It used to read "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)."
Which had some people thinking you had to be that level, or some people saying it just a prerequisite that can be ignored for an extra +5 on your spellcraft check. In any case it it was confusing and discouraging to crafters, PRAISE THE PAIZO GODS it is gone. My crafter can now use his 3rd level craft wondrous feat to make a 1st level pearl of power, yay!
(ok so he could have done that anyway with how we ruled on it, but it still feels good to be vindicated)
So how does this effect Detect Magic and Spellcraft? Do you still need to get a CL17 on the Spellcraft check to determine that pearl you're holding is a 1st level pearl of power?
I've looked for over an hour through searches and forums and have been unable to find an answer to this.
The caster level stays the same. If you find a pearl of power (level 1) in a dungeon, it has a CL17. But if you make a pearl of power, that caster level just determines the difficult to craft the item. It is not a caster level "prerequisite".
|
I just want to make sure I understand this correctly:
For our example:
In order to identify a pearl of power 1 using Detect Magic and Spellcraft, you would need to roll a DC of 32? Which by the way would also identify the pearl of power 9?
See, to me this makes no sense. Why is it just as difficult to identify a minor wondrous item as it is a major wondrous item?
The reason this doesn't make sense to me is that you only need to be a CL3 in order to make a Pearl of Power 1. So wouldn't the DC to identify be 18? (15 + CL3) The average Wizard (18 Int) would need to wait until 10th level (no feats or trait bonuses) just to have a chance to identify a Pearl of Power 1,2,3,4 or 5, even though he could make them.
Fellow Character: "What is that you created?"
Wizard: "I forgot, let me check."
Wizard casts Detect Magic and concentrates.
Wizard: "Well that's odd, I really don't know what this is even though I just made it."
I just want to make sure I understand this correctly:
For our example:
In order to identify a pearl of power 1 using Detect Magic and Spellcraft, you would need to roll a DC of 32? Which by the way would also identify the pearl of power 9?See, to me this makes no sense. Why is it just as difficult to identify a minor wondrous item as it is a major wondrous item?
The reason this doesn't make sense to me is that you only need to be a CL3 in order to make a Pearl of Power 1. So wouldn't the DC to identify be 18? (15 + CL3) The average Wizard (18 Int) would need to wait until 10th level (no feats or trait bonuses) just to have a chance to identify a Pearl of Power 1,2,3,4 or 5, even though he could make them.
Fellow Character: "What is that you created?"
Wizard: "I forgot, let me check."
Wizard casts Detect Magic and concentrates.
Wizard: "Well that's odd, I really don't know what this is even though I just made it."
Come now, a wizard does not need to identify what he has already created, unless he has dementia. Yes, its awful difficult to identify a pearl of power that someone else made. That was no different before the errata. And if you look through the book you will see that a great many items have fairly high CLs. A +1 flaming longsword is CL 13 for example.
Caster level and magic items are a funny beast. Caster level is essentially the item's magical durability, as well as a measure of how hard it is to craft. Generally items that have stronger effects will have a higher caster level, even if their scope is more for lower level characters. An extra spell slot is pretty awesome, but an extra 1st level spell slot at level 17? Not as desirable, has less of an effect.
It does make for some strange interactions, though.
|
I just want to make sure I understand this correctly:
For our example:
In order to identify a pearl of power 1 using Detect Magic and Spellcraft, you would need to roll a DC of 32? Which by the way would also identify the pearl of power 9?See, to me this makes no sense. Why is it just as difficult to identify a minor wondrous item as it is a major wondrous item?
The reason this doesn't make sense to me is that you only need to be a CL3 in order to make a Pearl of Power 1. So wouldn't the DC to identify be 18? (15 + CL3) The average Wizard (18 Int) would need to wait until 10th level (no feats or trait bonuses) just to have a chance to identify a Pearl of Power 1,2,3,4 or 5, even though he could make them.
