Discussion - General Discussion Thread XI
- Thread starter Bront
- Start date
- Status
Robichaud
Explorer
Another one of those things that don't strictly concern any of my characters yet, but I still find myself wondering about.. when creating magical stuff, is the caster level listed by the various items and effect part of the requirements, or just the CL the item ends up with?
The SRD is.. a bit unclear on some points. Based on reading the articles on item creation on the Wizards web site, the former interpretation seems to be WotC's line of thinking, and the latter appears to be what's done here. Makes the feats a whole lot more attractive, too - you're able to make Pearls of Power at level 3 instead of 17, and vorpal weapons at level 11 instead of 18, for example.
The SRD is.. a bit unclear on some points. Based on reading the articles on item creation on the Wizards web site, the former interpretation seems to be WotC's line of thinking, and the latter appears to be what's done here. Makes the feats a whole lot more attractive, too - you're able to make Pearls of Power at level 3 instead of 17, and vorpal weapons at level 11 instead of 18, for example.
Rystil Arden
First Post
The RotG Articles from WotC, when forced to make a non-trivial 50/50 Yes/No decision, are only actually correct with the same probability as a coin flip. In this case, those who use the caster level as a prereq are blatantly wrong, except in the case of certain items, for which it is indeed a prereq and is listed as such. So Pearls of Power are okay earlier. Many magic weapons and armour, not necessarily.Robichaud said:
Rystil Arden
First Post
The FAQ is only right maybe 75%-80% of the time (still not bad--this is because the conflicting FAQ entries where the FAQ contradicts itself have been eventually removed). The errata and the rules themselves are the only reliable sources for LEW purposes.Robichaud said:
Rystil Arden
First Post
There are a few others too. Always specifically listed.Bront said:
Robichaud
Explorer
It also determines the item's own saves, resistance to Dispel effects, and such.
I did some more digging on why and how caster levels that are sometimes wildly divergent from the RAWs own principle "The minimum caster level is that which is needed to meet the prerequisites given" are so prominently listed for each item. The occurence of some even more confusing language, too -- like for example in the case of magic armour and shields, "For an item with only an enhancement bonus, the caster level is three times the enhancement bonus. If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability, the higher of the two caster level requirements must be met," instead of something like "If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability with a caster level requirement.."
It turns out 3.0, or at least the version in my trusty first-printing 3.0 DMG, did use the item's caster level as a requirement in addition to the spell requirements; moreover, the item's caster level was set by this requirement, instead of the creator's caster level. The language used in the current explanations of some item types makes a whole lot more sense in that context, and if you consider the "crappy editing" factor.
I can't find an explicit mention of why 3.5 still lists caster levels for items and item abilities alongside their requirements, when the one can be derived from the other; I guess the listed CL is the "default" CL for the item when found as anonymous, random loot. Apparently NPC mages don't start thinking about making Pearls of Power or Brilliant Energy weapons until levels 17 and 16, respectively, despite being able to do so at spectacularly lower levels. Silly NPCs! :>
I did some more digging on why and how caster levels that are sometimes wildly divergent from the RAWs own principle "The minimum caster level is that which is needed to meet the prerequisites given" are so prominently listed for each item. The occurence of some even more confusing language, too -- like for example in the case of magic armour and shields, "For an item with only an enhancement bonus, the caster level is three times the enhancement bonus. If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability, the higher of the two caster level requirements must be met," instead of something like "If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability with a caster level requirement.."
It turns out 3.0, or at least the version in my trusty first-printing 3.0 DMG, did use the item's caster level as a requirement in addition to the spell requirements; moreover, the item's caster level was set by this requirement, instead of the creator's caster level. The language used in the current explanations of some item types makes a whole lot more sense in that context, and if you consider the "crappy editing" factor.
I can't find an explicit mention of why 3.5 still lists caster levels for items and item abilities alongside their requirements, when the one can be derived from the other; I guess the listed CL is the "default" CL for the item when found as anonymous, random loot. Apparently NPC mages don't start thinking about making Pearls of Power or Brilliant Energy weapons until levels 17 and 16, respectively, despite being able to do so at spectacularly lower levels. Silly NPCs! :>
Rystil Arden
First Post
A lot of various levels. But we don't need a new game. When you guys in TCotM get your butt out of the tower, we're starting the Mega Adventure with (more or less) all of themBront said:
Like literally could be any day now.- Status
