1. Spell Books
2. The Writing of Scrolls
3. Reading Scrolls
4. The Manufacture of Potions
5. Enchanted Crystals
6. Enchant An Item
7. Priests Making Magic Items
8. Final Thoughts

THE FABRICATION OF MAGIC ITEMS

Throughout the years I've always been disappointed with the lack of detail the DMG and PHB had for the fabrication of magic items. Alas, when I considered writing something on the subject myself, though I've always known it would be difficult, the true appreciation of why they've never tried to do more than they did comes to light. Too much of it will depend on the DM's personal vision, his world, what he wants, what he needs to avoid, and all of this must be carefully wrapped up in the blanket of GAME BALANCE which also varies radically from world to world. Thus, at best I can only produce procedures for what I feel to be reasonable for my world. Yet, with luck, perhaps what I have created herein can be used on your world as well, and with only minor adjustments.

First, I'd like to say I obviously get the feeling the authors of what little was written in the DMG didn't seem to like magic users or spell casters very much. Hoop after silly hoop was carefully constructed for the players of spell casters to jump through, sometimes only then to be told they were on the wrong track and had wasted their time, their comrades' time, and piles and piles of cash. The authors almost went out of their way to DISCOURAGE interested players from dabbling in the manufacture of magic items, making it extremely difficult and frustrating to even try - perhaps to hide the fact they didn't really know how to do it themselves, or worse, they didn't want to be bothered by players even making the attempt. This is NOT a good way to limit that sort of thing in a game, IMO.

Frustration is frustration, and rarely is it fun. If the DM wants limits, there are better ones than that. Economics and time will usually suffice, and a large percentage of the silly hoops constructed to hamper creativity and tinkering in the magical arts can be cut away if the DM will just use common sense and a reasonable application of the already important constraints of time and money. Adventurers have little time to spend "off the field," they are always short on cash, and their fellow adventurers cannot be expected to sit around and wait for them while they spend months and months making some magic trinket. It's already bad enough they sometimes have to sit and wait for the mage to simply acquire a new spell or write a scroll or two - from which they all will probably benefit - let alone waiting months for some magic item to be fabricated. So unless the game is geared up in such a way that the spell caster's player has a couple of PCs he can run - running the other PC while his mage is doing these complex things - it makes it practically impossible for a spell caster to do anything along these lines, and the lack of information in the book just adds to this already exceedingly difficult task.

If that wasn't bad enough, 2nd edition AD&D went even further to hamper the magical arts, curtailing once again the power of the spell caster. I guess they felt their concept of game balance was in jeopardy and needed to augment non-spell casters while lessening the power the of magic users, but I always felt they went down the wrong trail there. Augment the others, fine, but hamper the mages, why? Of course, I like playing spell casters, and as my favorite classes were under attack, it is no wonder I didn't approve of their "improvements." Nevertheless, I try to live with some of them, keep a few of the 1st edition rules where they were clearly better, and make up what the books lacked in detail. All in all, it is still AD&D, and the flavor of my game may be appreciated by those who like magic, while hated by those who prefer more mundane aspects to their worlds. I have seen plenty of DMs take that route, and their games are enjoyable, so don't get me wrong, but when I had a choice, I much preferred having magic items and spell casters in abundance rather than curtailing these things so badly that mages were almost a mere legend, or perhaps not even allowed as PCs, worlds where a clerical Raise Dead spell simply didn't exist, and magic items were dreamed of, but never seen. Only you know what your world is like and what flavor of game you most desire, and if that happens to coincide with my preferences, you may like this article and find it useful. I hope you do.

SPELL BOOKS

First, I'd like to talk about the SPELL BOOK of the wizard. These are, on my world, leather bound books - about the size of the PHB - with three snaps for leather flaps that fold over the top, bottom, and the side opposite the spine to help protect them. The flaps are so tight, when closed, the books can survive being submerged in water for a limited time, but a lengthy immersion will eventually begin to degrade the materials. The vellum pages are usually sewn in and can be carefully removed when mistakes are made. I never felt it necessary to make a mage lug around his mistakes or spells he no longer wanted. Again, time and money will limit this, as well as intelligence, so they may keep up to their maximum number of spells/level as indicated on the intelligence table, but they will usually have less than that since it takes a long, long time to acquire that many spells. If they wish to remove a spell and replace it, make them pay for the new spell, take time to scribe it into their book, and that alone should be sufficient to limit any abuse.

