RAW Exploit: The Negative Caster Level Scroll

[GnomishPride]

While determining which scrolls to purchase for my wizard, I stumbled what I consider to be a breaking of RAW in a fairly impressive way. I realize that others may interpret the rules slightly differently, so I'll try to lay out my process as clearly as possible.

Step 1: Determining Caster Level
Fact 1 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm#casterLevel): When crafting a scroll, the creator may set the caster level of the scroll to any caster level, provided that a) the caster level does not exceed their own caster level and b) the caster level is no lower than the minimum caster level required to cast the spell.
Fact 2 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#casterLevel): The minimum caster level required to cast a spell is defined only as "usually twice the spell's level, minus 1" (DMG 283), but the usually allows for a loophole. It also defined as "high enough for you to cast the spell in question," which is also very vague.
Putting them together:
When crafting a scroll, the caster level can be set to a number that is no greater than your own caster level, but with no clearly defined lower boundary.
Step 2: The Lower Boundary.
The most obvious interpretation is that when casting a spell, you can lower your caster level as low as you want, as long as you are able to cast the spell. However, you can still cast a fireball with CL 1 if you'd like, as there is no rule preventing that. So, you can lower your caster level as far down as you like. The question becomes, how low can caster levels go?
For example, let's take a Gnome Wizard 1, specializing in illusion. They take the Spellgifted trait (focusing on illusion)(UA), and the Gnome Illusionist substitution level. (RoS) These combined have a CL of -1 for Evocation, Conjuration, and Transmutation spells. So there is precedent for negative caster levels being possible.
Higher negative levels are possible too. Let's say that the above example gained five levels in sorcerer, the Mage Slayer feat (Complete Arcane), and a level in Wild Mage (applying the +1 CL to Sorcerer)(CArc), then gained 6 negative levels.
Your caster level for Evocation Conjuration, and Transmutation spells is now 1 (base) -4 (Mage Slayer) -3 (Wild Mage) -1 (Gnome Illusionist) -1 (Spellgifted) -6 (negative levels) +1d6, or -14+1d6 total. This can quickly escalate to very large negative numbers.
So the really is no lower boundary to caster levels. They can, in theory, go infinitely down.
Step 3: Crafting the Anti-ScrollTM
Now it gets fun.
So you craft a scroll, and set your caster level to, say, -100. The price calculation for such an item is 12.5*spell level*-100. For a level 1 spell, it ends up being -1250gp to craft. This essentially means that from crafting the Anti-Scroll, you gain 1250gp.
It thus follows that the XP required to craft the Anti-Scroll uses the same formula, i.e 1/25 of the cost to craft. 1/25 of -1250 is -50, so you would gain 50 XP from crafting the Anti-Scroll.
As for the time cost, it gets a little murkier. The Anti-Scroll costs -1250gp to craft, and it takes 1 day per 1000gp to craft a magic item. This means that it either takes 0 days (as the cost does not reach the 1000gp threshold) or -1 day.
In the former case, it means you can craft an arbitrarily high amount of Anti-Scrolls in 0 time. In the latter, it means you travel back in time one day per Anti-Scroll crafted, which is pretty cool.
Step 4: Applications
You now have the ability to gain XP and GP in (less than) no time. This enables you to gain a lot of money and a lot of levels, really, really quickly.
An important note is that this is not an infinite loop. This is a loop that goes indefinitely, but it never reaches infinity. The number of XP and GP gained can always be quantified, though with very high numbers.

So Playground, what say you? Are Anti-Scrolls a valid method of ascension, or not? I'm all ears.

[Troacctid]

I mean, sure, it works if you selectively ignore the parts of the rules that prevent you from doing it, but that kind of makes it, y'know, not really a RAW exploit.

[LastCenturion]

One problem with this is that the negative time requirements violate RAW: I can't find the quote, but there's something in the DMG about real-world physics applying to D&D rules unless something explicitly says otherwise. There's nothing the Crafting rules that explicitly says that you can use it to violate the second law of thermodynamics, which is exactly what rewinding the universe by crafting a scroll in negative time would do, from your own perspective.

[Extra Anchovies]

*cough*

Creating an item requires one day per 1,000 gp in the item’s base price, with a minimum of at least one day.
Literally in the same sentence as rules you quote, even.

[Bad Wolf]

Still a pretty cheesy thing. Expect encyclopedias thrown at you.

[Endarire]

This explains so many NPC Wizards of arbitrarily high level who had no right to be that level! Congratulations!

How well does Anti-Crafting work for other item types?

What are the implications of Anti-Scrolls for Artificers and Archivists?

What happens if you make an Anti-antimagic field Scroll?

