So, I went to through the first five modules of Kingmaker with a fine comb and came to the conclusion that the treasure in it is just right for a five man party. Assuming that every normal magic item is sold at 50% market price and valuables are kept at 100% market price, players have just about the right amount of treasure per level. Although most of the heavy stuff comes at the end of the AP modules, which is to be expected.
But I see a major problem for game balance coming up: Item crafting. Since Pathfinder abandoned the "XP for cheap magic items" system which 3.x was using and introduced time as the real constricting factor, an AP like Kingmaker, which has no real time-limit, has me worried. It can be easily possible for characters to get +5 attribute enhancing books about at 11th-12th level if the party Wizard is a dedicated item crafter. And that is with enough money left to equip themselves quite well.
This is quite worrying to me, since I am not in the mood to have to GM a campaign where the party steamrolls their opposition. I'd be very interested how other GM's have dealt with magic item inflation through crafting in this campaign or other tips. Of course I could cut treasure in half for everything, but that seems a rather cheap solution.
What exactly are the counters the Paizo developers thought of for this specific campaign? It's open-endedness seems to work decidedly against itself in this particular aspect.
So, I went to through the first five modules of Kingmaker with a fine comb and came to the conclusion that the treasure in it is just right for a five man party. Assuming that every normal magic item is sold at 50% market price and valuables are kept at 100% market price, players have just about the right amount of treasure per level. Although most of the heavy stuff comes at the end of the AP modules, which is to be expected.
But I see a major problem for game balance coming up: Item crafting. Since Pathfinder abandoned the "XP for cheap magic items" system which 3.x was using and introduced time as the real constricting factor, an AP like Kingmaker, which has no real time-limit, has me worried. It can be easily possible for characters to get +5 attribute enhancing books about at 11th-12th level if the party Wizard is a dedicated item crafter. And that is with enough money left to equip themselves quite well.
This is quite worrying to me, since I am not in the mood to have to GM a campaign where the party steamrolls their opposition. I'd be very interested how other GM's have dealt with magic item inflation through crafting in this campaign or other tips. Of course I could cut treasure in half for everything, but that seems a rather cheap solution.
What exactly are the counters the Paizo developers thought of for this specific campaign? It's open-endedness seems to work decidedly against itself in this particular aspect.
Access to spells such as Wish should restict this. Plus the items you mentioned have the same cost to create as they do to sell pretty much. I don't think it is really that unbalancing. Caster level is another issue, if you can't cast greater Magic weapon at +5 you can't make an item for it is one way to keep the power level in line if you want.
Access to spells such as Wish should restict this. Plus the items you mentioned have the same cost to create as they do to sell pretty much. I don't think it is really that unbalancing. Caster level is another issue, if you can't cast greater Magic weapon at +5 you can't make an item for it is one way to keep the power level in line if you want.
Sadly you are mistaken in all cases.
1.) You can substitute prerequisites ( which includes being able to cast a certain spell ) with a +5 increase to the Spellcraft check to craft the item.
2.) The items would not be for sale, but for use. Which means PC's will get access to them at half market price. In my current CotCT campaign, the PC's are using this to good effect to buff themselves up, although that particular campaign has a time limit to balance this.
3.) Caster level is actually not a prerequisite to craft an item, unless named as such in the prerequisites. Even so, that's just another +5 to the Spellcraft check and a Wizard with appropiate intelligence will ace those in almost every case.
If you give more gold vs loot then it is possible to go beyond your wealth, but if you give more loot vs gold then they should still be at the wbl or reasonably close. They will just have more custom gear than most parties would.
Note:Gold value for the purpose of this example is appoximate
Example(gold): You give them about 8000 in gold and they can get two +2 weapons since the weapons are created at half market value.
Example(loot): They get 8000 in loot, they sell the loot for 4000 gold. They can then use the 4000 gold to create a +2 weapon.
and not least due to the whole ability to grab some BP, turn that into items, and sell SOME of the items back for BP. Thus not really even stealing BP, merely borrowing,,, and ending up with a pile of items.