Spell books for magic users come in two varieties - traveling and home. Such books weigh 5 pounds for a home book or 2 pounds for a traveling book, but traveling books are limited and may contain only up to 50 pages. The cost per page is 50 GP for home book but 100 GP for traveling book - the traveling book's vellum pages have extra treatments to make them more durable (+1 to saves) and slightly more waterproof. The number of pages required for each spell is equal to 1 page per level of spell for actual space, but the cost is 1 page per level plus 1D4 pages for any mistakes. This cost included the costs for the ink and feathers as well as the extra pages ruined where mistakes were made; however, since pages can be carefully removed - or not placed in the book in the first place if they were messed up - only the proper and unspoiled pages are used and are, therefore, in the finished book. The completed pages are carefully sewn into the book, and if necessary, can be taken out and resewn back into the book. Each level of spells will have their own book. First level spells in one book(s), second level spells in another, etc., up to possibly nine books - or 18, 9 traveling and 9 home, though sometimes the mage's repertoire is so extensive they may need several books for some levels.

The ink used for this preparation is very special, though not as special or expensive as the ink required for magical scrolls. Ink for spell books is rather personal because part of its make up includes the BLOOD of the mage. Nobody else may supply this blood since his or her DNA is required - not that they necessarily know about DNA, mind you. As such, a captured spell book, though the mage could learn a spell from it using Read Magic, and transcribe them into his or her own spell book, cannot be used as if they were the mage's own spell books. The ink must be prepared with their own blood, the roll made - to see if they can learn it - and the costs paid (1d4+1/level of spell) x 50 GP - for home - or x100 GP - for traveling - and the time spent - one day/level of spell. Only after the time is spent and the costs are paid will the roll be made, and if they fail, this time and money is simply wasted. They may not try for the same spell again until they either go up another level or until they increase their intelligence.

Also, contained within this spell book ink are powdered gems and various powdered crystals. The quill for this work need only be a quality quill - and not a magical one from an extraordinary feathered beast (griffon, harpy, etc. - ask your DM, but most feathered creatures in the monstrous manual would normally suffice) as is required for scribing magical scrolls. All of this - ink, gems, crystals, leather, vellum, quills, etc., is already reflected in the cost given above, but the importance of the mage's own blood in the ink has been overlooked. This blood component helps curtail abuse and answers the question of why mages can't simply share their spell books, if you follow that rule.

To memorize a spell, the mage runs their fingers over the words while they read them, their personal mystic imprint from their blood helps to transfer the knowledge - as a sort of empathetic feeling - back to them so they may learn and memorize their spells more quickly. Without using their own spell book transcribed with his or her own blood, this extra mystic contact is lost and it may not be possible to memorize a spell from someone else's book. Of course, a softhearted DM may allow this, but just make it take longer - perhaps 30-minutes/spell level instead of 10 minutes/level to memorize spells, for example. Again, time constraints are a very effective way to prevent abuse, so I like this optional rule and employ it myself.

It is a mistake to think a mage can cast a spell out of their spell book like they could off a scroll. Even if they were willing to let it fade from their book, the ink is not made to hold magic in that fashion, but only serves to provide reminders and notes and that extra mystical personal touch from the blood to help them learn their spells. Furthermore, the material components and sacrifices (often quite expensive) necessary for the casting of the spell are not required when writing the spell in one's spell book, but would be required when writing a spell onto a scroll, so one really can't use those book spells like scroll spells (unless the DM allows one to supply those components at the time of casting out of the book, but this would, at most, only be done in an extreme emergency, if allowed at all, since to replace that spell the mage would have to start afresh and pay the time and monetary costs of researching the spell all over again). Magic Spell Books, though they will radiate slightly of magic when detected for, do not contain the powerful magic that magical scrolls contain.

