Crafting magic items a above your caster level


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 171 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
FAQ wrote:

earl of Power: What is the caster level required to create this item?

Though the listed Caster Level for a pearl of power is 17th, that caster level is not part of the Requirements listing for that item. Therefore, the only caster level requirement for a pearl of power is the character has to be able to cast spells of the desired level.

However, it makes sense that the minimum caster level of the pearl is the minimum caster level necessary to cast spells of that level--it would be strange for a 2nd-level pearl to be CL 1st.

For example, a 3rd-level wizard with Craft Wondrous Item can create a 1st-level pearl, with a minimum caster level of 1. He can set the caster level to whatever he wants (assuming he can meet the crafting DC), though the pearl's caster level has no effect on its powers (other than its ability to resist dispel magic). If he wants to make a 2nd-level pearl, the caster level has to be at least 3, as wizards can't cast 2nd-level spells until they reach character level 3. He can even try to make a 3rd-level pearl, though the minimum caster level is 5, and he adds +5 to the DC because he doesn't meet the "able to cast 3rd-level spells" requirement.

—Sean K Reynolds, 08/18/10

This FAQ indirectly say that it is possible to craft items above the character CL. apparently with a single +5 to DC for missing the prerequisite ability a no increase in DC for missing the caster level. It is how it should work?

That will really allow someone to craft a luck sword with wishes, as soon as they get the minimum skill level to reliably beat the DC.

With a CL of 17 and missing only 1 prerequisite it would be a DC of 27, so a 10th level character with skill focus spellcraft and no intelligence bonus could do it.

A wizard with 18 intelligence, Craft weapons, masterwork tools and skill focus could beat that DC at level 5! it would be harder to meet the prerequisites for the +2 to hit and damage than the DC to craft a wish granting item.

While the above are extreme examples, being capable of crafting items at a CL higher than yours character level seem out of kilter with other rules of the game, where it is very hard to get your abilities to work above that limit.

Edit. math correction and Cheapy point about the +2 bonus.


Fully intentional. It of course breaks down with certain items, but oh well.


Of course, the earliest level someone could make a luck blade is level 6. The only requirements that can be bypassed are the ones in the Requirements section of the item.

You still can't get around needing 3 times the enhancement bonus, as far as I can tell.

Liberty's Edge

Cheapy wrote:

Fully intentional. It of course breaks down with certain items, but oh well.

The problem is that it break down with a lot of items.


Cheapy wrote:

Of course, the earliest level someone could make a luck blade is level 6. The only requirements that can be bypassed are the ones in the Requirements section of the item.

You still can't get around needing 3 times the enhancement bonus, as far as I can tell.

Depending on how you interpret which prerequisites are immutably mandatory and which are avoidable with a +5 to the DC. As far as I can tell the only thing that everyone agrees on is requiring the needing the appropriate Crafting Feat.

Liberty's Edge

Just to increase the absurdity:
a 4th level wizard, with 20 intelligence focusing on craft jewellery can make a wishing gem with 5 wishes/day but can't make a potion of haste (you need to memorize the spell to make a potion).

At this point every state with a decent economy would have a wizard producing them. It is one thing to immobilize a 17th level wizard for several years, another to immobilize a 4th.


Magic items are very easy to make. I noticed it a long time ago, but it is RAI, and not an oversight.
It does not work perfectly well, but pricing and time are the real barriers. The skill checks are normally so low that they are almost an auto-success in many occasions.

Liberty's Edge

I had always used the rule that it is not possible to make an item at above your caster level, so hat you can't make items using a spell that a cleric/druid/wizard of your character level can't cast.

With this ruling a 3rd level character can easily make 5d fireballs gems at 375 gp (production cost) and 1 day of work for each one. Or 10d fireball gems for 750 gp. 1 day of work and he could trivialize most encounters of appropriate CR.

It mean that a crafter with some money, a few days and craft wondrous items will have access to all the spell in game in the form f single use items from level 6 onward.
No cleric? Here is my salve of resurrection, it is only a DC of 23.

We need to cure a friend that has been bitten by a lycanthrope and the high cleric will ask for a favour in exchange of the cure?
"A cure disease salve at CL 12 is only a DC 22 item and it will cost 900 gp and I can make it in 2 day, we have plenty of time."

Pricing can be a barrier for the high level items, but not for this kind of items. And it break believability . A player character will lack the money, but a noble, rich merchant or the ruler of a nation will have it so why every kingdom treasury hasn't a few wishing gems?

For items where the final price isn't modified by the CL of the item there is no reason to not to make them at CL 20 (or even 30) if you have the skill. And getting the skill is easy.
A level 10 wizard with skill focus spellcraft could would get +25 before adding any magic item. That mean he could make item at CL 20 requiring any single spell on any list.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pearls of power are caster level 17, even for a first level pearl. The caster level is not tied to the power of the item. It is tied to the spells used to create the item.