Furthermore, its not just items. Hirelings too. They have the legitimate right to raise armies. Such as 100 warrior level 10 knights.
So it requires a bit of steering, and possibky bolstering some encounters considerably... like adding 100 trolls in the palace..
If you give more gold vs loot then it is possible to go beyond your wealth, but if you give more loot vs gold then they should still be at the wbl or reasonably close. They will just have more custom gear than most parties would.
Note:Gold value for the purpose of this example is appoximate
Example(gold): You give them about 8000 in gold and they can get two +2 weapons since the weapons are created at half market value.Example(loot): They get 8000 in loot, they sell the loot for 4000 gold. They can then use the 4000 gold to create a +2 weapon.
Well, I am going with the assumption that one wants to adhere to the loot which is statted in the AP. Also, as I said in my initial post, nerfing the treasure seems like a cop-out, making taking the item creation feats meaningless ( which swings too much in the other direction ).
I am very interested what the developers can say about this problem. Was item creation somehow taken into account when developing the AP?
You as the GM could always limit it and call it supply & demand.
Well, it's not that Kingmaker has "no real time limit," but it has a very flexible and open one. If the PCs get slow to start a magic item factory, turn up the burners.
Likewise, all the leadership roles are supposed to, as I recall, at least a week every month. That's going to cut into the magic item prep time, and that's only a minimum. Minimum, because if there's trouble, the kingdom might need more help, and there's nothing like the choice between bleeding loyalty and getting that nifty magic item.
I understand you're looking for more of an engineering solution, but I think the whole shebang is a little more confined than the way you're presenting the problem.
Well, it's not that Kingmaker has "no real time limit," but it has a very flexible and open one. If the PCs get slow to start a magic item factory, turn up the burners.
Likewise, all the leadership roles are supposed to, as I recall, at least a week every month. That's going to cut into the magic item prep time, and that's only a minimum. Minimum, because if there's trouble, the kingdom might need more help, and there's nothing like the choice between bleeding loyalty and getting that nifty magic item.
I understand you're looking for more of an engineering solution, but I think the whole shebang is a little more confined than the way you're presenting the problem.
J.S. makes a good point. You could always house rule that the PCs' duties are taking up so much time, they can only create X many items/month.
If you give more gold vs loot then it is possible to go beyond your wealth, but if you give more loot vs gold then they should still be at the wbl or reasonably close. They will just have more custom gear than most parties would.
Note:Gold value for the purpose of this example is appoximate
Example(gold): You give them about 8000 in gold and they can get two +2 weapons since the weapons are created at half market value.Example(loot): They get 8000 in loot, they sell the loot for 4000 gold. They can then use the 4000 gold to create a +2 weapon.
Well, I am going with the assumption that one wants to adhere to the loot which is statted in the AP. Also, as I said in my initial post, nerfing the treasure seems like a cop-out, making taking the item creation feats meaningless ( which swings too much in the other direction ).
I am very interested what the developers can say about this problem. Was item creation somehow taken into account when developing the AP?
My players get more treasure in loot than gold in every AP. You as the DM can always speed things up by having the events happen before the players expect it, if its that much of an issue, or hold back on loot.
I don't think item creation was taken into account. I guess they assumed rulers have better things to do than sit around and make magic items.
Are you only using the core book for item creation or did you allow 3.5 feats also?
|
3.) Caster level is actually not a prerequisite to craft an item, unless named as such in the prerequisites. Even so, that's just another +5 to the Spellcraft check and a Wizard with appropiate intelligence will ace those in almost every case.
I've operated under this interpretation of the rules as well in 3.5 and PFRPG. Before now the official sources have been vague on the topic of caster level as a prerequisite. However, in the magic item section of the APG they flat out state caster level is a minimum level that must be attained to make the item. I don't have the book in hand right now, but if your look under the description of caster level in the intro to the magic item section, you'll find the passage in question.
for even a +2 belt of giant strength your caster will need to be at least 8th level, and thus 3/5 of the way through Kingmaker. Some items, like ioun stones, would have to wait until the last installment to be constructed.
