Is Caster Level a prerequisite for creating magic items?

[Menexenus]

Hello all. Long ago, near the beginning of 3rd edition, Monte Cook posted the following clarification on his website. He directs us to the text in the DMG about creating magic items, and then he comments as follows.

Note what it doesn't say. It doesn't say that you have to be the listed level to make a given item. It's not a prerequisite. You don't have to be 17th level to create a 1st-level pearl of power -- you just have to meet the prerequisites. Prerequisites, you'll notice, get their own section.

Now since Monte was (apparently) in charge of writing this part of the DMG, I thought this was Gospel. Then recently I came across this snippet on the Wizards of the Coast website which completely threw me for a loop.

When creating items, the creator's caster level must be at least as high as the item's caster level.

Huh?! Is this a change that was made for 3.5 edition, or has Monte been wrong all along (even though he was the author)? Or, more likely, was this written by someone at Wizards of the Coast who doesn't know what the frack he is talking about? Can someone please help me out here?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Li Shenron]

Oh no... (preparing for evacuation)

 

[apesamongus]

There is a difference between an items caster level and the suggested caster level of a generic item. Yes, your caster level has to be as high as the caster level of an item, but that just means that you can't make that CL 17 pearl of power at level 15, there's nothing preventing you from making a CL 15 pearl of power.

 

[Tatsukun]

Check the errata. If you can cast the spells needed, and you have the feat, you're good to go.

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.

For example, you can make a belt of giant strength +4 at third level if you can cast “Bull's strength”, you have the “Craft Wondrous Item Feat”, and you have the Gp and Exp to do it.

Of course, at third level, that's a lot of Gp and Exp.

-Tatsu

P.S> Others will tell you (scream it really) different.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Caster Level is not a Prerequisite in 3.5, no matter how hard someone is going to argue the fact.

There are three actual rules that support this point of view, and exactly zero which don't.

To whit:

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item’s creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).

So, you must meet the prereqs to create an item. What are the prereqs to create an item?

• Caster Level: The next item in a notational entry gives the caster level of the item, indicating its relative power. The caster level determines the item’s saving throw bonus, as well as range or other level-dependent aspects of the powers of the item (if variable). It also determines the level that must be contended with should the item come under the effect of a dispel magic spell or similar situation. This information is given in the form “CL x,” where “CL” is an abbreviation for caster level and “x” is an ordinal number representing the caster level itself.

For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the caster level of an item at any number high enough to cast the stored spell and not higher than her own caster level. For other magic items, the caster level is determined by the item itself. In this case, the creator’s caster level must be as high as the item’s caster level (and prerequisites may effectively put a higher minimum on the creator’s level).

• Prerequisites: Certain requirements must be met in order for a character to create a magic item. These include feats, spells, and miscellaneous requirements such as level, alignment, and race or kind. The prerequisites for creation of an item are given immediately following the item’s caster level.

Now, there are two conclusions which may be drawn from these statements:

1. That the prerequisites section of the item's description is distinct from the Caster Level section.

2. That the caster level section also seems to be a sort of prereq, even though it's listed separately.

However:

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.

The apparent oddity above is here cleared up, and the minimum necessary Caster Level is the minimum to meet the prerequisites - which in no way, shape, or form include the Caster Level in the item description.

The Errata rewrites the DMG, and any conclusions not based on or contradictory to the DMG + Errata are incorrect.

 

[ARandomGod]

Depends on who you ask. Since you're asking me,

"No, you don't."

 

[dcollins]

Is Caster Level a prerequisite for creating magic items?

A lot of contradictory information has come from WOTC about this. The short story is this:
- 3.0 DMG, as published: Yes.
- Cook/Reynolds online 2001: No.
- 3.5 DMG, as published: Yes.
- Cook online 2003: Yes, but it's a mistake.
- Reynolds/Andy Collins: No.
- 3.5 DMG errata: No, and it never was.
- Williams online 2004: Yes.

Since I consider this the most confusing issue in the core rules, I have a website with more detail on the subject. I recommend playing it by-the-book as published, that is, "Yes". My site: http://superdan.net.home.comcast.net/dndfaq2.html

Note that there's a distinction between two kinds of items. For potions/scrolls/wands, everyone agrees that the creator can set the Caster Level to whatever works for them ("the creator can set the caster level", formulas in PHB under Feats). For other item types, that is not the case by the published DMG (printed entry is a "minimum on the creator's level"), and that is what gets argued. (Quotes from 3.0 & 3.5 DMG, "Magic Item Descriptions: Caster Level").

 

[dcollins]

Huh?! Is this a change that was made for 3.5 edition, or has Monte been wrong all along (even though he was the author)?

One other thing. You noticed what Monte wrote in 2001. But here's what he wrote later on in 2003, in a review of 3.5:

Caster level is still a prerequisite for magic item creation. This was an error in the 3.0 DMG and remains. You still have to be 17th level to make a 1st-level pearl of power.

http://www.montecook.com/arch_review26.html

 

[Krelios]

One other thing. You noticed what Monte wrote in 2001. But here's what he wrote later on in 2003, in a review of 3.5:

That's not a contradiction, Monte is saying that it was wrong in 3.0 and the error persists in 3.5. He does not, and has never believed, that the CL of an item listed in the DMG is a requirement.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

That's not a contradiction, Monte is saying that it was wrong in 3.0 and the error persists in 3.5. He does not, and has never believed, that the CL of an item listed in the DMG is a requirement.

Yeah, but if you don't quote it out of context, you can't make your point more convincing by having Monte Cook back you up! :sheesh:

Come on, Dcollins, you should be more intellectually honest.

The full quote, as part of Monte's review of the 3.5 Revision dcollins was kind enough (though I wondered at other adjectives, since it readily enough debunks his point) to link to, is:

Things that should have changed, but didn't:

* Caster level is still a prerequisite for magic item creation. This was an error in the 3.0 DMG and remains. You still have to be 17th level to make a 1st-level pearl of power.

Oddly enough, it did change - when they released the Errata.

Ergo, 3.5 as it currently stands follows Monte's wishes as far as CL being a prereq goes - in that it isn't, at all, a prereq, despite how much dcollins desperately wishes it to be.