For the necklace of fireballs each necklace type must be created. Any mixing and matching is GM Fiat. A 3rd level character wasting most of his wealth on one item deserves whatever happens to him after his money is gone. 875 GP is a lot of money for a 3rd level character to throw away.

The game's economy issues have been proven to fail by several posters on several forums. I am sure there are other items that break verisimilitude if someone wanted to use them to prove the game rules don't support a working society.

Liberty's Edge

Pearl of powers can be made at any CL. It is in the FAQ posted above:
"Though the listed Caster Level for a pearl of power is 17th, that caster level is not part of the Requirements listing for that item. Therefore, the only caster level requirement for a pearl of power is the character has to be able to cast spells of the desired level." "For example, a 3rd-level wizard with Craft Wondrous Item can create a 1st-level pearl, with a minimum caster level of 1."

The trick is that if you make a belt of mighty prowess at minimum caster level (3) it is very easy to dispel it with a targeted dispelling. It you make it at CL 25 it is almost impossible. As the cost is the same there is no reason to make items whose price isn't CL dependant at a CL lower than the maximum the caster can successfully reach. So a level 10 wizard will routinely make them at CL 25.

There is no need to make a necklace of fireball. Actually there are all the reasons not to make it as it has special rules for failing a ST against a fire attack.
It is way more efficient to make a couple of custom made single shot spell gems or sling bullets.

The whole problem is not with the item pricing per se, but with the ability to easily overcast 15 or more levels above your actual level when making some items (principally wondrous items) and the inability to do so with a different class of items (the Brew potion feat specifically prohibit it), or the ability to make items with spells that will be incapable to cast for another 10 or more character levels.

If instead of only taking skill focus spellcraft I were combing the rules for stackable bonuses, between traits, feats and items I would be capable to overcast 20 levels above my actual level with extreme ease and probably would get 25 levels above my actual level.


I know that CL 17 is not a part of the requirements. My point is that by your house rules a level 3 character could not make them.

You don't get to increase caster level when making a magic item from the book. It is assumed that what is in the book is the caster level the item is created at. If not then it would have to be assumed that only casters of a certain level are creating certain items. If the GM wishes to allow a player to go over what is in the book he should ad-hoc the price to make up for it.

edit: Things like weapons assume various caster levels for the purpose of which enchantment you use, and a scroll can be varied, but in general what is in the book for an item is what the caster level will be.

Liberty's Edge

No, Wraith. With my house rule a CL 1 character could make a pearl of power for level 1 spells, a CL 3 character would be capable to make them for level 2 spells and so on.
A crafter will be incapable to overcast, not to make item at his caster level or lower.

So he would be incapable to make a item that require a spell that can be only cast by a CL 17 spell caster, but he would be perfectly capable to make an item containing spells he is capable to cast.

My house rule is that if you are CL 10 you can't make an item at CL 11, but it don't change the rule that that you can make a item at the minimum CL needed to cast the relevant spells.


Just a simple question...

Forget RAW and RAI and history and game balance and all that.

Does it make any sense that a level 5 magic item crafter can make magic items which grant wishes, alter reality or otherwise would be far, far beyond the ability of a magical CASTER of the same spell effect of the same caster level?

I have to say...

Not to me it doesn't. It just reeks of poor game design and oozes exploit potential.

Am I going to let a level 5 character make a CL 20 pearl of power?

Not a chance.


Diego Rossi wrote:

No, Wraith. With my house rule a CL 1 character could make a pearl of power for level 1 spells, a CL 3 character would be capable to make them for level 2 spells and so on.

A crafter will be incapable to overcast, not to make item at his caster level or lower.

So he would be incapable to make a item that require a spell that can be only cast by a CL 17 spell caster, but he would be perfectly capable to make an item containing spells he is capable to cast.

My house rule is that if you are CL 10 you can't make an item at CL 11, but it don't change the rule that that you can make a item at the minimum CL needed to cast the relevant spells.

Ok. I misread your houserule before.

I don't a character mind using the caster level in the book, but creating it "at any level he wants" seems strange.

From the way I understood the FAQ the caster can set the caster level at 20 just by adding +5. That should never happen. I would see not reason to not tack on the extra +5 since the crafting DC's are really low anyway.


wraithstrike wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

No, Wraith. With my house rule a CL 1 character could make a pearl of power for level 1 spells, a CL 3 character would be capable to make them for level 2 spells and so on.

A crafter will be incapable to overcast, not to make item at his caster level or lower.

So he would be incapable to make a item that require a spell that can be only cast by a CL 17 spell caster, but he would be perfectly capable to make an item containing spells he is capable to cast.

My house rule is that if you are CL 10 you can't make an item at CL 11, but it don't change the rule that that you can make a item at the minimum CL needed to cast the relevant spells.

