Since 1 bucket of milk would equal 3 'potions' of bottled milk, I'm ok with it still negating (or even diminishing) the effects of potions, but loosing the ability of being able to be used in recipes.
Yes. Well, this is intrinsic with the "bottle of milk" since the recipe calls for a "bucket of milk".
That is to say I agree with you (in my own A-hole kind of way).
Maybe the bottle of Milk (Potion of Negation) reduces a potion effectiveness by 1 level and in duration by 1 minute (or -15% max duration), then the Player could add glowstone to increase the negation effectiveness to 2 or 3 level reduction, and redstone to increase the negative impact on duration to 3-4 minutes (or -45% to -60% max duration), gunpowder could be used to convert it to a splash potion.
Thus if you drink it from a bottle, it is less effective than drinking it from a bucket (unless you drank 3 of them).
Maybe the bottle of Milk (Potion of Negation) reduces a potion effectiveness by 1 level and in duration by 1 minute (or -15% max duration), then the Player could add glowstone to increase the negation effectiveness to 2 or 3 level reduction, and redstone to increase the negative impact on duration to 3-4 minutes (or -45% to -60% max duration), gunpowder could be used to convert it to a splash potion.
Thus if you drink it from a bottle, it is less effective than drinking it from a bucket (unless you drank 3 of them).
Perhaps. I was thinking more along the lines of glowstone and redstone simply not having any additional effect upon a Potion of Negation. Just like you cannot "amplify" a Night-vision potion, you won't be able to amplify or extend a Negation potion. 100% agree with making them splash-able. Great for PVP, since as of now there is no way to negate an opponent's effects.
In the vein of the discussion, what would the inverse (fermented spider-eye) version of the potion be (if any)?
A "refresh potion"? All effects, positive and negative, have their clocks reset to their initial times. ??
Perhaps. I was thinking more along the lines of glowstone and redstone simply not having any additional effect upon a Potion of Negation. Just like you cannot "amplify" a Night-vision potion, you won't be able to amplify or extend a Negation potion. 100% agree with making them splash-able. Great for PVP, since as of now there is no way to negate an opponent's effects.
In the vein of the discussion, what would the inverse (fermented spider-eye) version of the potion be (if any)?
A "refresh potion"? All effects, positive and negative, have their clocks reset to their initial times. ??
Refresh and/or amplify, could potentially boost effectiveness too in some cases (convert a Potion level I effect to a Potion Level II effect or a Potion level III effect).
One of the reasons I thought of decreasing the effectiveness of the potion variety is that it seems to be a bit OP being able to cancel ALL potion effects on a target player with a single splash potion made only with milk and no other resources.
Refresh and/or amplify, could potentially boost effectiveness too in some cases (convert a Potion level I effect to a Potion Level II effect or a Potion level III effect).
One of the reasons I thought of decreasing the effectiveness of the potion variety is that it seems to be a bit OP being able to cancel ALL potion effects on a target player with a single splash potion made only with milk and no other resources.
Good point. I suppose that why it was never implemented as a brewing ingredient.
You've swayed me to "variable effectiveness" camp. I think the idea you proposed about the potion reducing the clock on effects is good. Maybe a Level 1 potion can knock off 1 minute, Level 2 (by adding glowstone) can knock off 2 minutes or so... not a full negation but still a boon if used properly. Plus you get three of them. Essentially, that equivalent to negating 6 minutes of effects.
Ooo, I like that.
I think that we're all over complicating things here. I don't really think that milk needs as much balancing as we're giving it. How about this: You put a bucket of milk into the top of the brewing stand, and it pours into 3 bottles, which you can then turn into a splash potion with gunpowder.
Since there's less milk in a bottle than in a bucket, how about one bottle of milk (Splash or regular) will cure the player of ONE status effect. And a bucket of milk would be used to rid the player of ALL of the effects.
So why even brew a milk bottle if it's better to drink the whole bucket? Well, the whole reason I suggested the splash potion is to cure other mobs. (Perhaps your wolf or iron golem was hit by a wither skull). And of course, splahing milk is faster than drinking it, and can be used to cure multiple players as well.
What's the use for milk bottles? other than potions and cures?
It was ultimately the idea of being able to make splash potions to negate effects on other MOB's that eventually sold me on the idea... other than that, I haven't seen anything that was super convincing of adding this as an idea.... yet.
But the idea of being able to use it as a 'potion' opens the doors to reversing the effects using a fermented spider eye, or what it might mean to enhance the effects.
Maybe the bottle of Milk (Potion of Negation) reduces a potion effectiveness by 1 level and in duration by 1 minute (or -15% max duration), then the Player could add glowstone to increase the negation effectiveness to 2 or 3 level reduction, and redstone to increase the negative impact on duration to 3-4 minutes (or -45% to -60% max duration), gunpowder could be used to convert it to a splash potion.
Thus if you drink it from a bottle, it is less effective than drinking it from a bucket (unless you drank 3 of them).
Why would you want to just reduce the duration as opposed to just... getting rid of it as milk already does?
Why would you want to just reduce the duration as opposed to just... getting rid of it as milk already does?
If 1 bucket of milk produces 3 bottles (potions) of milk... then technically, 1/3 the milk quantity should not have the same effectiveness as the full bucket...otherwise just the process of bottling the milk would make it 3 times more effective.