I actually suggested to my party to take the feats. As for Upping DC's. From what i understand You still need access to spells to make items, Just you can have someone else cast it (which ups the DC by 5).
If you are using 3.5 sourcebooks (ESPECIALLY Magic Item Compendium), I caution GMs when it comes to giving free reign to craft. With the new crafting rules, a wizard worth his staff can craft ANYTHING, and all he needs is money.
My party basically cherry pick anything, and are extremely overpowered compared to the opposition. Unless I spend 5-6 hours optimizing scripted encounters in each part, no encounter would go past 2 rounds. (Combination of 3.5 spells/items and a new APG feat allow the wizard and rogue to basically freely kill anything that is not immune to stun/paralysis/sleep on the first round, likely before the monster even gets to act, since they both have double digit initiative modifiers when they want)
If you go core pathfinder, I see less of a problem. The loot in the AP is really good, and the crafting that players do will most likely be custom stuff like exotic weapons and stat increase items.
Personally, I am contemplating upping the item creation cost by 25% per missing ingredient to at least stick my finger in the bursting dike.
Well, it's not that Kingmaker has "no real time limit," but it has a very flexible and open one. If the PCs get slow to start a magic item factory, turn up the burners.
Likewise, all the leadership roles are supposed to, as I recall, at least a week every month. That's going to cut into the magic item prep time, and that's only a minimum. Minimum, because if there's trouble, the kingdom might need more help, and there's nothing like the choice between bleeding loyalty and getting that nifty magic item.
I understand you're looking for more of an engineering solution, but I think the whole shebang is a little more confined than the way you're presenting the problem.
That may be a viable solution in some regard and I can always put the next chunk of adventure before them. I will check into the ruler requirements to see what can be done. Good suggestion, thanks!
My players get more treasure in loot than gold in every AP. You as the DM can always speed things up by having the events happen before the players expect it, if its that much of an issue, or hold back on loot.
I don't think item creation was taken into account. I guess they assumed rulers have better things to do than sit around and make magic items.
Are you only using the core book for item creation or did you allow 3.5 feats also?
No, only Pathfinder ( and now APG stuff ). I find it a bit difficult to believe that the devs completely forgot about the possibility of PC's crafting magic items. I am a bit surprised that there isn't even a sidebar about it in the AP.
I've operated under this interpretation of the rules as well in 3.5 and PFRPG. Before now the official sources have been vague on the topic of caster level as a prerequisite. However, in the magic item section of the APG they flat out state caster level is a minimum level that must be attained to make the item. I don't have the book in hand right now, but if your look under the description of caster level in the intro to the magic item section, you'll find the passage in question.
for even a +2 belt of giant strength your caster will need to be at least 8th level, and thus 3/5 of the way through Kingmaker. Some items, like ioun stones, would have to wait until the last installment to be constructed.
It was very clearly stated by James Jacobs, IIRC, that caster level is not a prerequisite. If it is now however, even then it's only a +5 to the Spellcraft DC.
If you are using 3.5 sourcebooks (ESPECIALLY Magic Item Compendium), I caution GMs when it comes to giving free reign to craft. With the new crafting rules, a wizard worth his staff can craft ANYTHING, and all he needs is money.
My party basically cherry pick anything, and are extremely overpowered compared to the opposition. Unless I spend 5-6 hours optimizing scripted encounters in each part, no encounter would go past 2 rounds. (Combination of 3.5 spells/items and a new APG feat allow the wizard and rogue to basically freely kill anything that is not immune to stun/paralysis/sleep on the first round, likely before the monster even gets to act, since they both have double digit initiative modifiers when they want)
I know what you are talking about... I got extremely tired of overpowered PC's at the tail end of 3.5 . That's another reason why I like Pathfinder so much, there is no feat/PrC/spell bloat ( yet ). I hope the devs keep it that way.
