The Brew Potion feat states that:

You can create a potion of any 3rd-level or lower spell that you know and that targets one or more creatures or objects.

Does that includes spells with a personal range and you as the target, like for example Alter Self? Technically it targets "one creature" (you), but at the same time it's not exactly written "one creature" so I am not sure about it.


The Brew Potion feat allows a potion to be brewed of a spell that has an entry of Target: You, but not a potion of a spell that has an entry of Range: Personal. Creating Potions says pretty much exactly that: "Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions." Further, the description of Potions limits potions even more: A potion "can [only] duplicate the effect of a spell of up to 3rd level that has a casting time of less than 1 minute and targets one or more creatures or objects." Why all these rules aren't in one place is a mystery.

Thus it's typically impossible to brew, for example, a potion of alter self.

  • \$\begingroup\$ I missed that "Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions." part. Deleted my wrong answer. Was it like this from the beginning, or was it errated? \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jan 25 '17 at 14:06
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot It's been that way since 3.5e, but it's always been buried in Creating Potions, making it really easy to overlook. And I didn't know about long-casting-time spells being prohibited until, like, a year ago when I asked this question. \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Jan 25 '17 at 14:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ I guess my house-rule-believed-to-be-rule that such potions works, but only on a brewer, just like Potion of Shillelagh works only on oak clubs, wasn't game-breaking. But glad to know what the real rules are. \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jan 25 '17 at 14:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yeah, potions are pretty underpowered as a whole, especially if it costs you a feat to make them. My group plays that any non-gamebreaking spell can be made into a potion. \$\endgroup\$ – GreySage Jan 25 '17 at 16:54
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @TREB I agree, but it may go even deeper. The no Range: Personal spell potions thing dates back to D&D 3e, which, if memory serves, was extensively—yet not destructively—playtested only for levels 1–6, the range at which surveys at the time showed most games took place. At those levels (and, presumably, during those playtests), a core fighter outperforms a poorly (or, a la AD&D 2e, a traditionally) played caster. I suspect that maybe removing potions of, like, divine favor, shield, alter self, and false life was to make such classes less attractive to power gamers! \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Jan 25 '17 at 17:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.