ARandomGod
First Post
I've seen a thread somewhere about this before...
One of the groups I'm in is debating about the character level entry in the creation of wonderous items. Skip's article specifically states (as I read it) that you need to meet the CL listed to make the item. The DMG does not so state... and in fact going by such a rule leads to some pretty contradictory areas of the DMG.
Like the issue that the CL of a Pearl of Power is 17, but the requirement to make a Pearl of Power is the ability to cast spells of the applicable level... which means to make a first level pearl you "have" to be able to cast first level spells, AND be level 17.
So why bother meantioning the spell requirement? At level 17 you can cast spells of any level!
This is a group with multiple games and therefore multiple GM's... (Hence the discussion as opposed to just making a houserule)
Where all do you guys know of this 'ruling' of Skip's being contradicted? Does a careful reading of the article end up with him contradicting himself IN the article? I really wish I could find the previous thread wherein I saw people tearing the various arguements apart, but since I can't... can one of you guys point it out?
Or if not, how about tearing about all the various interpretations here?
^_^
Flame on!
(Politely, of course.)
One of the groups I'm in is debating about the character level entry in the creation of wonderous items. Skip's article specifically states (as I read it) that you need to meet the CL listed to make the item. The DMG does not so state... and in fact going by such a rule leads to some pretty contradictory areas of the DMG.
Like the issue that the CL of a Pearl of Power is 17, but the requirement to make a Pearl of Power is the ability to cast spells of the applicable level... which means to make a first level pearl you "have" to be able to cast first level spells, AND be level 17.
So why bother meantioning the spell requirement? At level 17 you can cast spells of any level!
This is a group with multiple games and therefore multiple GM's... (Hence the discussion as opposed to just making a houserule)
Where all do you guys know of this 'ruling' of Skip's being contradicted? Does a careful reading of the article end up with him contradicting himself IN the article? I really wish I could find the previous thread wherein I saw people tearing the various arguements apart, but since I can't... can one of you guys point it out?
Or if not, how about tearing about all the various interpretations here?
^_^
Flame on!
(Politely, of course.)