D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 DMG Errata has been posted at WOTC

[Caliban]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a

I've just started looking. More later.

Looks like they finally fixed the "Caster Level" disconnect between the rules and the way all the designers say it should work.

 

[Olive]

no fix of PrCs not counting towards levels for the 10% xp hit tho...

 

[jgsugden]

Yipee! They fixed Polymorph! Hit points DO NOT CHANGE when con changes!

 

[jgsugden]

Huh. I thought the policy on errata was 'only what is necessary'. A lot of the DMG errata is fluff that didn't need to be touched. Who cares if the sample NPCs have a few errors or the magic items have a few odd costs or components? There are a heck of a lot more PHB rules that are of much greater importance that need attention ...

 

[dcollins]

Looks like they finally fixed the "Caster Level" disconnect between the rules and the way all the designers say it should work.

Yep, that's just what I was always worried about -- it's now been been made totally nonsensical.

Caster Level
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 215
Problem: The last two sentences in the section on Caster
Level are ambiguous and potentially misleading.
Solution: Replace with this text: For other magic items, the
caster level is determined by the creator. The minimum caster
level is that which is needed to meet the prerequisites given.

(1) It was never ambiguous or misleading, the distinction was very clear.

(2) The revised text now reads like this: "For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the caster level... For other magic items, the caster level is determined by the creator." That's clearly pretty scrambled.

(3) The DMG is now silent on the issue of "What does the Caster Level entry for other magic items really indicate, anyway?". Apparently you just have to be familiar with the designer argument that they are "average appearing caster levels", because that information isn't anywhere in the DMG itself.

(4) It now opens the door to the no-one-knows-how-much-anything-costs issue. None of the designers who lobbied for this have ever given a solid answer on how changing caster level does or does not change Market Price for these "other magic items". The people writing this errata completely overlooked that issue, and I'm not really surprised... many will be familiar with how I've written about this before at www.superdan.net/dndfaq2.html

 

[Caliban]

For many items, the caster level is irrelevent (in regards to cost), it's the effect that determines the cost.

Stat increasing items, AC and Resistance items, etc. They all have their cost determined by the effect they create, not the caster level for the item.

In general, items that generate a level based spell effect are the ones that have their price determined by the caster level.

 

[dcollins]

For many items, the caster level is irrelevent (in regards to cost), it's the effect that determines the cost.

Not according to Sean K. Reynolds. (Primary proponent of the new errata.)
This occurred here at ENWorld: http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=56402

For example, what I've never found an answer to:- What is the market price of a 1st-level pearl of power made at caster level 3 (instead of 17)?
Marginally greater, since for this item the only effect is a slightly better chance at resisting a dispel magic.

What is the market price of vestments of faith made at caster level 7 (instead of 20)?
Probably not much less (though I'd be inclined to argue that this "holy garment" probably has its cost based on the clerical version of stoneskin rather than the arcane version). As with the pearl, the resistance do dispel magic is of only marginal value.

Is there any increase in market price to a +1 flaming sword made at caster level 20 (instead of 10)?
Ditto.

This is from his website: http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/magicitemcreation.htm

...there is little benefit (other than resisting dispel magic) for creating a constant endure elements item with a caster level above 1 because none of the spell's effects are based on duration. In such cases, the item can be priced at 1 level above its minimum caster level to reflect the very slight benefit for the increased caster level (resisting dispel magic), but the overall caster level of the item remains the same.
Another example would be an item with a caster level above 10 that also had a dispel magic function. Dispel magic tops out at +10 to the dispel check for caster level 10, so there is no benefit giving it a caster level above 10. Price the dispel magic feature at caster level 11 (because of the slight benefit the higher caster level gives the item when trying to resist a hostile dispel magic attempt).

 

[Caliban]

Sean K Reynolds doesn't work at WOTC anymore, he wasn't the one who wrote the 3.0 DMG, and what he says contradicts the pricing guidelines for magic items in the 3.5 DMG. Also, your first quote is two years old, and only relates to 3.0. So I wouldn't really put much weight in what he says on this particular subject.

A belt of Giant Strength +4 has the same cost to make if it's caster level 8 or caster level 20.

 

[Marshall]

A belt of Giant Strength +4 has the same cost to make if it's caster level 8 or caster level 20.

BUT! and this is where dc misses the boat and the rules dont cover, the item made by the 20th level caster has a higher "Sale Value" which is unfortunately synonymous with the game term "Market Value"

 

[Hardhead]

BUT! and this is where dc misses the boat and the rules dont cover, the item made by the 20th level caster has a higher "Sale Value" which is unfortunately synonymous with the game term "Market Value"

And in the old rules, there were oddities, like "Why does Universal Solvent only cost 50 gp, if only 20th level casters can make it?"