Fellow Character: "What is that you created?"
Wizard: "I forgot, let me check."
Wizard casts Detect Magic and concentrates.
Wizard: "Well that's odd, I really don't know what this is even though I just made it."Come now, a wizard does not need to identify what he has already created, unless he has dementia. Yes, its awful difficult to identify a pearl of power that someone else made. That was no different before the errata. And if you look through the book you will see that a great many items have fairly high CLs. A +1 flaming longsword is CL 13 for example.
Caster level and magic items are a funny beast. Caster level is essentially the item's magical durability, as well as a measure of how hard it is to craft. Generally items that have stronger effects will have a higher caster level, even if their scope is more for lower level characters. An extra spell slot is pretty awesome, but an extra 1st level spell slot at level 17? Not as desirable, has less of an effect.
It does make for some strange interactions, though.
Hm? A +1 flaming longsword is CL 10. When it comes to CL of enhancement bonus vs. ability on a weapon, you only take the highest of each.
"Caster Level for Weapons: The caster level of a weapon with a special ability is given in the item description. For an item with only an enhancement bonus and no other abilities, 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."
I just want to make sure I understand this correctly:
For our example:
In order to identify a pearl of power 1 using Detect Magic and Spellcraft, you would need to roll a DC of 32? Which by the way would also identify the pearl of power 9?See, to me this makes no sense. Why is it just as difficult to identify a minor wondrous item as it is a major wondrous item?
I think it's funny you think that. I've run into people who thought that more powerful items should be EASIER to identify since their magical auras are more overt/obvious/easier to detect. Something with a weak aura, for example, should be harder to detect with detect magic and, by extension, harder to identify.
my search fu is off today, any chance of a link?
I think it depends on how you describe the magical aura. If it's just how much the item shines or radiates under the detection spell, then it might be right, but if you describe magic as sacred geometry and incantions in arcane symbols wrapped around the item, the more powerful the more complicated they get, then the higher CL items are arder to identyfy properly.
my search fu is off today, any chance of a link?
They're discussing the Errata just released - it's available as a free downloads in "My Downloads" - Core Rulebook Second Printing, or just Here.
I'm also quite glad to have that little bit made clear.
My crafter can now use his 3rd level craft wondrous feat to make a 1st level pearl of power, yay!
Still DC22 to make one of those suckers :) Hard to do reliably.
Thanks Majuba.
btw, my 3rd lvl wizard has a Spellcraft score of 15. With the cleric's help (he has the law domain) i can consistently craft items with a DC 27 or lower (rolling a 1 on the check). Even with a +5 to the DC, no problem.
+3 Skill Focus (Spellcraft)
+3 Class Skill
+6 Int bns
+3 Ranks
|
Thanks Majuba.
btw, my 3rd lvl wizard has a Spellcraft score of 15. With the cleric's help (he has the law domain) i can consistently craft items with a DC 27 or lower (rolling a 1 on the check). Even with a +5 to the DC, no problem.
+3 Skill Focus (Spellcraft)
+3 Class Skill
+6 Int bns
+3 Ranks
You can't use the law domain. That gives you a 11 on a roll for ONE round. Crafting anything takes longer then one round.
You can however still take 10 by RAW. Personally I don't like that rule.
Thanks Majuba. ^^
...
You can however still take 10 by RAW. Personally I don't like that rule.
I have to totally disagree with you here. The rule of 10 reduces an undo amount of rolling, especially when not in combat. As an occasional DM, that is golden.
|
|
In the case of wondrous items, rods, or other 'pre-built' items, the 'default CL' is in the top-right corner. This isn't the CL required to craft it (usually none is required), but it is used when calculating the craft DC or the spellcraft check to identify.
In the case of weapons/armor, you look at the enhancement bonus and special abilities. Each special ability has a set CL, and the CL of an enhancement bonus is equal to it's modifier x 3. For the total CL, you then take the highest of these.
