The Most Broken D&D Item Keeps Ruining Games. Here Are 3 Ways to Fix It

Polygon ·

The article argues that the basic Dungeons & Dragons healing potion is unusually powerful for its cost, disrupting combat by letting characters quickly revive a fallen ally. Under the 2024 rules, any character can administer one as a Bonus Action, sometimes using a potion from the downed character’s own inventory, allowing them to return to the fight without spending a spell slot.

The article proposes three ways to rebalance the item: raise the basic potion’s price from 50 to 200 gold pieces, change how or when it can be administered, or adjust its healing effect. It notes that low-level characters often have few competing uses for their gold, while healing a character at zero hit points can undo an enemy’s effort at relatively little cost. The article stresses that these are optional adjustments for Dungeon Masters, whose priority is keeping the game enjoyable.

In short

  • Healing potions can revive fallen characters with a Bonus Action.
  • The basic potion costs 50 gold and restores 2d4+2 hit points.
  • Suggested fixes include raising its price or changing its rules.

Steelman: both sides, in good faith

The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.

The case for

Changing the potion’s price, use or healing effect could make combat choices more consequential and stop a cheap item from repeatedly undoing the risk of knocking a character unconscious. Dungeon Masters who find this pattern disruptive may value a house rule that better fits their group’s preferred challenge and pacing.

The case against

The standard potion gives players a simple way to recover from a sudden knockout without requiring a particular character, spell or class feature, which can make the game more accessible and keep encounters moving. Because gold is often plentiful and groups differ in how they enjoy combat, changing a familiar item’s cost or use may add bookkeeping or frustration without improving every table’s experience.

Gaming

Read the full article at the source →

Log in to join the discussion