reagent). Even an apprentice magic user should be familiar with preparing reagents just like any student chef would know how to chop onions.

So here's what I propose. Keep the 6 types of reagents, but as far as keeping track of uses let us simplify this by preparing our reagents by grinding them to powders and pastes. This way regardless which of the six type of mandrake we found or bought, we can convert them to a powder so that we can carry it in a reagent pouch. That way a pinch of mandrake powder is equal to one use (no need to keep track of 6 different mandrakes).

The Alchemy skill shouldn't have to be required since this is not making anything new, nor is it mixing ingredients together to create some new property. In fact this should not require any crafting table. Like I said any apprentice mage should be able to carry a mortar and pestle with them and should be able to grind up reagents with it (even in the wilderness). SO a large mandrake get's ground into 8 pinches of fully usable mandrake, a dried one would yield 4 pinches, and so on.

I like the different sized reagents, and different potency. It also makes sense that when we harvest reagents that they will come in different sizes and potency too. Although I think most mages would want to deal with ONE common measurement of a reagent instead of carrying 6 versions of each reagent. Besides a mage can harvest reagents and use a mortar and pestle to refine them without returning home.





Besides it also seems a bit interesting imagining a mage pulling out a pinch of one kind of dust, and another swerling them together in the air as it forms into a potent and bright looking magical spell. I can picture the dust thing better than just throwing one full mandrake and one full black pearl and one full sulfurous ash and they just fade away. Also a person using a piece of a large mandrake would have to break off a piece in combat, it would be easier to take a pinch of refined mandrake and toss the dust, and instead of the dust falling back to the ground it flairs up like throwing gunpowder into a fireplace.

So not only does this create a cool way to measure uses of reagents, it also adds something interesting to mages. They will have some sort of personal touch, and involvement with their magic. The mage actually handles the reagents and makes sure it is properly ready to cast their spells. It shouldn't take long to grind 5 large mandrakes into 40 pinches of refined mandrake.

 

@Isaiah,
what did you think about my last comment

 

@Isaiah,

By the way, herbs and roots like mandrake are very often sold the way you're suggesting, if not as whole roots, than cut up,





Though as a powder, too,



Those are from ebay.

Different sizes of whole root, fresh,

 

What if custom spells showed an animation of a mage tossing reagent dust into the air, and it flairs up in different colors based upon the reagent type?

 

Here's the problem... How do you only use part of a Large Black pearl? Sure the Large Black Pearl might have 8/8 uses. How do you break off an 8th of a black pearl in combat? You can't.

So I think we should be able to find large black pearls, but it makes sense to grind that into dust before using that reagent in combat.

 

Wouldn't be necessary. The pearl would just be more dead inside, have some of its magic spent.

If a visual cue is necessary, this could mean changing color, to pearls with less innate potency. From black -> dark blue -> light blue -> white. In Earth lore, pearls gained their color from the weather under which they were formed, and the stormier the weather, the darker they'd be. The lustre was also a feature, and certain pearls would be duller, and others more lustrous.

That would mean one could find less potent pearls (blue instead of black) , or a black pearl could degrade into a blue pearl.

Or, it could shrink.

All reagents wouldn't need to degrade in the same way,

Or, if changing appearance and form is too complicated, just the potency change would be noted like charges (2/4 potency remaining), to show some of its magic is spent.

 

if it shrinks will it fit in the second size stack or will it create a new stack of Large Black Pearls with 7/8 charges. Now we are talking about making more and more and more stacks of reagents. Because you can no longer stack a reagent called Large black pearl 7/8 charges on top of others with 8/8 charges. This gets too complex.

If you grind them all up there is no problems ever again.

...
Even more so changing color. Also 8 shades of the same color is very difficult to tell apart.


I'm not fighting you here. I like your idea for harvesting purposes, and for possible alchemy recepies, but as far as keeping track of charges or uses of a reagent I think it needs the refinement process.

 

You'd generally just end up with 1 pearl out of the stack, because the rest would be at full potency.

Grinding sure would work, but I don't know if that's less complex or more complex. I think a mage would want to use his reagent after he finds it, and I think some players would complain about having to grind a reagent to use it to cast in a spell first, since there seems to be no point to that.

My view is that they should end up giving us a reagent bag anyway, because it solves the natural mess of having reagents... whatever system they end up doing. If we're going to have a lot of different types of reagents, we're going to want some way to sort them anyway. Plus, having reagents of different powers and potencies is fun for mages who want to be collectors, or arcanists. Its part of the role-playing aspect of being a mage.

But I have no problem myself with grinding or cutting or changing reagents into different forms.

 

I like the idea of grinding the reagents into powder and using them in alchemy and magic spells. I can visualize the grab a pinch and throw it in the air while casting.

 

@Redfish

The point to grinding can be "preservation of potency" - say you have a fresh mandrake root - in order to preserve its potency grind it and then allows you to decide how to use - keep it in a bottle or use it for a potion

 

I think they could have rituals where Large Whole Reagents could be used as a component. (it is a ritual so it doesn't matter how many charges or whatever, it just requires a large reagent, not two smaller reagents or its equivalent in reagent dust etc).

 

+1 to potions. As for regs i think its just overly complicating regs. But it wouldnt bother me either so call me neutral on it.