For example, let's say you have a +1 icy burst undead-bane longsword. The CL of icy burst is 10, bane is 8, and the +1 enhancement is 3. So the CL of this sword is 10.
If it was a +1 icy burst longsword (no bane) it would still be 10 because the icy burst is present, and that is the highest CL. Were it just a simple +1 longsword, the CL would only be 3.
Hope that helps!
The caster level requirement is still there. The only change is that it can now be bypassed with a +5 to the DC.
For example, a level 5 wizard crafting a level 5 magic item has a DC of 10. A level 4 caster crafting the same item has a DC of 15.
Also, since there is a risk of loss of materials on a failure, I constitute this as pressure. You cannot take a 10 when under pressure.
Not trying to threadjack, but quick question along these lines...
I never got much into the crafting rules, and this new change to Pathfinder Detect Magic/Identify really is cool, but at the same time rather confusing!
How can I easily and reliably determine the required CL (and thus, Spellcraft check) to ID items? I had a heck of a time figuring out (and never did, actually) what it would take for a caster to ID a simple +1 longsword.
Can somebody point me toward some help on this? I'm a new DM and I could use some pointers. :) Thanks!
"Creating a magic weapon has a special prerequisite: The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the weapon. If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability, the higher of the two caster level requirements must be met. A magic weapon must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus to have any melee or ranged special weapon abilities."
Caster level is 3 times the enhancement bonus of the CL of the special ability, whichever is higher.
So a +1 sword is caster level 3. A +1 dancing sword is caster level 15.
|
|
The caster level requirement is still there. The only change is that it can now be bypassed with a +5 to the DC.
For example, a level 5 wizard crafting a level 5 magic item has a DC of 10. A level 4 caster crafting the same item has a DC of 15.
Also, since there is a risk of loss of materials on a failure, I constitute this as pressure. You cannot take a 10 when under pressure.
Both are actually a bit off. The first one was corrected in the latest errata. The CL in the top-right corner of most items is NOT a requirement to craft it. Weapons and armor DO have their own special crafting requirement, as do *some* wondrous items (cloaks of resistance, for one), but most items do not.
That sentence is this one:In the Magic Items Description section, under Caster
Level, delete the last sentence of the second paragraph.
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).
In any case, if you just meant the CL was a requirement for weapons, you are absolutely correct. The way you wrote it just made it sound like it was a requirement for any item, which has been changed. Heck, it's what the OP is talking about in the first post of this thread. :)
As for the take 10 issue, I'm not sure where the quote is but I believe James commented that he thought take 10 should be fine for crafting. While that isn't really RAW, it does help.
|
The caster level requirement is still there. The only change is that it can now be bypassed with a +5 to the DC.
For example, a level 5 wizard crafting a level 5 magic item has a DC of 10. A level 4 caster crafting the same item has a DC of 15.
Also, since there is a risk of loss of materials on a failure, I constitute this as pressure. You cannot take a 10 when under pressure.
Having negative consequences does not automatically constitute "pressure".
Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10
What you're describing is covered under Taking 20, which you certainly cannot do with crafting.
When you have plenty of time, you are faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20.
In any case, if you just meant the CL was a requirement for weapons, you are absolutely correct. The way you wrote it just made it sound like it was a requirement for any item, which has been changed. Heck, it's what the OP is talking about in the first post of this thread. :)
I was specifically talking about the places where caster level was in the prerequisite field of the item.
Having negative consequences does not automatically constitute "pressure".
Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10
Ok, if you have to stop to eat or sleep, I would count it as distracted. Take your pick.
"Creating a magic weapon has a special prerequisite: The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the weapon. If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability, the higher of the two caster level requirements must be met. A magic weapon must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus to have any melee or ranged special weapon abilities."
Caster level is 3 times the enhancement bonus of the CL of the special ability, whichever is higher.