[Ruethgar]

There was a specification somewhere for minimum caster level. Away from comp ATM but you can look in the Falacy of the Leapfrog Wizard thread to find specifics.

[Segev]

There was a specification somewhere for minimum caster level. Away from comp ATM but you can look in the Falacy of the Leapfrog Wizard thread to find specifics.

The OP references the specification, but then says it's only a guideline because of "usually."

Unfortunately for his trick, here, the "usually" is there not because there's no clear set of exceptions, but because it's acknowledging that there are exceptions.

More to the point, however, the minimum caster level to cast a spell is defined by the class spell list you're pulling the spell from. The "usually" is telling you that most classes use that formula, but is acknowledging that some do not. For example, a Bard requires a higher caster level than the "usual" reference for a 3rd level spell.

In essence, that specification is, as the OP notes, a guideline...but it's a guideline of the "reminder" sort, not of the "loose rule you don't technically have to follow" sort. Because the actual rules for minimum level to cast a spell are class-specific.

[LastCenturion]

The OP references the specification, but then says it's only a guideline because of "usually."

Unfortunately for his trick, here, the "usually" is there not because there's no clear set of exceptions, but because it's acknowledging that there are exceptions.

More to the point, however, the minimum caster level to cast a spell is defined by the class spell list you're pulling the spell from. The "usually" is telling you that most classes use that formula, but is acknowledging that some do not. For example, a Bard requires a higher caster level than the "usual" reference for a 3rd level spell.

In essence, that specification is, as the OP notes, a guideline...but it's a guideline of the "reminder" sort, not of the "loose rule you don't technically have to follow" sort. Because the actual rules for minimum level to cast a spell are class-specific.

All good points, but this is such a good trick that I feel compelled to save it somehow. Here is the New Anti-Scroll (tm), at level one:

Step One: Be a gnome. Take the following flaws: Noncombatant, Shaky.
Step Two: Take the following feats: Craft Scroll, Spellgifted (Illusion)
Step Three: Take the Gnome Illusionist racial substitution level, choosing Evocation.
Step Four: Craft a scroll of Magic Missile. Your minimum CL is 1, so you choose 1. As you've pointed out, a wizard can't craft a first level spell by setting their CL below 1, but this is still fine.
Step Five: Apply the CL reductions from your feat and substitution level. Your CL for the scroll is now -1.
Step Six: Violate causality and the conservation of mass and energy in innumerable ways as you create a scroll of Magic Missile CL -1 in negative time for negative gold piece and experience cost.
Step Seven: ???????????????????
Step Eight: Profit.

[Segev]

All good points, but this is such a good trick that I feel compelled to save it somehow. Here is the New Anti-Scroll (tm), at level one:

Step One: Be a gnome. Take the following flaws: Noncombatant, Shaky.
Step Two: Take the following feats: Craft Scroll, Spellgifted (Illusion)
Step Three: Take the Gnome Illusionist racial substitution level, choosing Evocation.
Step Four: Craft a scroll of Magic Missile. Your minimum CL is 1, so you choose 1. As you've pointed out, a wizard can't craft a first level spell by setting their CL below 1, but this is still fine.
Step Five: Apply the CL reductions from your feat and substitution level. Your CL for the scroll is now -1.
Step Six: Violate causality and the conservation of mass and energy in innumerable ways as you create a scroll of Magic Missile CL -1 in negative time for negative gold piece and experience cost.
Step Seven: ???????????????????
Step Eight: Profit.
Do these reductions reduce your CL, or do they allow you to access spells at a lower CL?

[GnomishPride]

I mean, sure, it works if you selectively ignore the parts of the rules that prevent you from doing it, but that kind of makes it, y'know, not really a RAW exploit.
Can you name any specifics?

*cough*

Literally in the same sentence as rules you quote, even.
*blinks* Totally missed that. Thanks for pointing that out.

One problem with this is that the negative time requirements violate RAW: I can't find the quote, but there's something in the DMG about real-world physics applying to D&D rules unless something explicitly says otherwise. There's nothing the Crafting rules that explicitly says that you can use it to violate the second law of thermodynamics, which is exactly what rewinding the universe by crafting a scroll in negative time would do, from your own perspective.
As Extra Anchovies pointed out, negative time is impossible because it takes a minimum of one day to craft anything, even the Anti-Scroll.

This explains so many NPC Wizards of arbitrarily high level who had no right to be that level! Congratulations!

How well does Anti-Crafting work for other item types?

What are the implications of Anti-Scrolls for Artificers and Archivists?