THE WRITING OF SCROLLS

I believe 2nd edition AD&D holds that a priest or mage must wait until 9th level before they can write scrolls. I see no reason for this, and continue to use the 1st edition 7th level mark. After achieving 7th level, the priest or mage may scribe spells onto scrolls. They must be able to memorize the spell and cast it normally to be able to transcribe it thus. Special ink must be made and a special quill must be found. Usually, the quills and ink can be purchased in limited quantity, so if we are talking about a spell or two every other month, there should be no problem. Just pay the going rate for these things and obtain them at the magic shop or alchemist shop in the nearest large city.

While prices on your world may vary and you should feel free to make adjustments as you see fit, the current prices on my world are thus: 35 GP/level for ink, 20 GP/level for the feather quill, and 1 GP/level for vellum. This totals 56 GP/level of the spell to write it on a scroll. Naturally, if the spell requires further expensive or rare material components, ages the caster, makes them lose a point of constitution or some other statistic point, then this all must still be paid for in addition to this 56 GP/level of spell being written. The DM will limit how many levels you can write from these limited feathers and limited supply of ink as he sees fit. He may even require you to quest for these items, especially if you insist on writing many levels worth of spells.

I do not think it necessary that each spell requires special ink or that a new feather be obtained for each kind of spell. The material components consumed will do that already, and the ink only need hold the magic. I simply limit each feather to writing 10 levels worth of spells before it becomes useless. By the way, this makes each magical feather worth about 200 GP - so pick them up when you kill such magical-feathered creatures, even though the DM will tell you only a few of them are of sufficient quality - particularly if you seriously hack the poor beast to death, or fried it with a Fireball. Typically, ink comes in bottles of 10 doses - that is, you can write 10 levels of spells with one vial of magic ink. This makes things easy, and only the price and time involved need limit your character - as well as just the few feathers or limited amounts of ink available. Otherwise, you will need to quest for more feathers or ink components so your character may write dozens of spells.

Like many things, it takes one day/level of spell to transcribe it. The chance of failure is a base 20% chance. For each level of the spell, add +1% more to the failure chance. For each level of the spell caster, subtract 1% from the failure - making it easier to succeed for higher-level characters. If common paper is used, add 5% - but save 1 GP/level - and if expensive paper is used - no adjustments to the failure rate, but save 0.5 GP/level. Otherwise, use the 1 GP/level - as is typical and already included in the 56 GP/level formula - for the vellum and subtract 5% from the failure rate.

EXAMPLE A: A 14th level wizard wishes to transcribe a Fireball spell onto a scroll. He uses vellum. This will cost him 56 X 3(rd level spell) GP or 168 GP for ink, feather, and vellum. It will also cost him 3 days of his time. The failure rate is 20% (base) +3% (level of spell) - 14% (level of mage) -5% (vellum) = 4%. Alas, AD&D limits one to 5% or less always being a failure, so he can hope for no better. He pays 168 GP, spends three days, and then the player rolls. If 6% or higher on 1d100 is rolled, he succeeds. The spell will have 14 hit dice of damage (1st edition) or 10 hit dice of damage (2nd edition).

If you wished to hire a mage to write this spell for you, he'd charge more than it cost him to make it, naturally. To find out how much more, add another (25 GP/level) x (level of the mage). In this case, add another 1050 GP (25 X 3 X 14), so he'd sell it for 1218 GP - round off to nearest 100 GPs. However, he may also sell it for (25 X 3 X 10) + 168 = 918 GP since being 14th level is no better than being 10th level - in 2nd. edition - for that spell. But this depends on who wants what the most, for a mage looking for work would sell to you for less, but a buyer bothering a busy mage who already has work should expect to pay more. Remember that if a mage tries to read a scroll of a spell at a level they may not yet employ, there is a chance of failure - see below. And, if there are expensive material components involved to this spell, he'll either charge you 1 to 2 times what they cost him, or expect you to supply them.