So a +1 sword is caster level 3. A +1 dancing sword is caster level 15.
Sorry, but that's not correct, lest +5 dancing swords be impossible to make. You use the higher of the two caster levels. Either the one set by the numerical enhancement bonus (up to CL 15th for +5) or that set by the most powerful ability (as determined by the listed CL).
Sorry then, the way it was written sounded like all items.
As for the distracted bit, a crafter can only work for 8 hours each day. By your logic, would you then say that every worker in the world who works for 8 hours per day is always distracted at their job? All the time?
You are working on the same thing for a year. Each day, you have to stop and remember where you were from the day before, because you stopped in the middle of a long term task. This happens after every break you take.
vs
You are doing a bunch of things that take 1 hour each You finish one, take a break, then move on to the next on. Each task can be done in a single sitting without having to take any breaks. The breaks can be set up to avoid them distracting you.
Now, throw in interruptions by party members asking you "Hey wizard, when you going to finish my sword?" or "Can you look at this scroll for me?", etc. The longer the task, the higher the chance of an unexpected interruptions occuring.
Put those two together and I have a fair case for saying that any crafting job that takes more than half a day would count as being distracted.
Sorry, but that's not correct, lest +5 dancing swords be impossible to make. You use the higher of the two caster levels. Either the one set by the numerical enhancement bonus (up to CL 15th for +5) or that set by the most powerful ability (as determined by the listed CL)."Creating a magic weapon has a special prerequisite: The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the weapon. If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability, the higher of the two caster level requirements must be met. A magic weapon must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus to have any melee or ranged special weapon abilities."
Caster level is 3 times the enhancement bonus of the CL of the special ability, whichever is higher.
So a +1 sword is caster level 3. A +1 dancing sword is caster level 15.
I didn't add them together. Dancing is CL15. Any dancing sword is CL 15 be it +1 or +5.
|
|
Sorry then, the way it was written sounded like all items.
As for the distracted bit, a crafter can only work for 8 hours each day. By your logic, would you then say that every worker in the world who works for 8 hours per day is always distracted at their job? All the time?
You are working on the same thing for a year. Each day, you have to stop and remember where you were from the day before, because you stopped in the middle of a long term task. This happens after every break you take.
vs
You are doing a bunch of things that take 1 hour each You finish one, take a break, then move on to the next on. Each task can be done in a single sitting without having to take any breaks. The breaks can be set up to avoid them distracting you.
Now, throw in interruptions by party members asking you "Hey wizard, when you going to finish my sword?" or "Can you look at this scroll for me?", etc. The longer the task, the higher the chance of an unexpected interruptions occuring.
Put those two together and I have a fair case for saying that any crafting job that takes more than half a day would count as being distracted.
That seems to assume a lot though. What if a wizard puts on a ring of sustenance and locks himself in his lab? No people come by, no one bothers him, and he doesn't even have to tend to food, beverage, or other bodily functions thanks to the ring. Are you saying that, even then, he still has distractions?
I didn't add them together. Dancing is CL15. Any dancing sword is CL 15 be it +1 or +5.Sorry, but that's not correct, lest +5 dancing swords be impossible to make. You use the higher of the two caster levels. Either the one set by the numerical enhancement bonus (up to CL 15th for +5) or that set by the most powerful ability (as determined by the listed CL)."Creating a magic weapon has a special prerequisite: The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the weapon. If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability, the higher of the two caster level requirements must be met. A magic weapon must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus to have any melee or ranged special weapon abilities."
Caster level is 3 times the enhancement bonus of the CL of the special ability, whichever is higher.
So a +1 sword is caster level 3. A +1 dancing sword is caster level 15.
Sorry then.
That seems to assume a lot though. What if a wizard puts on a ring of sustenance and locks himself in his lab? No people come by, no one bothers him, and he doesn't even have to tend to food, beverage, or other bodily functions thanks to the ring. Are you saying that, even then, he still has distractions?Sorry then, the way it was written sounded like all items.