But, no, as said above, I only allow core PF items and spells. And now the APG.
If you go core pathfinder, I see less of a problem. The loot in the AP is really good, and the crafting that players do will most likely be custom stuff like exotic weapons and stat increase items.
Personally, I am contemplating upping the item creation cost by 25% per missing ingredient to at least stick my finger in the bursting dike.
That could be a viable solution. I am contemplating telling the players that I will have to adjust the AP treasure accordingly, if they abuse the item creation feats too much. But I'd still be very interested if the devs had the consequences of magic items inflation somewhat in mind when they created the AP.
Access to spells such as Wish should restict this. Plus the items you mentioned have the same cost to create as they do to sell pretty much. I don't think it is really that unbalancing. Caster level is another issue, if you can't cast greater Magic weapon at +5 you can't make an item for it is one way to keep the power level in line if you want.Sadly you are mistaken in all cases.
1.) You can substitute prerequisites ( which includes being able to cast a certain spell ) with a +5 increase to the Spellcraft check to craft the item.
2.) The items would not be for sale, but for use. Which means PC's will get access to them at half market price. In my current CotCT campaign, the PC's are using this to good effect to buff themselves up, although that particular campaign has a time limit to balance this.
3.) Caster level is actually not a prerequisite to craft an item, unless named as such in the prerequisites. Even so, that's just another +5 to the Spellcraft check and a Wizard with appropiate intelligence will ace those in almost every case.
I guess you didn't get my point. +5 stat increase manual or tomes cost as much to create a they do to buy. Check out the costs of items before making a blanket assumption.
I understand the other rules, I was suggesting making the caster level a hard requisite. That should fix your power level concerns or make the DC +2 or +3 for every caster level they lack.
My players get more treasure in loot than gold in every AP. You as the DM can always speed things up by having the events happen before the players expect it, if its that much of an issue, or hold back on loot.
I don't think item creation was taken into account. I guess they assumed rulers have better things to do than sit around and make magic items.
Are you only using the core book for item creation or did you allow 3.5 feats also?
No, only Pathfinder ( and now APG stuff ). I find it a bit difficult to believe that the devs completely forgot about the possibility of PC's crafting magic items. I am a bit surprised that there isn't even a sidebar about it in the AP.
They probably felt like it was up to the DM to control how much wealth the players get. Many DM's don't care about the WBL chart. I guess a side bar would have been nice, but it probably would have read like the suggestion on increasing or decreasing XP as needed for the sidequest.
|
|
It was very clearly stated by James Jacobs, IIRC, that caster level is not a prerequisite. If it is now however, even then it's only a +5 to the Spellcraft DC.
The wording in the APG seems to suggest otherwise. Here is the pertinent passage:
The creator's caster level must be as high as the items caster level (and additional requirements may effectively put a higher minimum on caster level)
Personally, that looks to me as if caster level is now a non-negotiable requirement. Now, even if that must is hyperbole and you can ignore caster level as you can any other requirement, (accepting the +5 spellcraft difficulty) those penalties will add up fast. for most of the sections of Kingmaker, your PCs will likely lack at least caster level and likely one other requirement for the item. a +10 on caster level is nothing to sneeze at.
It was very clearly stated by James Jacobs, IIRC, that caster level is not a prerequisite. If it is now however, even then it's only a +5 to the Spellcraft DC.The wording in the APG seems to suggest otherwise. Here is the pertinent passage:
The creator's caster level must be as high as the items caster level (and additional requirements may effectively put a higher minimum on caster level)
Personally, that looks to me as if caster level is now a non-negotiable requirement. Now, even if that must is hyperbole and you can ignore caster level as you can any other requirement, (accepting the +5 spellcraft difficulty) those penalties will add up fast. for most of the sections of Kingmaker, your PCs will likely lack at least caster level and likely one other requirement for the item. a +10 on caster level is nothing to sneeze at.
All the requirements are "must". I think the assumption is that the player's wont try to get around them. Once the must becomes "I want to ignore X", then the +5 is added.