What happens if you make an Anti-antimagic field Scroll?
Other Itema: I believe that's possible for any item without a minimum caster level, but Scribe Scroll comes onlinr at level one.
I haven't examined the Anti-Scroll with other classes yet, but I imagine it'd be similar.
Anti-Scrolls aren't intended to be used, as most of the profit comes from the actual crafting.

[KillianHawkeye]

Trying to break the game like this is such a foreign thought process for me that I can't really comprehend why anyone would try to justify such an obviously wrong reading of the rules. :smallsigh:

[rrwoods]

I'm confused. You base part of your CL reduction on being able to cast (for example) fireball at CL 1. What am I missing here? How do you cast a fireball at CL 1?

EDIT: More specifically, how is CL 1 "high enough for you to cast" fireball? It seems like you need to deliberately interpret "high enough" to have no meaning here.

[Bucky]

Even the usual "twice the spell's level, minus 1" formula means you can create an anti-scroll for a cantrip with no other shenanigans.

[Segev]

Even the usual "twice the spell's level, minus 1" formula means you can create an anti-scroll for a cantrip with no other shenanigans.

Except that "usually" doesn't mean "this is the rule." It means "this is the rule of thumb that will match the actual rules a lot of the time."

The actual rules are in each individual class. No spellcaster gets the ability to cast spells at less than level 1.

[Troacctid]

EDIT: More specifically, how is CL 1 "high enough for you to cast" fireball? It seems like you need to deliberately interpret "high enough" to have no meaning here.
Correct. Hence why the trick requires you to selectively ignore the parts of the rules that prevent it from working.


Except that "usually" doesn't mean "this is the rule." It means "this is the rule of thumb that will match the actual rules a lot of the time."

The actual rules are in each individual class. No spellcaster gets the ability to cast spells at less than level 1.
Actually, the prices of minimum-CL scrolls for spells of every level are given in the DMG. It's spelled out very explicitly.

http://i.imgur.com/AcLG3uJ.png

[Segev]

Correct. Hence why the trick requires you to selectively ignore the parts of the rules that prevent it from working.


Actually, the prices of minimum-CL scrolls for spells of every level are given in the DMG. It's spelled out very explicitly.

http://i.imgur.com/AcLG3uJ.png

Technically, that's not a complete list. And it makes assumptions - generally good ones - about what class is making the scroll(s). A Bard still couldn't make a 2nd level spell scroll using CL 3.

[Troacctid]

Technically, that's not a complete list. And it makes assumptions - generally good ones - about what class is making the scroll(s). A Bard still couldn't make a 2nd level spell scroll using CL 3.
It was a complete list at the time of printing. And you'll notice that 2nd level bard scrolls are in fact at CL 4.

[Deophaun]

Isn't it stated somewhere that a caster level of 0 means you cannot cast the spell? I seem to remember that in a PrC or ACF that penalized the CL for a school of magic, it noted that the CL reduction prevented you from casting spells of that school at low levels.

[Segev]

It was a complete list at the time of printing. And you'll notice that 2nd level bard scrolls are in fact at CL 4.

Which is not CL 3.

And third level bard spells (e.g. glibness) are at CL 7.

[Troacctid]

Which is not CL 3.

And third level bard spells (e.g. glibness) are at CL 7.

Yes. That's what the chart says. I'm not sure what your point is?

[DarkSoul]

Fact 2 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#casterLevel): The minimum caster level required to cast a spell is defined only as "usually twice the spell's level, minus 1" (DMG 283), but the usually allows for a loophole. It also defined as "high enough for you to cast the spell in question," which is also very vague.The term "high enough for you to cast the spell in question" is anything BUT vague. In fact, it's specific enough to account for any and every combination of feats, classes and abilities in the game. Whatever the minimum caster level is for Joe the spellcaster to cast Bear's Endurance is the lowest caster level Joe's allowed to cast it at, or in this case make a scroll of it. If that CL is 3 because he's a wizard, 4 because he's a sorcerer, or 2 because he's a rogue 5/Ur-priest 2, so be it.

Also, Scribe Scroll requires "Caster level 1st". The moment you drop below caster level 1, as is the case with your example Wiz1/Sorc6/Wild Mage1, you lose access to Scribe Scroll until your caster level is at least 1, per the rules on page 87 of the Player's Handbook. So no, not only are "anti-scrolls" not a valid method of generating XP, they aren't even possible to make.

[Segev]

Yes. That's what the chart says. I'm not sure what your point is?

That the classes themselves give the actual minimum necessary CL to cast a particular spell.

[Troacctid]

That the classes themselves give the actual minimum necessary CL to cast a particular spell.
Yes...which is why the chart is by class. :smallconfused: