According the the PRD, the required level is 17th. However, there is actually no spell listed for creation of the pearl of power, and the requirement simply says that you must have craft wondrous item, and be able to recall the spell of the pearl of power being created.
Would the DC to create the pearl simply be higher if I was a level 5 wizard? Or am I unable to create a pearl of power myself until I am level 17?
Thanks in advance!
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You need to be level 3: the minimum level at which you can learn Craft Wondrous Item.
All magic items (at least I am not aware of any exceptions) list a caster level. This is helpful for determining how hard it is to learn the properties of a magic item, or to suppress them in anti-magic. But it is not a requirement for making the item in the first place.
Now, some magic items have a caster level listed in the "Requirements" section of the item. It's quite rare, but there are a few with this requirement. Of note would be Bracers of Armor and Amulet of Mighty Fists. Also, notice that both magical armor and magical weapons have an additional requirement that you must have a caster level = 3x the enhancement bonus of the item you are creating. These are the only cases in which caster level is a requirement.
For all other items, you can create them as soon as you're able to learn the feat, regardless of the item caster level.
Official cite by Sean K. Reynolds: Click Here.
Note: Everyone please follow the link and click the FAQ tag on his post. This question gets asked several times a month (maybe several times a week) so it would be good to FAQ it as soon as possible.
Slightly off-topic, we house rule that instead of all Pearls of Power being CL 17, the CL is the same as the wizard level required to cast the spell at that level. That is, 1st level PoP is CL 1, 2nd level PoP is CL 3, etc. As DM Blake said, this has no bearing on the level required to create any PoP. But, it is used when you try to identify a pearl, or for the skill check needed when you create one. It seemed silly to us that it would be a DC 32 check to identify a 1st level pearl of power. By the time you are high enough level to figure out what it does, you probably won't find it useful. :-).
Slightly off-topic, we house rule that instead of all Pearls of Power being CL 17, the CL is the same as the wizard level required to cast the spell at that level. That is, 1st level PoP is CL 1, 2nd level PoP is CL 3, etc. As DM Blake said, this has no bearing on the level required to create any PoP. But, it is used when you try to identify a pearl, or for the skill check needed when you create one. It seemed silly to us that it would be a DC 32 check to identify a 1st level pearl of power. By the time you are high enough level to figure out what it does, you probably won't find it useful. :-).
Not a bad houserule, but I think you overstate the difficulty of figuring out the pearls.
At level 2, my elf wizard was able to identify a Pearl of Power just on Detect Magic/Spellcraft alone: 2 Ranks + 3 Class Skill + 5 INT + 2 Elf = 1d20 +12 with a DC of 32.
Sure, I needed a natural 20, but hey, give me 20 days and I'd probably get one.
Or, even better, give me an Identify spell and even at level 1, I had a 50% chance to successfully Identify an Pearl of Power.
Not a bad houserule, but I think you overstate the difficulty of figuring out the pearls.At level 2, my elf wizard was able to identify a Pearl of Power just on Detect Magic/Spellcraft alone: 2 Ranks + 3 Class Skill + 5 INT + 2 Elf = 1d20 +12 with a DC of 32.
Sure, I needed a natural 20, but hey, give me 20 days and I'd probably get one.
Or, even better, give me an Identify spell and even at level 1, I had a 50% chance to successfully Identify an Pearl of Power.
Fair enough, although the CL for PoP is definitely out of line compared to other minor wondrous items. My opinion is that it was set to 17 as a matter of convenience for making the rules concise more than anything else, so we undid that.
It's a little frustrating when all of the players at the table know it is a 1st level Pearl of Power, yet they have no chance to use it during the crawl because they failed to roll a 20 that day.
It's a little frustrating when all of the players at the table know it is a 1st level Pearl of Power, yet they have no chance to use it during the crawl because they failed to roll a 20 that day.
Indeed.
It hearkens back to the time when we had to take even our +1 swords to the local wizard and beg/buy/trade/indenture for his good graces to tell us what our sword does.
Now, we can figure out almost anything on the fly - certainly very nearly everything we're appropriately powerful enough to deserve to find it in a treasure hoard.
Except the dreaded PoP.