Ok. I misread your houserule before.

I don't a character mind using the caster level in the book, but creating it "at any level he wants" seems strange.

From the way I understood the FAQ the caster can set the caster level at 20 just by adding +5. That should never happen. I would see not reason to not tack on the extra +5 since the crafting DC's are really low anyway.

Don't forget cost would go up dramatically with a higher caster level.


Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:


Don't forget cost would go up dramatically with a higher caster level.

True. That may be the solution. I did think of that, but I am too lazy to do the math to see how much it matters with various items.

Liberty's Edge

Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:


Don't forget cost would go up dramatically with a higher caster level.

Plenty of existing items for which that is not true.

A Pearl of power price don't change, whichever is the CL at which it is made (if you rule otherwise people can make very cheap peals of powers, they only need to lower the current Cl from 17 to 1, 3, 5 and so on, the minimum to cast the a spell of the level affected by the pearl).

The price of all the items in this list are not affected by the CL at which the item is made:

Ability bonus (enhancement) - Bonus squared x 1,000 gp
Armor bonus (enhancement) - Bonus squared x 1,000 gp
Bonus spell - Spell level squared x 1,000 gp
AC bonus (deflection) - Bonus squared x 2,000 gp
AC bonus (other) - Bonus squared x 2,500 gp
Natural armor bonus (enhancement) - Bonus squared x 2,000 gp
Save bonus (resistance) - Bonus squared x 1,000 gp
Save bonus (other)1 - Bonus squared x 2,000 gp
Skill bonus (competence) - Bonus squared x 100 gp
Spell resistance - 10,000 gp per point over SR 12; SR 13 minimum
Weapon bonus (enhancement) - Bonus squared x 2,000 gp

Making the item at incredibly high CL levels, well above CL 20 make them practically immune to being disabled by dispel magic.

There are other items that would share that characteristic, even if it is not spelled under the magic item creation rules, some example:

Bag of holding (what matter is the capacity of the bag, and that is not related to CL a which it is made)

Boots of the Winterlands (no CL dependant power)

Bottle of Air (idem)

Brooch of Shielding (idem)

Cloak of Displacement, Minor (idem)

and so on.


Diego Rossi wrote:

Just to increase the absurdity:

a 4th level wizard, with 20 intelligence focusing on craft jewellery can make a wishing gem with 5 wishes/day but can't make a potion of haste (you need to memorize the spell to make a potion).

At this point every state with a decent economy would have a wizard producing them. It is one thing to immobilize a 17th level wizard for several years, another to immobilize a 4th.

Now you're starting to see the wide game-world implications to the Rules As Clarified, and why they really must be house ruled in most campaigns to keep them consistent with the game world itself.

Your same wizard can make candles that open portals into Hades. Hard to see why anyone would spend money on a standing army when he can just sneak ten peasants into the enemy's capital with instructions to "light this candle in an alley."

Apparently Monte Cook always intended people to be able to bypass item caster level when crafting. However, most of this silliness was avoided in 3.5 because ICL or no ICL, you still needed to have a legitimate source for the spell. In allowing crafters to bypass the spell prereq with a relatively minor check, and take ten on that check, it really opens pandora's box.

There are a host of ways it can be fixed. One is to up the DC penalty for skipping prereqs to 10, and prohibit a 'take 10' on the roll. Another is to stick ICL back into the non-bypassable prereqs. Etc.

Liberty's Edge

As I like the flavour of the master craftsman feat my solution is to limit the the maximum CL of what it is possible to produce to the caster level of the character (and so the ranks in the appropriate skill for a master craftsman).

I thought it was the actual rule till I did read more accurately SKR FAQ after your posts.

I have no problem with "downgrading" the CL of a item till you hit them minimum level to cast the relevant spells (beside some problem with the Summoner spell list. Potion of Dimension door .....), but I have problems with a guy building something well above is actual caster level an getting indirect access to spell he is incapable to cast.

Another "fun" way to use of the FAQ is to craft wands at a Cl well above your own. Any level 5 character with craft wand and access to magic missile can craft a wand working at level 9, same thing for a fireball wand casting the spell at level 10 while you are a level 5 character and so on.
Production cost can make a difference here, but generally the added efficancy supersede the increase in cost.


Here is our house rule, quite similar to yours.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I posted the following in another thread, but I thought it might have some relevance here as well:

beej67 wrote:
beej67 wrote:


Where the ability to bypass the Item Caster Level and/or the spell prereq really gets stupid is for these two items:

Luck Blade
Candle of Invocation

Oh I forgot to mention another thing that gets really really stupid according to how Paizo "clarified" the rules ... any item crafted by any caster level 10 or above, other than maybe wands and staves, is going to be crafted at "Item Crafter Level 20" so it effectively can't be dispelled. The cost for crafting a bag of holding at ICL3 and ICL 20 is the same, so if you're a mage with Craft Wonderous Item, and you have a bag of holding, you can upgrade it's ICL for free. And when taking 10 on the check, any mage worth a crap is going to be able to Take10 his way to ICL20 items when he's like level 9.