EXAMPLE B: A 9th level priest wishes to transcribe Rainbow, but this will require the special material component, a 1,000 GP diamond with a Bless and Prayer cast upon it. As both of those spells do not cost anything in material components, he may cast these things easily for himself, or he may charge a small fee of 25 GP/level of spell, so 100 GP for the pair, thus making the diamond worth 1,100 GP. If this is for someone else, he may charge them up to 2,200 GP for the components, but if they supply the diamond, probably only 100 GP for the spells. Now, he proceeds. This will take him 5 days (level of spell) to transcribe. It will cost 56 GP/level of spell, or 280 GP for this fifth level spell. The failure rate is 20% (base) +5% (level of spell) - 9% (level of priest) - 5% (vellum) = 11% chance of failure. He pays the 280 GP, the diamond is consumed in the process, he spends 5 days working on the scroll, and then the player rolls. If the roll is 12% or higher, he succeeds, but 11% or lower, and all is lost, a failure.

Optional: The DM may allow you to increase your chance of success - reduce your chance of failure - by spending more time on the scroll. Naturally, this must be announced before any rolls are made. This extra time and care is sometimes very important when expensive material components are on the line, like diamonds, constitution points, unnatural aging, etc. For each additional day you wish to spend on it, subtract 1% from your failure percentage - not to be less than 5% in any event. You may also not spend more than double the normal time on such a spell. Thus, for the example of the Rainbow spell, you could spend an additional 5 days on it and reduce the failure from an 11% to a 6% chance. Therefore you would spend 10 days writing that scroll instead of 5. No more than 10 - double its level - may be spent on this scroll, so 6% is as good as it gets in this example.

As a general rule, mages and priests will scribe spells they feel they will occasionally need but do not care to memorize. If the optional BLANK method of memorizing spells is used, you may not write a BLANK scroll, but must have a specific spell for the scroll. Multiple spells may be written on the same parchment, but this saves no money as you'll need longer pieces and they cost more. However, if it is important, no more than 7 spells of any kind may be placed on any one scroll. If so scribed, they may be separated by carefully cutting them apart with a silver scissors or silver blade.

READING SCROLLS

The very idea that scrolls may fade if you do not read them right away when you find them is utter nonsense and a cheap DM trick to force the issue of cursed scrolls at inopportune times. There is no reason why scrolls should fade thus. You will still need to employ Read Magic the first time you wish to learn what the scroll contains, but after that, you may know what is on the scroll without that spell. However, when trying to read - and thus cast - a scroll that contains a spell they cannot normally cast themselves, or a spell functioning at a level higher than they can normally attain, there is a chance of failure. The chance is equal to 5% per level difference between their current level and the level they would have to be to cast that spell at the level at which it is functioning. For example, a 1st level mage tries to cast a Fireball scroll - 3rd level spell normally castable by a 5th level mage. Assuming this is a 5 hit dice Fireball, the chance of failure would be (5th level - 1st level) x 5% = 20% chance of failure. A roll of 20 or less on 1d100 indicates failure. The DM may also then decide if there is a harmful effect, but I generally believe if a spell fails, that it is unlikely to do much of anything, for good or bad. However, it will uselessly disappear from the scroll, of course.

Now if the spell is functioning at a higher level - as a Fireball at 10 hit dice may be - then the failure rate would be (10-1)x5% = 45%. However, in this case the reading mage has the option to tone down the spell to its absolute minimum - for a 3rd level spell, this would be at 5th level use - and so only 5 dice of damage would be called forth when successful, and the failure rate would only be 20%. Or, he may try to cast it somewhere in between 5 and 10 dice with the appropriate failure percentage. Most discovered scrolls, unless there is reason to believe otherwise, function at their minimum level.

Protection scrolls may actually need special inks and have other special requirements, but this is left up to the DM.