If only it weren't for that annoying command word...
|
Note that the only thing you actually MUST HAVE is the Item Creation feat. Even if there are other "requirements", they can be bypassed by adding a cumulative +5 to the DC.
I believe it was also clarified that the CL is not a requirement unless explicitly stated in the items' description. Otherwise it's just a DC setter. If it is explicitly stated, then it's a hard requirement (cannot be bypassed).
I believe it was also clarified that the CL is not a requirement unless explicitly stated in the items' description. Otherwise it's just a DC setter. If it is explicitly stated, then it's a hard requirement (cannot be bypassed).
Actually, I am not sure you're correct about the "cannot be bypassed" statement.
AFAIK, the only requirements that cannot be bypassed by adding +5 to the DC are
1. the required item creation feat
2. the required spell, but only if you are creating spell-trigger or spell-completion magic items
|
Was just reading through the Advanced Player's Guide and found the second paragraph in the 'Caster Level (CL)' section on page 282:
The creator’s caster level must be as high as the item’s caster level (and additional requirements may effectively put a higher minimum on the creator’s level).
This replaces the following text from the same section in the Core Rulebook (3rd printing) on page 460:
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.
So does the APG supercede the Core Rulebook stating that CL is not a requirement?
Mike
Was just reading through the Advanced Player's Guide and found the second paragraph in the 'Caster Level (CL)' section on page 282:
The creator’s caster level must be as high as the item’s caster level (and additional requirements may effectively put a higher minimum on the creator’s level).So does the APG supercede the Core Rulebook stating that CL is not a requirement?
Mike
Probably technically, yes. I believe this is old wording that was removed from the Core rules in an errata. I think this wording comes from the 3.5 SRD (or perhaps earlier) and keeps unintentionally popping up, much to the chagrin of people. There were several threads on this topic a long time ago which might help add some clarity.
IMHO, use the rules as stated in the Core book on this one and don't worry about it.
| 9 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata. |
So does the APG supercede the Core Rulebook stating that CL is not a requirement?
The APG is in error, strike that part of the text where it says "The creator's caster level must be as high...."
It amuses and yet horrifies me that this one error introduced during editing/development in the 3.0 DMG keeps rearing its ugly head in later books....
So does the APG supercede the Core Rulebook stating that CL is not a requirement?The APG is in error, strike that part of the text where it says "The creator's caster level must be as high...."
It amuses and yet horrifies me that this one error introduced during editing/development in the 3.0 DMG keeps rearing its ugly head in later books....
Sooo...ummm...yeah...why does it?
Will this be fixed with the errata for the Advanced Players guide?
Sooo...ummm...yeah...why does it?So does the APG supercede the Core Rulebook stating that CL is not a requirement?The APG is in error, strike that part of the text where it says "The creator's caster level must be as high...."
It amuses and yet horrifies me that this one error introduced during editing/development in the 3.0 DMG keeps rearing its ugly head in later books....
Maybe the trick is to hit the FAQ flag on Mr. Reynold's post. Lots.
Everyone join hands and hit that FAQ button!
So does the APG supercede the Core Rulebook stating that CL is not a requirement?The APG is in error, strike that part of the text where it says "The creator's caster level must be as high...."
It amuses and yet horrifies me that this one error introduced during editing/development in the 3.0 DMG keeps rearing its ugly head in later books....
As my design teacher in college once said: "If something happens once, it is happenstance. If something happens twice in a row, it could be coincidence. If something happens three times in a row, there are definitely forces at work causing it to happen."
|
I'd be inclined to house rule that the CL for the DC scales, and that the '17' is for a prepared caster attempting to make a Pearl of Power for a 9th level spell, while one who was going for a Pearl of Power good for a 2nd level spell would base his Craft DC off of a CL 3.
Ditto for identification DCs, etc. A Pearl of Power (1st) probably doesn't warrant being as hard to identify as a Ring of Wishes because of it's 'Strong magic.'
Still, that's just me house-ruling like I'm gettin' paid for it. :)
As my design teacher in college once said: "If something happens once, it is happenstance. If something happens twice in a row, it could be coincidence. If something happens three times in a row, there are definitely forces at work causing it to happen."
In the military we used to be told, "Once is an anomaly, twice is a coincidence, three times is enemy action."