This is NOT true, according to this old thread of mine.

James Jacobs wrote:

Caster levels for items cannot be changed, as a general rule, unless they're things like wands or scrolls or other spell trigger or spell completion items.

You could theoretically increase the caster level for a wondrous item or other magic item, but that'd need GM approval and would increase the base cost of the item as appropriate.

Simply rolling well on your craft check won't let you end-run around these rules. Caster level is not determined by your check's result.

Not only is it a house rule requiring GM approval, it would increase the cost of the item (dramatically in all liklihood) and not be at all "free."


As a house rule would it make sense to limit the "Increase the DC by 5 for each requirement you lack" rule so that you can only do so if you are capable of casting spells of the appropriate level? IE. to create a Luck Blade you must be able to cast 9th level spells or be of sufficient character level so that you would be able to do so if you're using the master craftsman feat. I can't think of any problems with that. You should be able to create items with an ICL higher than your own, that's why there's a skill check, but this would prevent early access to spells way above your level.


We've had a lot of magic item crafters in my group, and this hasn't been much a problem for us. Sure you could craft a luck blade with one wish at low levels, but is it worth it? At low levels, I'd rather put that 32k towards a cloak of resistance or an ability boosting item or some handy wondrous item. Candle of Invocation is more problematic, but the player still won't want to gate in something of a higher HD than it can control. Since custom magic items are subject to DM approval, in practice this hasn't done anything to throw our games out of whack.

Sczarni

Yes, that level 10 can make the roll to craft the item with a wish on it... now... pay the 75k GP materials cost (not counting the other costs). Nothing reduces this except for aligning the item, and then even your GM might baulk at the reduction making you pay full price for the spell's materials. It is going to be pretty hard for that level 10 to fulfill this requirement (wealth by level for level 10 = 62,000).

The real trick is keeping them from making a user activated (thought) ring of endless limited wishes for 232,400 base, 168,700 gp aligned to their alignment. Yep. That is a ring that can cast limited wish every round. By thinking about it (no command word, no somatic, no components, nada, just think about it and the world changes).

ps. ring of wishes in the same fashion is about 2.74m gp. Kind of out of reach of most sub-20 players.

Also as a "house rule" I would rule that they get the +5 OR Caster level - character level, whichever is higher. Meaning if the caster level is more than 5 higher than their level, they take additional penalties. That seems relatively fair.

Sovereign Court

Basically, the limit on what you can craft is money, not level; but money is somewhat circumscribed by WBL, so level after all.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Rather than necroing a two year old thread on this, there are some FAQ rulings that clarify this.


Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
Rather than necroing a two year old thread on this, there are some FAQ rulings that clarify this.

Would be helpful to link to them.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CraziFuzzy wrote:
Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
Rather than necroing a two year old thread on this, there are some FAQ rulings that clarify this.
Would be helpful to link to them.

Ok

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Diego Rossi wrote:
Cheapy wrote:

Fully intentional. It of course breaks down with certain items, but oh well.

The problem is that it break down with a lot of items.

it only breaks down if the GM wants it to. A GM can choose to add items to the list of things that can't be bypassed. Caster level seems to be a very reasonable choice as one of them. Another would be "creator must be X race". A GM can tune crafting has he/she sees fit.

Liberty's Edge

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
CraziFuzzy wrote:
Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
Rather than necroing a two year old thread on this, there are some FAQ rulings that clarify this.
Would be helpful to link to them.
Ok

None of those change the basic problem.

If you have the money, a low level spellcaster can make wondrous items with spells that only a extremely high character can cast, so why every major city armory hasn't a weapon stand that cast greater magic weapon at CL 20 on all the weapon put in it? and a armor stand that do the same with magical vestment?

Now the 1st level warriors patrolling the city have +5 short spears, +5 saps, +5 leather armor and +5 small wooden shields for 20 hours.
They are stolen? After 20 hours at most they return to normal and you are out a few gold pieces, the price of the normal weapon.

The cost of that?
CL 20, level 3 spell, no space used x2, base duration 1 hour no multiplier:
2.000*20*3*2= 240.000 gp for each stand.
Well within what a major city can afford and worth it.

To avoid having it stolen make it a massive affair with a stone basis and anchor it in place.

A 4th level wizard can make it.

- * -

Similarly a playing group could decide to craft a lot of game breaking single shot items for a paltry sum.

Single shot, use activated is CLxSLx50. You make it as an elixir instead of a potion, or a breakable item, and you have no problem.