I think that we're all over complicating things here. I don't really think that milk needs as much balancing as we're giving it. How about this: You put a bucket of milk into the top of the brewing stand, and it pours into 3 bottles, which you can then turn into a splash potion with gunpowder.
Since there's less milk in a bottle than in a bucket, how about one bottle of milk (Splash or regular) will cure the player of ONE status effect. And a bucket of milk would be used to rid the player of ALL of the effects.
So why even brew a milk bottle if it's better to drink the whole bucket? Well, the whole reason I suggested the splash potion is to cure other mobs. (Perhaps your wolf or iron golem was hit by a wither skull). And of course, splahing milk is faster than drinking it, and can be used to cure multiple players as well.
(see bold text above)
Yes, well how then do you propose the game determines which effect is eliminated? You see? Your attempt to un-complicate things opens a new can of worms.
I think Greg's idea of each Bottle o'Milk reducing the time on all active effects (rather than fully negating them) is probably the best route.
I'm still in favor of allowing the effect to stack with other potions, namely instant health potions.
(see bold text above)
Yes, well how then do you propose the game determines which effect is eliminated? You see? Your attempt to un-complicate things opens a new can of worms.
I think Greg's idea of each Bottle o'Milk reducing the time on all active effects (rather than fully negating them) is probably the best route.
I'm still in favor of allowing the effect to stack with other potions, namely instant health potions.
I propose that the game just picks the first effect (Open the inventory, it will rid the player of the first listed effect), and just get rid of it. It's a simple mechanic.
If 1 bucket of milk produces 3 bottles (potions) of milk... then technically, 1/3 the milk quantity should not have the same effectiveness as the full bucket...otherwise just the process of bottling the milk would make it 3 times more effective.
I get that... But I don't see the point in doing nothing other than just subtracting the duration of an affect by one third..
Teddwa (The Fakemon in my avatar) belongs to ReallyDarkAndWindie and that is used with permission from him.
Click on this spoiler to see mods and ideas that I support!
Click on this Spoiler to see misc. banners and whatnot!
Yes. Well, this is intrinsic with the "bottle of milk" since the recipe calls for a "bucket of milk".
That is to say I agree with you (in my own A-hole kind of way).
Thus if you drink it from a bottle, it is less effective than drinking it from a bucket (unless you drank 3 of them).
Perhaps. I was thinking more along the lines of glowstone and redstone simply not having any additional effect upon a Potion of Negation. Just like you cannot "amplify" a Night-vision potion, you won't be able to amplify or extend a Negation potion. 100% agree with making them splash-able. Great for PVP, since as of now there is no way to negate an opponent's effects.
In the vein of the discussion, what would the inverse (fermented spider-eye) version of the potion be (if any)?
A "refresh potion"? All effects, positive and negative, have their clocks reset to their initial times. ??
Refresh and/or amplify, could potentially boost effectiveness too in some cases (convert a Potion level I effect to a Potion Level II effect or a Potion level III effect).
One of the reasons I thought of decreasing the effectiveness of the potion variety is that it seems to be a bit OP being able to cancel ALL potion effects on a target player with a single splash potion made only with milk and no other resources.
Good point. I suppose that why it was never implemented as a brewing ingredient.
You've swayed me to "variable effectiveness" camp. I think the idea you proposed about the potion reducing the clock on effects is good. Maybe a Level 1 potion can knock off 1 minute, Level 2 (by adding glowstone) can knock off 2 minutes or so... not a full negation but still a boon if used properly. Plus you get three of them. Essentially, that equivalent to negating 6 minutes of effects.
Ooo, I like that.
Since there's less milk in a bottle than in a bucket, how about one bottle of milk (Splash or regular) will cure the player of ONE status effect. And a bucket of milk would be used to rid the player of ALL of the effects.
So why even brew a milk bottle if it's better to drink the whole bucket? Well, the whole reason I suggested the splash potion is to cure other mobs. (Perhaps your wolf or iron golem was hit by a wither skull). And of course, splahing milk is faster than drinking it, and can be used to cure multiple players as well.
It was ultimately the idea of being able to make splash potions to negate effects on other MOB's that eventually sold me on the idea... other than that, I haven't seen anything that was super convincing of adding this as an idea.... yet.
But the idea of being able to use it as a 'potion' opens the doors to reversing the effects using a fermented spider eye, or what it might mean to enhance the effects.
Why would you want to just reduce the duration as opposed to just... getting rid of it as milk already does?
If 1 bucket of milk produces 3 bottles (potions) of milk... then technically, 1/3 the milk quantity should not have the same effectiveness as the full bucket...otherwise just the process of bottling the milk would make it 3 times more effective.
(see bold text above)
Yes, well how then do you propose the game determines which effect is eliminated? You see? Your attempt to un-complicate things opens a new can of worms.
I think Greg's idea of each Bottle o'Milk reducing the time on all active effects (rather than fully negating them) is probably the best route.
I'm still in favor of allowing the effect to stack with other potions, namely instant health potions.
I propose that the game just picks the first effect (Open the inventory, it will rid the player of the first listed effect), and just get rid of it. It's a simple mechanic.
I get that... But I don't see the point in doing nothing other than just subtracting the duration of an affect by one third..
What does 'O.P.' mean in this instance?
Click on this spoiler to see mods and ideas that I support!
OP = Original Poster (in this case) / in other instances, often referring to the Original Posting (specifically).