As for the distracted bit, a crafter can only work for 8 hours each day. By your logic, would you then say that every worker in the world who works for 8 hours per day is always distracted at their job? All the time?
You are working on the same thing for a year. Each day, you have to stop and remember where you were from the day before, because you stopped in the middle of a long term task. This happens after every break you take.
vs
You are doing a bunch of things that take 1 hour each You finish one, take a break, then move on to the next on. Each task can be done in a single sitting without having to take any breaks. The breaks can be set up to avoid them distracting you.
Now, throw in interruptions by party members asking you "Hey wizard, when you going to finish my sword?" or "Can you look at this scroll for me?", etc. The longer the task, the higher the chance of an unexpected interruptions occuring.
Put those two together and I have a fair case for saying that any crafting job that takes more than half a day would count as being distracted.
He still has to sleep 2 hours a day...
But, if a crafter took all those precautions, the I might let them take a 10.
Most of my players try to do their crafting while sitting in a wagon, traveling down the road, so I have more than enough grounds to claim they are distracted.
He still has to sleep 2 hours a day...
But, if a crafter took all those precautions, the I might let them take a 10.
Most of my players try to do their crafting while sitting in a wagon, traveling down the road, so I have more than enough grounds to claim they are distracted.
That is a bigger issue you have with your players not the rules.
|
|
He still has to sleep 2 hours a day...
But, if a crafter took all those precautions, the I might let them take a 10.
Most of my players try to do their crafting while sitting in a wagon, traveling down the road, so I have more than enough grounds to claim they are distracted.
Sure, but keep in mind a crafter only gets to work on things up to 8 hours a day. 1/3rd of the time. He has 16 hours to sleep, eat, and do other things.
Also, crafting in a wagon, while adventuring, or other such things is already accounted for by penalizing the crafting time. Crafting during these areas is less effective, and the crafter only makes 1 hour progress for every 2 hours work. In addition, their max of 8 hours changes to 4 hours while adventuring, netting them a total of 2 hours progress on their item in the end. This means they're only making 1 day's worth of normal progress for every 4 days they craft while adventuring, a pretty significant penalty already.
The caster can work for up to 8 hours each day. He cannot rush the process by working longer each day, but the days need not be consecutive, and the caster can use the rest of his time as he sees fit. If the caster is out adventuring, he can devote 4 hours each day to item creation, although he nets only 2 hours' worth of work. This time is not spent in one continuous period, but rather during lunch, morning preparation, and during watches at night. If time is dedicated to creation, it must be spent in uninterrupted 4-hour blocks. This work is generally done in a controlled environment, where distractions are at a minimum, such as a laboratory or shrine. Work that is performed in a distracting or dangerous environment nets only half the amount of progress (just as with the adventuring caster).
Taking 10 is a system that really just assumes *average* work. It's not perfect, the crafter is going to have good days and bad days, but overall they're competent enough that they can churn out something that the only need to roll a 10 on.
Really, I don't see the issue. Crafting *used* to be a 100% success rate. Granted, it had an XP cost and you *needed* every requirement, but there was really no chance for failure. If someone maxes out their Spellcraft, spends half the money, spends the time needed, I really don't see the need to make things more difficult by giving them the chance for failure (assuming they can succeed while taking 10). I kind of agree with the 'crafting while adventuring' bit, I might not allow taking 10 if they were on the road as well. But if they're not on the road, crafting instead in a stable environment, I say give them the 10.
If the crafter is "distracted" by sleep or "in danger" of losing his raw materials then wouldn't the same problem with taking 10 apply to crafting run of the mill items like a suit of armor or a pair of shoes? Perhaps the local cobbler would go away to live as ascetic hermit on the mountaintop so he can take 10. That or the DM could just make a house rule that you can never take 10 for a check to craft a magic item. No detailed explanation or rationalization is really needed. Maybe the DM in question just feels making magic items should be more difficult in his world.