Now that Gencon is over we get to harass them about the FAQ and errata.
I guess you didn't get my point. +5 stat increase manual or tomes cost as much to create a they do to buy. Check out the costs of items before making a blanket assumption.
<headdesk> How the hell did I miss that all the time? Yeah, of course they must cost the same, the wishes don't get cheaper. D'oooooooh. <facepalm>
I must apologize profusely. Sorry, I totally should have catched that by myself. :(
I understand the other rules, I was suggesting making the caster level a hard requisite. That should fix your power level concerns or make the DC +2 or +3 for every caster level they lack.
That'd be an interesting house-rule and I'll hash the viability for that out in the next days. Thanks for the suggestion.
They probably felt like it was up to the DM to control how much wealth the players get. Many DM's don't care about the WBL chart. I guess a side bar would have been nice, but it probably would have read like the suggestion on increasing or decreasing XP as needed for the sidequest.
True enough. Well, having the stat enhancer books not be available for cheap already is something mayor. I'll see what else I can do.
The wording in the APG seems to suggest otherwise. Here is the pertinent passage:
The creator's caster level must be as high as the items caster level (and additional requirements may effectively put a higher minimum on caster level)
Personally, that looks to me as if caster level is now a non-negotiable requirement. Now, even if that must is hyperbole and you can ignore caster level as you can any other requirement, (accepting the +5 spellcraft difficulty) those penalties will add up fast. for most of the sections of Kingmaker, your PCs will likely lack at least caster level and likely one other requirement for the item. a +10 on caster level is nothing to sneeze at.
All the requirements are "must". I think the assumption is that the player's wont try to get around them. Once the must becomes "I want to ignore X", then the +5 is added.
Now that Gencon is over we get to harass them about the FAQ and errata.
What Wraith said. All prerequisites are mandatory, but we got a clear rule that says a +5 to the Spellcraft DC will take care of a single missing prerequisite.
Without the caster level being a firm requirement - which has yet to be solidly addressed - you will see gear via item crafting go through the roof.
One of the best solutions I've come up with is to scale the foes according to what the characters do. If they "go stupid awesome", layer on multiple advanced simple templates (from the PF Bestiary) until things are about where they should be. If they pull the "multiple noble djinni planar allies to grant me 30 wishes for my ability scores" thing - the BBEGs get it too. The GM should have a good gauge of what AC, save bonuses and attack bonuses the characters have - and layer/adjust accordingly. Just don't engage in a "gear escalation" - it will exacerbate the situation, not improve it.
Without the caster level being a firm requirement - which has yet to be solidly addressed - you will see gear via item crafting go through the roof.
One of the best solutions I've come up with is to scale the foes according to what the characters do. If they "go stupid awesome", layer on multiple advanced simple templates (from the PF Bestiary) until things are about where they should be. If they pull the "multiple noble djinni planar allies to grant me 30 wishes for my ability scores" thing - the BBEGs get it too. The GM should have a good gauge of what AC, save bonuses and attack bonuses the characters have - and layer/adjust accordingly. Just don't engage in a "gear escalation" - it will exacerbate the situation, not improve it.
Yeah, I am so very happy that all of my players have not even approached the twinkishness of the type of gamer who hangs out on The Gaming Den or an optimization board. So the situation ain't yet as bad as it could be.
However, my players have, of course, much less concerns about game balance than I do, which I have to compensate for. Well, I got some good suggestions and corrections in this thread, so I will see how far they'll take me. I'll probably still will need to address the players on this topic.
And, as to my reading, caster level now is a firm requirement of magic item creation, as Underling pointed out above.
I think that the whole "caster level" thing has always been a problem and just being able to fake it can cause some problems too.