And that is another problem, BTW, rule wise it is possible to duplicate all potions with Craft wondrous item and put in them even the personal range spells that can't be put in potions.
We have several examples of that kind of item, and it is a very broken as it make Brew potions a extremely weak feat.

Liberty's Edge

LazarX wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Cheapy wrote:

Fully intentional. It of course breaks down with certain items, but oh well.

The problem is that it break down with a lot of items.
it only breaks down if the GM wants it to. A GM can choose to add items to the list of things that can't be bypassed. Caster level seems to be a very reasonable choice as one of them. Another would be "creator must be X race". A GM can tune crafting has he/she sees fit.

True, but some player (or at least some forum goers) push hard against that: "The rules say I can!!!". (whine)

I can say no and all the GM with which I play can say no, but I have seen several time posts in these board: "Help, my player want to make a T-shirt of constant shield that work only for left handed character whose name is Bob, it really cost only 2.800 gp?"
(Maybe not the left handed and named Bob part, but T-s#*+ of shield? At least 2 thread in which I participated with several people saying "The rule allow them" even after pointing out that it should be priced on the effects, not the spell. Ultimate Campaing has given some extra ammunition against that, but not much.)

A crafty player with the feat an a GM that don't want to argue with him will break game balance very fast and probably hog the spotlight, ruining all the other players fun.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Or the GM could just say no to all those custom items. Craft Wondrous Item is powerful enough without letting it duplicate wands and potions as well.

Sovereign Court

A lot of "proofs" that item creation in general is broken revolve around custom items. If you ignore the "GM approval not guaranteed" part of custom items, then they're indeed breakable.

But those "proofs" don't tell us whether ignoring level prereqs for standard items is unbalanced as well.

I think we can make the question more nuanced: is ignoring level prereqs unbalanced even in situations where the crafter doesn't have an abnormal amount of money at hand?

Because if the crafter also has too much money, then the excess wealth is probably the real source of unbalance.


Honestly, I can see a really good crafter being able to craft higher level items, in some instances. I think the best 'house rule' around this might be that instead of bypassing the caster level requirement with a +5 to DC, you instead add +3 to the DC for every level you lack. This would allow some fudge room (for instance, a +2 weapon is not unheard of for a 5th level character, based on WBL, but its caster level is 6th), but prevent the CL17 items from being crafted by the 5th level rookie.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Diego Rossi wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Cheapy wrote:

Fully intentional. It of course breaks down with certain items, but oh well.

The problem is that it break down with a lot of items.
it only breaks down if the GM wants it to. A GM can choose to add items to the list of things that can't be bypassed. Caster level seems to be a very reasonable choice as one of them. Another would be "creator must be X race". A GM can tune crafting has he/she sees fit.

True, but some player (or at least some forum goers) push hard against that: "The rules say I can!!!". (whine)

The one beautiful thing about my circle of players is that for the most part, they're over the mental age of eight. We're also all pretty much old school enough to recognize that the GM does have the final word on all rulings, even if the discussions do get slightly heated every now and then.

Being GM means I don't have to put up with whiners. And they are more than welcome not to put up with me.

Sovereign Court

@CraziFuzzy: if the 3rd-level crafter is more or less within WBL, can he even afford CL-17 items?

Are there good examples of high-CL items that are cheap enough to craft at low CL? (Apart from the ridiculously over-CL'd Pear of Power I, which doesn't need to be CL 17 according to the FAQ.)

A crafter with too much money on his hands is inherently unbalanced. If he can't craft high-CL stuff he can just craft a LOT of low-CL stuff. So bypassing the CL isn't really the cause of the unbalance, it's the money.

So I'm wondering, aren't people trying very hard to fix a problem that's not really all that problematic?


my concern wasn't necessarily with balance, but acceptance. I just can't accept that a low caster level crafter can enchant items with powers far exceeding their own. Its a 'realism' issue to me. I don't see my proposal of a scaled caster level penalty being damaging in any way, as it still allows a character to craft anything he can normally afford, but it prevents the aforementioned issue of the local king hiring/slaving gobs of low level casters to craft epic level magic items.


Ascalaphus wrote:
@CraziFuzzy: if the 3rd-level crafter is more or less within WBL, can he even afford CL-17 items?

Candle of Invocation is the example I like to default to. Which, you know, opens a gate to another plane of existence and yanks an entity through it.

Hard to justify a world where the evil cultists don't have a crapton of those laying around, if you stick with the core crafting rules.

Liberty's Edge

Ascalaphus wrote:

@CraziFuzzy: if the 3rd-level crafter is more or less within WBL, can he even afford CL-17 items?

Are there good examples of high-CL items that are cheap enough to craft at low CL? (Apart from the ridiculously over-CL'd Pear of Power I, which doesn't need to be CL 17 according to the FAQ.)

