The debate among D&D players on whether or not the "Caster Level" is a fixed minimum for magic items (other than potions/scrolls/wands) is largely a result of comments by certain D&D designers which directly contradict the rules in the 3.0 Dungeon Master’s Guide. In fact, the rules as written are very explicit and clear that "Caster Level" is in fact a fixed minimum creator level for such items (as originally discussed here).

So it was particularly interesting that around the time of the release of 3.5 Edition (in Summer of 2003), the issue came up all over again, as the same designers started contradicting or back-tracking from what they had said in the past on this issue. This last round has definitely put the "Caster Level of Magic Items" issue into the unique position of single-most confusing topic in the core rules.

First, let’s look at what Monte Cook has had to say. Monte is credited with being the author of the 3.0 DMG, and the writer of the magic items chapter therein (although to be fair, one must still admit that large chunks of that descriptive text, probably a majority, is still a copy of what was written by Gygax in the AD&D 1^st Ed. DMG). In a 2001 article, Monte said this:

What is a Caster Level?… Note what it doesn't say. It doesn't say that you have to be the listed level to make a given item. It's not a prerequisite. You don't have to be 17th level to create a 1st-level pearl of power -- you just have to meet the prerequisites. Prerequisites, you'll notice, get their own section. It comes next… Note that caster level can be a variable. (http://www.montecook.com/arch_dmonly3.html#casterlevel)

As noted on the other page on my website, in order to argue this Monte had to pointedly avoid quoting the piece of text in the DMG where it does in fact say that Caster Level is a "minimum on the creator’s level" (3.0 DMG p. 178). But, in his review of the release of 3.5 Edition in 2003, Monte then said this under his criticism of "Things that should have changed, but didn't":

Caster level is still a prerequisite for magic item creation. This was an error in the 3.0 DMG and remains. You still have to be 17th level to make a 1st-level pearl of power. (http://www.montecook.com/review.html)

Which is of course the opposite of what he said in 2001, even though the text of the rule was totally unchanged. Perhaps we can accept that his prior discussion on the issue should have come under the heading of "what I think the rule should have been", even if it was not presented that way.

Now, let’s consider Sean K. Reynolds, another designer who has gone on record as saying that Caster Level is definitely not a minimum on magic item creators (and has also ascribed to the "prerequisites are separate" argument). In his own review of 3.5 Edition, Sean quoted Monte’s comment above and then concluded:

"Things that should have changed, but didn’t: Caster level is still a prerequisite for magic item creation. This was an error in the 3.0 DMG and remains." I'd guess that's because the designers may have been working off the pre-errata files and didn't plug in all of the errata. Oops. (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/3point5comments.html)

However, it was then pointed out (by myself, actually) that this was not correct – the rule had never actually been altered in any official changes, errata, FAQ, or anything else. Sean then promptly edited his comments:

Correction: The "CL is a prereq" is a commonly known error at WotC, but for some reason it never actually made it into the official DMG errata. So that helps explain why it didn't make it into the 3.5 DMG ... it wasn't on the existing list of things to fix. Still, it is unfortunate that it was not included, because it _is_ an error in the 3.0 book. (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/3point5comments.html)

So, although this is a "commonly known error at WOTC", the designers seem pretty unclear about what the rules in fact say on the issue, or whether it has been changed or errata’d or not. Sean would later again assert that that’s not what the rules actually say:

Well, it is listed BEFORE the word "Prereq," so unless people are reading right-to-left it should be self-evident that CLs are not part of the prereqs.

Even though in the exact same thread he presents this clarification:

For the record:
1. Monte never intended caster level to be a prereq for creating items.
2. His turnover of the DMG text doesn't include such a rule.
3. It was added afterward, I don't know when.
4. It's a pretty well-known bit of errata among the R&D staff, as Monte and I both talked about it with people when we both still worked there.
5. It apparently didn't make it into the official DMG errata, though it should have.
6. I thought it had made it into the errata, but was on the train home without a copy of the errata so I couldn't check, and since I left my power adapter at work I only had a limited amount of time to post my comments before I ran out of power so I couldn't check the errata to be sure.
7. The error is still in the 3.5 DMG.
8. I'll be posting a correction to my commentary ASAP.
(http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=56402)

Which is additionally interesting since this asserts that some unknown third party was between Monte Cook’s draft of the DMG magic items chapter, and the actual publication, who was responsible for entering that rule into the text (bullets #2-3 above). That’s a pretty strange situation, particularly because the rule seems threaded throughout the chapter (it pops up on pages 178, 179, 183, and seems intrinsic to the magic item crafting price rules), and because many people in the debate tend to raise a "Monte Cook wrote it, he should know what it says" point of order.

Apparently Andy Cook, designer for 3.5 Edition, has also been quoted as asserting that Caster Level is not a fixed minimum for magic items, that the text does not say what’s actually written, even though again 3.5 Edition maintains the same language and has still not been errata’d.

But, as noted in my previous article, my primary point of dispute over the Caster Level issue is that there are no solid rules in D&D for pricing items with variable Caster Levels (other than potions/scrolls/wands). This leads me to conclude that (a) Caster Level cannot be variable, and/or (b) if this rule is in fact changed, it must come in conjunction with formal pricing rules for variable Caster Levels. (A related issue is whether "new items" -- items other than those detailed in the DMG -- actually count as "core rules" items or not.) If you read my previous article, you’ll know that I had an email exchange with Monte Cook over the pricing issue that lead to ambiguous, rather contradictory responses with no clear resolution.

Let me return to Sean K. Reynolds, who was gracious with his time and thoughts in discussing the issue on the ENWorld forums. I was able to ask him the same question there – but once again he was unable to formally answer the question of how altered Caster Levels change the Market Price of a magic item. He could tell me that certain items should be "marginally greater" or "not much less", but could not establish a fixed number fort any of them, which seems to leave DMs very much in the lurch if items supposedly allowed under the Core Rules have totally subjective Market Prices. (You can read an edited transcript of this discussion here.)

So it seems as though the "Caster Level" issue gets even more disjointed over time. It still hasn’t been changed, and still no designer has been able to answer how to change Market Prices under the Core Rules if the text actually read like they argue it should. It still seems as though the simplest thing for DMs to do is play it by the book, even if this makes magic item crafting a bit more restrictive for the players than some would prefer.

To return to the main page discussing the Caster Level of magic items in D&D, click here.