That would greatly change balance. The strength/duration of most potions would have likely been settled on with the current limited carrying capacity in mind. Increasing them all to eight adds a lot of potential power to the player. So which way do you go?
Would those potions need values/duration toned down to compensate? If so, this means you effectively just added a cost increase.
Or do you leave it as-is? If so, this would allow the player to be a lot more immediately powerful than they already can be. Do they need to be? If so, why?
Fair enough. If they are left alone then maybe stacking to eight is too much, four would be more manageable saving at least some inventory clutter. However if they stack to eight it would be more balanced if they halved the duration amount.
I didn't think about the cost to convenience ratio when I originally made this post. Thank you for pointing it out.
Also as creating potions results in three of the same potion, stacking to four wouldn't really have any negatives. Four is the stack size I am suggesting because of game stack consistency.
Ender chests and shulker boxes are balanced in this way since your immediate access is still gated.
On the topic of inventory, I think some more spaces are needed, but that goes beyond potions so it's another subject. But it would indirectly help potions a bit without outright massively skewing balance. Making potions stack however (even to just two or thee) probably could have big balance implications.
Ender chests and shulker boxes are balanced in this way since your immediate access is still gated.
On the topic of inventory, I think some more spaces are needed, but that goes beyond potions so it's another subject. But it would indirectly help potions a bit without outright massively skewing balance. Making potions stack however (even to just two or thee) probably could have big balance implications.
maybe there could be a potion holder what's hard to craft and it allows you to stack 2 potions together.
Potions should stack to eight.
That is all
For what reason?
That would greatly change balance. The strength/duration of most potions would have likely been settled on with the current limited carrying capacity in mind. Increasing them all to eight adds a lot of potential power to the player. So which way do you go?
Would those potions need values/duration toned down to compensate? If so, this means you effectively just added a cost increase.
Or do you leave it as-is? If so, this would allow the player to be a lot more immediately powerful than they already can be. Do they need to be? If so, why?
Fair enough. If they are left alone then maybe stacking to eight is too much, four would be more manageable saving at least some inventory clutter. However if they stack to eight it would be more balanced if they halved the duration amount.
I didn't think about the cost to convenience ratio when I originally made this post. Thank you for pointing it out.
Also as creating potions results in three of the same potion, stacking to four wouldn't really have any negatives. Four is the stack size I am suggesting because of game stack consistency.
Four is still a big balance change.
Ender chests and shulker boxes are balanced in this way since your immediate access is still gated.
On the topic of inventory, I think some more spaces are needed, but that goes beyond potions so it's another subject. But it would indirectly help potions a bit without outright massively skewing balance. Making potions stack however (even to just two or thee) probably could have big balance implications.
maybe there could be a potion holder what's hard to craft and it allows you to stack 2 potions together.