A crafter with too much money on his hands is inherently unbalanced. If he can't craft high-CL stuff he can just craft a LOT of low-CL stuff. So bypassing the CL isn't really the cause of the unbalance, it's the money.

So I'm wondering, aren't people trying very hard to fix a problem that's not really all that problematic?

Making a Wasp Nest of Swarming for 500 gp is a good starter (CL 9).

All the feather token are CL 12.
The cloak of resistance and the amulets of natural armor and mighty fists have a minimum caster level, dependant on the item pusses. A crafter (and if there is the time, the whole group) generally will have at least 1 extra point to saves and AC for those items alone.
A few ioun stones, more if you allow flawed and cracked ioun stones.
Boots of the winterland and golembane scarab in the right campaign.
Even limiting yourself tot he official items there is agood number of items that are limited by you caster level that become available early in teh game.

Sovereign Court

beej67 wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
@CraziFuzzy: if the 3rd-level crafter is more or less within WBL, can he even afford CL-17 items?

Candle of Invocation is the example I like to default to. Which, you know, opens a gate to another plane of existence and yanks an entity through it.

Hard to justify a world where the evil cultists don't have a crapton of those laying around, if you stick with the core crafting rules.

Well, 4200gp is pricey enough that the evil cultists can't afford a whole crapton of them.

But the DC to make it if you lack the CL yourself is 5 (base) + 17 (CL) +5 (lack of CL) +5 (lack of spell) = 32; that's not exactly easy. It can be done, but a low-level cultist isn't easily Taking 10 on it.

Which means that the item might end up cursed (exciting!) or that the cultists may be wasting a lot of money (that's what cultists do).

Ultimately though, yes, cultists might end up making a few working candles of invocation. Great! Cultists summoning things bigger than their head is a time-honored trope, and the game system should definitely enable it.

And when the cultists Gate in something big and awful, it'll absolutely stomp everything around it. But the cultists have no hope of long-term control over the thing whose attention they drew. So now there's a big extraplanar entity who might resent being forcibly summoned to do a job for noobs. Even better! I love game mechanics that allow reckless summoners to get in over their head.

Sovereign Court

CraziFuzzy wrote:
my concern wasn't necessarily with balance, but acceptance. I just can't accept that a low caster level crafter can enchant items with powers far exceeding their own. Its a 'realism' issue to me. I don't see my proposal of a scaled caster level penalty being damaging in any way, as it still allows a character to craft anything he can normally afford, but it prevents the aforementioned issue of the local king hiring/slaving gobs of low level casters to craft epic level magic items.

I'm not too concerned with realism. I often see GMs contort themselves for the sake of realism, while that's not needed or necessarily fun.

As for the king commissioning epic items: if he's got the money he might as well hire high-level casters to achieve the same end. It's not the CL issue that's causing trouble here, but that kings with the spending power of national economies don't work well with WBL in general. The king would be just as "unbalanced" if he spent the same budget on a huge pile of low-end (but good) magic items.

And it's perfectly fine for kings to be unbalanced. NPCs don't need to be balanced with WBL the same way as PCs do. A king who has a magical doomsday device built is a plot waiting to happen. That's good.

Sovereign Court

Diego Rossi wrote:

Making a Wasp Nest of Swarming for 500 gp is a good starter (CL 9).

That wasp nest is a pretty wacky item. The text says it's extremely fragile, and it's triggered by being kicked; but the text doesn't say this consumed the item. Also, anyone walking through the same square as the nest just has a 50% chance of kicking it - going strictly by RAW even if they're aware of it and trying not to do so.

Diego Rossi wrote:


All the feather token are CL 12.
The cloak of resistance and the amulets of natural armor and mighty fists have a minimum caster level, dependant on the item pusses. A crafter (and if there is the time, the whole group) generally will have at least 1 extra point to saves and AC for those items alone.

I don't think the feather tokens are "unbalancing". The big six items are a more legitimate argument I guess, although I'm not sure if that's truly unbalancing. It'll tend to come down to a +1 to a handful of things; a clear benefit but not enough to actually break the game.

Diego Rossi wrote:


A few ioun stones, more if you allow flawed and cracked ioun stones.
Boots of the winterland and golembane scarab in the right campaign.
Even limiting yourself tot he official items there is agood number of items that are limited by you caster level that become available early in teh game.

Those are "nice" items, but not what I'd call game-breaking. A golembane scarab is CL 8 and expensive enough that I don't think a lot of people would even bother to buy one at that level. And if you face that many golems, an adamantine weapon is in the same price range.

Ioun stones aren't really more cost-effective than other lower-CL items that grant bonuses to the same things; again I don't think there's an actual problem here.

And boots of the winterlands are only CL 5; are you really worried about the level 3 wizard getting his hands on those two levels early?