I'm thinking that rather than "caster level," there should be a hard and fast "character level" requirement like this:
1st level -- +1
5th level -- +2
9th level -- +3
13th level -- +4
17th level -- +5
21st level -- +6
That would be both for magic weapons and armor and also for the spiffalicious tomes of stat buffing that everyone likes so much, and would count both for regular casters with the requisite feats and also people who manage to get in via Master Craftsman
The "raise the dc and fake a requirement" would be left for stuff like "must be crafted by particular race/alignment/class/sex/religion/skill level/etc." as per Use Magic Device, even though you're using Spellcraft or the respective Craft skills via Master Craftsman.
If you scale the monsters due to the PC's taking creation feats, or if you reduce the gold available due to the feats..
you just need to ban the feats. Otherwise, all you are really doing is negating any benefit of the feat.
Its the functional equivalent of increasing the AC of the foes because the PC's took weapon focus.
If you won't let them reap the benefit of it then just ask them politely not to take the feats. (aka ban them).
DO NOT let the PC's labor under the false impression that they are gaining some perfectly legit benefit when in reality you are altering the game world to deprive them of that benefit.
Just be up front about it.
-S
|
Perhaps a solution would be that the item-crafter in question has to possess plans for items beyond the standard? plans for belts of giant strength +2 or even +4 might be commonplace, but it might be that a wizard can only make particularly obscure or high-level items if he has a guide to them, or perhaps an example to reverse engineer?
Essentially, a caster has a "second spellbook" of items they know how to do, or classes of item. Know ring of Lesser Fire Resistance? You also know the normal and greater varieties, you just can't make them yet. Know one class of metamagic rod? You know them all, save for the super-cool ones.
Or, you have to devote time and money and Spellcraft or Knowledge Arcana checks to research.
Read the Dresden Files sometime. It actually gives a decent sense of all the drudgery and effort a wizard has to go though to get his Metamagic Rod or Magic Staff.
Perhaps even knowing how to make an item like a Belt of Giant Strength +4 requires a Knowledge Arcana check at a fairly high DC. If you dont know it, you have to seek out a book that tells you how. Maybe some items are just unknown in the Brevoy region, being invented of the more advanced south/west of avistan?
I think that the whole "caster level" thing has always been a problem and just being able to fake it can cause some problems too.
I'm thinking that rather than "caster level," there should be a hard and fast "character level" requirement like this:
1st level -- +1
5th level -- +2
9th level -- +3
13th level -- +4
17th level -- +5
21st level -- +6That would be both for magic weapons and armor and also for the spiffalicious tomes of stat buffing that everyone likes so much, and would count both for regular casters with the requisite feats and also people who manage to get in via Master Craftsman
The "raise the dc and fake a requirement" would be left for stuff like "must be crafted by particular race/alignment/class/sex/religion/skill level/etc." as per Use Magic Device, even though you're using Spellcraft or the respective Craft skills via Master Craftsman.
I agree. There are certain things that should not be faked. I dont mind faking the caster level, but I might make the DC 1/2 the required caster level. I will have to run some numbers though.
Now if an item has a caster that is too high I would adjust it as a DM.
If you scale the monsters due to the PC's taking creation feats, or if you reduce the gold available due to the feats..
you just need to ban the feats. Otherwise, all you are really doing is negating any benefit of the feat.
Its the functional equivalent of increasing the AC of the foes because the PC's took weapon focus.
If you won't let them reap the benefit of it then just ask them politely not to take the feats. (aka ban them).
DO NOT let the PC's labor under the false impression that they are gaining some perfectly legit benefit when in reality you are altering the game world to deprive them of that benefit.
Just be up front about it.
-S
The benefit of the feats varies from game to game, and DM to DM.
In games where getting the item you want is hard to do the feats allow you to get what you want. In magic mart games, all they do is save money, and get you a little over the WBL. I would take them if a DM did not allow us open access to magic items, but in a magic mart campaign I probably would not bother with them.
If you scale the monsters due to the PC's taking creation feats, or if you reduce the gold available due to the feats..
you just need to ban the feats. Otherwise, all you are really doing is negating any benefit of the feat.
Its the functional equivalent of increasing the AC of the foes because the PC's took weapon focus.
