Stupid New Item Creation Rules

I continue to believe that Andy Collins misunderstood the intention of the original rules, was too stubborn to admit he was wrong, and then took the opportunity of the new DMG to turn his incorrect ruling into the new correct one.

Given that Andy wasn't the main guy for the DMG revision I would guess this is an incorrect assumption.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Anubis said:
I understand all that. The thing is, what about those items where caster level doesn't do anything, such as Bracers of Armor? The difference between Bracers of Armor +1 at CL 7 and Bracers of Armor +1 at CL 20 is negligible. In fact, the only differences are for dispel magic, detect magic, and saving throws of the item if unattended or in the hands of someone with poor saves. In addition, for this item (and most others), caster level isn't even a factor in the cost! (Bracers of Armor is "bonus squared x 1000, period!) So how would changing the CL change the price? It wouldn't!



I know that, but my point is that it's stupid and makes no sense! Why would you have to be Level 7 to make Bracers of Armor +1, an essential item for low-level wizards and sorcerers? How about the fact that by Level 7, you can make up to +3 easily, defeating the purpose of +1? See what I mean?

I agree ... except why would a 3rd-level mage waste XP on a set of +1 bracers, when he can just cast Mage Armor?
 

Anubis said:
Why on earth did they make the Caster Level a requirement for making an item now?

Just want to reiterate that not a single word changed on the issue between the 3.0 and 3.5 DMG.

'Round and round it goes, and still each of the D&D designers to comment (Monte, Sean, Andy) state that caster level is variable, and yet none can ever answer what the official market price is to a caster-level-3 pearl of power (et. al.). Sean's last comment asserted that some unknown extra person added that rule to the 3.0 DMG after Monte let go of it, but that seems hard to understand given how it ties into the other requirements and pricing rules.

www.superdan.net/dndfaq2.html
 

Anubis said:
Why on earth did they make the Caster Level a requirement for making an item now? Craft Wondrous Item can be gotten at Level 3, but you can't make anything with it until Level 5 now!

There are 10-11 or so items that can be made at 3rd level, here are just 9 of them off-hand:

Boots of Levitation
Brooch of Shielding
Gloves of Arrow Snaring
Goggles of Night
Horn of Fog
Horseshoes of a Zephyr
Rope of Climbing
Stone of Alarm
Unguent of Timelessness
 

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
I agree ... except why would a 3rd-level mage waste XP on a set of +1 bracers, when he can just cast Mage Armor?

For the same reason she might choose to make +3 bracers instead of casting a 7-hour Mage Armor at 7th level?
 

Re: Re: Stupid New Item Creation Rules

dcollins said:

Just want to reiterate that not a single word changed on the issue between the 3.0 and 3.5 DMG.

Perhaps, but the official stance has it seems.

dcollins said:

'Round and round it goes, and still each of the D&D designers to comment (Monte, Sean, Andy) state that caster level is variable, and yet none can ever answer what the official market price is to a caster-level-3 pearl of power (et. al.).

Um, I could answer this one. It costs the same as the CL 17 version. There is no power variable by level. What's the difference between a CL 3 Pearl of Power for Level 1 and a CL 17 Pearl of Power for Level 1? NOTHING. Sure, you can say "oh it affects dispel magic and saving throws for the item when unattended", but in fact, these differences are paltry and pretty meaningless.

Besides, why could a Level 17 spellcaster ever use a Pearl of Power for Level 1 spells? Dur . . . So I am inclined to believe that we are probably misinterpreting the written rules.

dcollins said:

Sean's last comment asserted that some unknown extra person added that rule to the 3.0 DMG after Monte let go of it, but that seems hard to understand given how it ties into the other requirements and pricing rules.

www.superdan.net/dndfaq2.html

I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that pretty much everything in there is bunk. First off, some of the items with higher CL listings WOULD NEVER ME MADE BY CASTERS OF THAT LEVEL. For instance, why would a Level 7 caster create Bracers of Armor +1, when the prerequisites allow for +3? What is the point of needing double the bonus in level when the EARLIEST the CL would allow the item to be made would be at 3-1/2 times the minimal bonus?

In other words, there comes a time when common sense and logic must be used. The whole CL requirement myth defies ALL logic and common sense.

On top of that, now WotC HAS *officially* stated that CL is not a requirement, despite it not being fixed in the revised books. As I said before, this is the official ruling from WotC:

-- Can you clarify if Magic Item Caster Level's listed in the DMG are pre-requisites to creating these items???

They are not prerequisits. _They are the caster level at which the items are typically found. _This value can vary.

As you can see, this does blow the CL myth right out of the water. Why it's not yet in errata or the FAQ is beyond me. At any rate, it is official, so CL is NOT a requirement.
 

Re: Re: Re: Stupid New Item Creation Rules

First off, some of the items with higher CL listings WOULD NEVER ME MADE BY CASTERS OF THAT LEVEL. For instance, why would a Level 7 caster create Bracers of Armor +1, when the prerequisites allow for +3?

Aside from the higher cost... why would the "default" Caster Level be 7, then? ... unless it's because 6th level casters can't make them.

If there's no reason a 7th or higher level caster would ever make Bracers +1, the default Caster Level wouldn't be 7...

-Hyp.
 

CL is NOT a pre-requisite!!!

seems to me that WotC is not, and/or will not, admit to the error.

Sean K Reynolds WRITES HERE it's an error (towards the end.) He also quotes Monte Cook here stating that IT IS AN ERROR.

Sean writes:
"I'd guess that's because the designers may have been working off the pre-errata files and didn't plug in all of the errata. Oops. Correction: The "CL is a prereq" is a commonly known error at WotC, but for some reason it never actually made it into the official DMG errata. So that helps explain why it didn't make it into the 3.5 DMG ... it wasn't on the existing list of things to fix. Still, it is unfortunate that it was not included, because it _is_ an error in the 3.0 book."

Lastly, please see DMG(v3.5) page 14 - Changing the Rules. Remember the game you play is ultimately your game, you payed for it. Play it how you want to play it. It's supposed to be FUN. we have enough restrictions, rules and laws in Real Life to worry about the semantics of a rule for a game.
 

Re: Re: Re: Stupid New Item Creation Rules

Anubis said:
Perhaps, but the official stance has it seems.

(Sigh) "Official" is what's in the books, plus errata.

Anubis said:
Um, I could answer this one. It costs the same as the CL 17 version. There is no power variable by level.

The designers disagree with you. According to Sean K. Reynolds ( http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=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.


Other than that, you apparently have everything well in hand and meticulously analyzed. Good thing it's "beyond a shadow of a doubt" for you. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Living Greyhawk

What really stinks is that Living Grehawk has decided that CL being a prerequisite is a good way to limit MIC and so will probably keep this the way it is without change.

Look at that list of things you can make at 3rd level, and its pretty obvious that there is a mistake. Goggles of Night are about the coolest item you can make at 3rd level, but a 3rd level wizard would be hard pressed to afford it I think.

Pearls of Power are whacked under the ruling, since nobody who needs them (low levels) can make them and who would think that 17th level casters are mass producing them for the low level characters to buy.

The worst part of the revision was how "rules based" it was while ignoring the "implied world" world-building questions.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top