Ascalaphus wrote:
CraziFuzzy wrote:
my concern wasn't necessarily with balance, but acceptance. I just can't accept that a low caster level crafter can enchant items with powers far exceeding their own. Its a 'realism' issue to me. I don't see my proposal of a scaled caster level penalty being damaging in any way, as it still allows a character to craft anything he can normally afford, but it prevents the aforementioned issue of the local king hiring/slaving gobs of low level casters to craft epic level magic items.
I'm not too concerned with realism. I often see GMs contort themselves for the sake of realism, while that's not needed or necessarily fun.

There's a reason I put 'realism' in quotes. Obviously, 'realism' is a hopeless ideal in a fantasy game. It is more a way to describe common sense ruling. When you ask a barely initiated player how they think a rule should work, the answer should, most of the time, be correct. I doubt the answer would normally be 'simply add 5 to it, and you're fine, doesn't matter whether your a 5th trying to craft a 6th, or a 5th trying to craft a 17th'. Yes, I know that it isn't exactly the same, as the based DC goes up one per level, but it should go up more than that if you don't have the ability to even understand the magic you're putting in there.


I dunno, I guess I'm just a little disappointed in Paizo's design team on this issue. Especially when you compare and contrast with how unrewarding crafting nonmagical items [cough]alchemy[cough] can be.

Still, it confounds me that a 3rd level wizard with an entirely unremarkable build could crank out a Robe of the Archmagi with no chance of failure, needing only funding. Which, probably wouldn't happen for a 3rd level party, but could very well happen if a member of a 7th level party took the Leadership feat and found themselves with a 3rd level Wizard as a cohort...

Grand Lodge

cattoy wrote:

I dunno, I guess I'm just a little disappointed in Paizo's design team on this issue. Especially when you compare and contrast with how unrewarding crafting nonmagical items [cough]alchemy[cough] can be.

Still, it confounds me that a 3rd level wizard with an entirely unremarkable build could crank out a Robe of the Archmagi with no chance of failure, needing only funding. Which, probably wouldn't happen for a 3rd level party, but could very well happen if a member of a 7th level party took the Leadership feat and found themselves with a 3rd level Wizard as a cohort...

Robe of the Archmagi: 37,500 gp cost

Wealth by Level for 7th level: 23,500 gp
Wealth by Level for 8th level: 33,000 gp
Wealth by Level for 9th level: 46,000 gp
Wealth by Level for 10th level: 62,000 gp

So, first, 9th level, going by WbL, is the first level you could possibly afford to craft it. And that leaves you with so little other money available, 7,500 gp, that the odds of a PC spending o little money through 8th level is going to be having serious issues surviving.

Base Craft DC: 5+14, so 19 if you meet all the other prerequisites.
Feat: Craft Wondrous Item is available at 3rd, so good there.
Spell: Antimagic field: SL6, CL13 or +5 DC, to make it DC 24
Spell: Mage armor: SL1, CL1, so should be easy to provide

75 days to craft, so over two months.

So, let's look at that 3rd level Wizard, and see what can be see:
Spellcraft 3 ranks
Class skill +3
Int 20 +5
Feats: Scribe Scroll, Craft Wondrous Items, Skill Focus (Spellcraft), so +3 Spellcraft
Wealth by level for 3rd level: 3,000, so no stat booster

So, I guess, for that 9th level PC with Leadership and a 3rd level crafting Wizard cohort, he can, after a month and a significant portion of his wealth, get himself a Robe of the Archmagi.

Nice item, but it contains the following elements, assuming it is the correct alignment for you:
+5 armor bonus to AC. (Bracers of Armor +5 are 25,000 gp, so 12,500 crafting)
Spell resistance 18.(Per the Magic Item creation rules, this would be 60,000 gp, so 30,000 crafting cost)
+4 resistance bonus on all saving throws. (Cloak of Resistance +4 is 16,000 gp, so 8,000 gp crafting)
+2 enhancement bonus on caster level checks made to overcome spell resistance. (Let's call that bonus squared by 2,000 gp, so 8,000 gp, so 4,000 gp to craft.)

So, ignoring the multiply by X cost for additional power, as I am to o lazy, it costs 54,500 gp for the abilities, then a 30% reduction for the alignment restriction, gives 38,150 gp, give the 50% increase for the cheaper abilities, maybe use the 1000 instead of the 2000 multiplier for the Spell Penetration, and it probably comes out fairly close in cost.