If you won't let them reap the benefit of it then just ask them politely not to take the feats. (aka ban them).
DO NOT let the PC's labor under the false impression that they are gaining some perfectly legit benefit when in reality you are altering the game world to deprive them of that benefit.
Just be up front about it.
-S
This is a solution I've been working toward. Some of the advice in this thread has made me re-consider, but I may well go back to the solution of saying the feats are not available. I still think that in a campaign without time limit the new crafting rules can unbalance the game.
The benefit of the feats varies from game to game, and DM to DM.
In games where getting the item you want is hard to do the feats allow you to get what you want. In magic mart games, all they do is save money, and get you a little over the WBL. I would take them if a DM did not allow us open access to magic items, but in a magic mart campaign I probably would not bother with them.
I went through the AP up until module 5 with a fine comb and calculated all the treasure which is available. Given the assumption that the PC's will sell everything ( unique items excepted ), and will get 50% market price on magic items, but 100% on goods like jewelry, etc., then five PC's will have almost the exact amount of money they should have at certain set levels ( normally they break even at the end of an AP module, when they vanquish the big bad of that module ).
Given that, having an item crafter in the group who has no time limit on building stuff has pretty dramatic consequences, IMO.
Hmm, now I could be wrong - if someone could point me to where Mr. Jacobs clarified this I'd be happy to eat my words - but I always thought caster level wasn't part of the "Requirements" of building magic items that you could add +5 to the DC to substitute.
My reasoning on this is simple: The rules never say it is. They state that Caster Level is a MUST HAVE, and then in a separate section (under Requirements) they state that certain requirements - such as spells, class levels, etc. - can be substituted. If you read the description of the magic items, too, you'll see that Caster Level isn't *in* the Requirements (and most requirements are silent as to Caster Level), but rather up on the Caster Level line of the magic item.
That interpretation - which I believe fits the spirit of the rules far better than all others - goes a long way towards solving your problem. (It might, in fact, take you all the way home.)
Those are just my two cents though - if any heads wiser than I have spoken differently, I'd like to hear it.
|
Hmm, now I could be wrong - if someone could point me to where Mr. Jacobs clarified this I'd be happy to eat my words - but I always thought caster level wasn't part of the "Requirements" of building magic items that you could add +5 to the DC to substitute.
My reasoning on this is simple: The rules never say it is. They state that Caster Level is a MUST HAVE, and then in a separate section (under Requirements) they state that certain requirements - such as spells, class levels, etc. - can be substituted. If you read the description of the magic items, too, you'll see that Caster Level isn't *in* the Requirements (and most requirements are silent as to Caster Level), but rather up on the Caster Level line of the magic item.
The Rules were changed in the last round of errata. The sentence in bold, below, was DELETED from page 460 of the Core Rules in June, 2010:
Caster Level (CL): 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.
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 but 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).
So the creator's caster level is no longer required to be as high as the item's caster level per the last round of errata. This was largely to permit lower level characters create metamagic items and things like Pearls of Power, but the broad-ranging effect of the rule change can be pernicious.
Without the caster level being a firm requirement - which has yet to be solidly addressed - you will see gear via item crafting go through the roof.
One of the best solutions I've come up with is to scale the foes according to what the characters do. If they "go stupid awesome", layer on multiple advanced simple templates (from the PF Bestiary) until things are about where they should be. If they pull the "multiple noble djinni planar allies to grant me 30 wishes for my ability scores" thing - the BBEGs get it too. The GM should have a good gauge of what AC, save bonuses and attack bonuses the characters have - and layer/adjust accordingly. Just don't engage in a "gear escalation" - it will exacerbate the situation, not improve it.
If the players I played with started doing anything remotely like that, I show them the door and tell em go to play WOW.
The other thing I have done, when people are creating characters that have crafting feats that are higher level (level 5 onwards), I tell them they only get a 25% bonus on items so that they aren't that much stronger then the people who don't have crafting, as I don't think that a feat should give you an extra 2-4 extra major items.