To that point, I suspect that more than a few DMs won't welcome this errata. I've already heard some muttering that crafting items is a bit too easy in Pathfinder. My crafting PC won't mind though! ;)
He still has to sleep 2 hours a day...
But, if a crafter took all those precautions, the I might let them take a 10.
Most of my players try to do their crafting while sitting in a wagon, traveling down the road, so I have more than enough grounds to claim they are distracted.
Sure, but keep in mind a crafter only gets to work on things up to 8 hours a day. 1/3rd of the time. He has 16 hours to sleep, eat, and do other things.
Also, crafting in a wagon, while adventuring, or other such things is already accounted for by penalizing the crafting time. Crafting during these areas is less effective, and the crafter only makes 1 hour progress for every 2 hours work. In addition, their max of 8 hours changes to 4 hours while adventuring, netting them a total of 2 hours progress on their item in the end. This means they're only making 1 day's worth of normal progress for every 4 days they craft while adventuring, a pretty significant penalty already.
The caster can work for up to 8 hours each day. He cannot rush the process by working longer each day, but the days need not be consecutive, and the caster can use the rest of his time as he sees fit. If the caster is out adventuring, he can devote 4 hours each day to item creation, although he nets only 2 hours' worth of work. This time is not spent in one continuous period, but rather during lunch, morning preparation, and during watches at night. If time is dedicated to creation, it must be spent in uninterrupted 4-hour blocks. This work is generally done in a controlled environment, where distractions are at a minimum, such as a laboratory or shrine. Work that is performed in a distracting or dangerous environment nets only half the amount of progress (just as with the adventuring caster).Taking 10 is a system that really just assumes *average* work. It's not perfect, the crafter is going to have good days and bad days, but overall they're competent enough that they can churn out something that the only...
I never knew adventuring made it take longer. Thanks for the update.
The caster level requirement is still there. The only change is that it can now be bypassed with a +5 to the DC.
For example, a level 5 wizard crafting a level 5 magic item has a DC of 10. A level 4 caster crafting the same item has a DC of 15.
Also, since there is a risk of loss of materials on a failure, I constitute this as pressure. You cannot take a 10 when under pressure.
That's how it used to work (well it was debated anyway). The line that says that an item's caster level is a requirement is gone now. So where else does it say that an item's caster level is a requirement (talking about magic armor, weapons, and wondrous items)?
|
|
In a few of them it actually says it in the "Requirements" part at the bottom. Cloak of Resistance says "creator's caster level must be at least three times the cloak's bonus". It says this in a few other items too. So while the CL in the top right corner is no longer a factor, occasionally the item actually has text in the requirements that still would be necessary.
As for weapons/armor, they've always had a separately listed CL requirement.
Caster Level for Weapons: The caster level of a weapon with a special ability is given in the item description. For an item with only an enhancement bonus and no other abilities, 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.
Emphasis mine. Armor has similar text. So for crafting weapons/armor, it looks like CL is still a requirement.
I would rule that adventuring counts as a distraction depending on the environment. The definition for adventuring I'd use is based in the quoted text above.
That text makes a clear line between a controlled environment versus a distracting or dangerous environment. You can take 10 in a controlled environment -- but in a dangerous or distracting environment you can't take 10. Sleep, eating, and other issues aren't intended to be distractions -- only environmental factors apply.
|
I think it's funny you think that. I've run into people who thought that more powerful items should be EASIER to identify since their magical auras are more overt/obvious/easier to detect. Something with a weak aura, for example, should be harder to detect with detect magic and, by extension, harder to identify.
I'm one of those weirdos :P
But I'm fine with whatever the Core Rulebook says. My only character currently that even uses Spellcraft is a 7th Summoner with an off-the-charts Spellcraft modifier :D Crafting? No prob. Identifying? Sure thing.