Doesn't seem like that big a deal, really. Especially since Mage Armor, at that level, is 9 or 10 hours, easily (3,000 gp rod) doubled to 18 or 20 hours for a single cast. For when it is really needed, there is a 500 gp consumable that gives a +5 bonus to spell penetration, so that enhancement is easily surpassed with a cheap consumable. SR is nice, but an 18, even at 9th or 10th level, is going to affect very few enemy casts, since an enemy caster of appropriate CR will probably need less than a 10 on the d20, before consumables or other bonuses, to overcome an 18. The +4 resistance bonus is nice, but, unless you are using Muleback Cords or some other shoulder slot item, is readily available starting at lower levels and scaling up. Besides, if you can make a Robe of the Archmagi, you can probably craft a Cloak of Resistance +5 easily enough; and, in a campaign with crafting, it is easy enough to stack it with other shoulder slot enhancements.

And this item lords it over having that cohort make a bunch of lower cost items that add up to better protection, just how?


wraithstrike wrote:
You don't get to increase caster level when making a magic item from the book. It is assumed that what is in the book is the caster level the item is created at. If not then it would have to be assumed that only casters of a certain level are creating certain items.

The CL of the items from the book don't follow their own formula, most of them have a CL slightly higher than the min creation CL. (I would like to know how they got to those numbers)

We should be able to increase the CL of magic items from the book. If I'm a Lv 17 wizard I don't want anybody dispelling my CL 8 heaband of intelect +6, I should be able to boost it to CL 17 too.

Considerations: As Diego said, like that it would be possible to find +1 weapons with CL 20 for no additional cost.

Possible solutions:
- The effective CL of items you are wearing/holding is equal to the item's CL or your level, if higher, regardless of class.

- All items with higher CL should cost more, since they are better. I don't know how much would be a fair price, but there is one. Items which properties and effects that get better with higher CL should follow the basic formula (CL x Spell Lv). Items with CL higher just for dispelling purpose should have a smaller, but fair, price adjustment.

I agree that RAW here is just not good. We shouldn't have to house rule things to be more strict, it's the other way around, the RAW rules should be strict and then you could house rule exceptions if you and your friends want. The way it is, it's all up to the DM, and since common sense doesn't exist, he would have the rules at his side if he allowed anyone to make almost any item they want, and then the other rules go out the windown.

Magic items are the most powerfull resource in the game, they can easily circumvent most hardships, and as such their fabrication rules should be accordingly strict.

I also don't like the +5 to DC to replace prerequisites rule. I think it's silly and doesn't make any sense, how they can replicate spells out of nowhere and create stuff with CL they don't have. If a player want's to create something he doesn't have the prerequisite for, the DM should give him a way to do so, with a different requirement or as a reward.

I think RAW should say you need all the prerequisites, including CL, to make the items, that you can boost item's CL up to your own, that you can't replace a prerequisite with +5 to the DC, and that items with a higher CL should cost more, specially if it's higher than yours. (but I would also allow you to borrow the ICF from someone else, just like you can get prerequisites from diferent sources, as long as who ever has the ICF stays there during the whole item creation process.)


Kchaka wrote:

I also don't like the +5 to DC to replace prerequisites rule. I think it's silly and doesn't make any sense, how they can replicate spells out of nowhere and create stuff with CL they don't have. If a player want's to create something he doesn't have the prerequisite for, the DM should give him a way to do so, with a different requirement or as a reward.

I think RAW should say you need all the prerequisites, including CL, to make the items, that you can boost item's CL up to your own, that you can't replace a prerequisite with +5 to the DC, and that items with a higher CL should cost more, specially if it's higher than yours. (but I would also allow you to borrow the ICF from someone else, just like you can get prerequisites from diferent sources, as long as who ever has the ICF stays there during the whole item creation process.)

The 'replicate spells out of nowhere' issue is slightly mitigated, as most items that 'replicate spells' are spell completion or trigger items, and you cannot mitigate the 'having the spell' prerequisite for those items.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A stated design goal of the crafting rules is they're meant to be easy skill wise. Being 'able' to make the items has never been an issue. Paying for them and having the time to craft them is the scarceness in that aspect of the game.

Sovereign Court

I kinda like the idea of a wizard making an item to achieve an effect that he's not yet powerful enough to cast directly. He's investing in tools.

I think the wizards who can already cast all those spells don't create many items, because they don't need them as much. Maybe a majority of item creation is done by wizards with more capital than caster level.

That also has some setting implications; it means you can have powerful magic items without having to have powerful casters. Gives you more freedom as a GM to design the world you want.


Ascalaphus wrote:

I kinda like the idea of a wizard making an item to achieve an effect that he's not yet powerful enough to cast directly. He's investing in tools.

I think the wizards who can already cast all those spells don't create many items, because they don't need them as much. Maybe a majority of item creation is done by wizards with more capital than caster level.

That also has some setting implications; it means you can have powerful magic items without having to have powerful casters. Gives you more freedom as a GM to design the world you want.

This does have some merit. Crafting an item might take a week of work, as compared to casting the equivalent spell in a <6 second standard action.

1 to 50 of 171 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Crafting magic items a above your caster level All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.