On my world, there are specialized Jump Start spells available that mesh divine clerical and arcane mage spells together. Both mage and priest versions of these 3rd level spells exist, and they may be written by a mage/priest - at least 7/7 in level - for 250 GP or a mage or a priest for 500 GP. This is how they work: The clerical Jump Start spell can be read by a cleric - a priest - and it runs into a specially prepared mage spell lower down on the scroll - that a mage must have written there earlier - automatically releasing the pent up energy of that mage spell at the same failure rate as normal. For example, a mage scribes a 10 dice Fireball spell on a scroll. A priest scribes right above it, the 3rd level Jump Start Spell - and pays 500 GP in cost and takes 3 days to do this. As normal, he rolls his chance for failure, and if it fails, it ruins both spells, but if it succeeds, a priest can read that Jump Start Spell and effectively release the mage's Fireball spell. The chance of reading failure is calculated as if the priest were a 0th level mage. In this case, (10-0)x5% = 50% chance of failure, though he could opt to release only 5 dice of energy - the minimum for 3rd level spells - making the failure percentage only 25% - or somewhere in between as before. Both the Jump Start Spell and the Fireball spell fade from the scroll after use whether it worked or not. Similarly, a mage may scribe a 3rd level Jump Start Spell, for example, above a Cure Critical Wounds. It is so similar to the clerical Jump Start spell, further comment needn't be made. Naturally, these things are generally only made when a priest and a mage agree to work together, or they are one and the same person.

Scrolls may be used to add spells to one's spell book. To do this, the mage must first roll his chance of failure to read the scroll - if any, for if he is of sufficient level to cast that spell, this works automatically. If he succeeds or this is automatically a success, he must then roll his chance to know that spell on the intelligence table. If this also succeeds, he then spends N days of uninterrupted work transcribing the spell into his spell book where N is the level of the spell. The spell will then fade from the scroll and he can then use it out of his book as any normal spell in his spell book. To copy a spell from one book to another, just roll your chance to know it - unless you already know it, such as in going from your home book into your traveling book - and spend N days working on it - and some blood, naturally, for your ink.

Finally, for completeness on spells, spell books, and scrolls, I include the costs for spell research, though this is not really about the fabrication of magic items. Typical research of a spell is 100 to 1,000 GP/level of spell. (This simply reflects how much the DM doesn't want you to have that spell and also the DM's judgment on how difficult it would be to find the spell in your current location). This is for non-named standard spells since named spells must be found. Or double this price (200 to 2,000-GP/ spell level) if it is a brand new spell the PC is inventing. The same price applies to a priest who is praying for (inventing) a brand new kind of clerical spell. In that case, the money is for robes, vestments, sacrifices, incense and holy water or any other materials needed and/or paid consultations with other temple clerics.

If the mage is training up in level, they automatically get one spell of the highest level they can cast for free - actually it isn't free so much as it is already included in the cost of training, and the time required is also included there. They must still make their intelligence chance to learn the spell roll, and failure indicates they cannot learn that spell until they go up in level again or until their intelligence increases. The time is still spent and no new spell is gained in that time. However, if not part of their normal training while going up a level, they will have to spend extra time and extra money.

The time require for spell research varies greatly, so it is randomly determined since it depends on the caster, his mood and health, the research facilities, luck, and a number of other things. Make it (1d10 days) x level of the spell. For example: Jilerb tries to research Wall of Force, a 5th level spell. He rolls a 4 on the 1d10, and 4 x 5th level spell = 20 days. He could have gotten lucky and needed only 5 days, or unlucky and taken as many as 50 days. The character may tell the DM in advance how long he is willing to spend before the roll, and if the time runs out before he succeeds, he will just leave, not having made any discovery or obtained any new spell, but the DM will still charge them some money. To determine how much, take the ratio of the days spent to the days required - go ahead and roll to see how long it would have taken - then multiply this ratio by the cost of research and charge that character that percentage of the whole. The DM may allow them to later "pick up" where they left off, however, so this time and money need not be wasted if the DM is softhearted. But the mage must also pay for his cost of living in that time, so charge accordingly - at whatever daily rate the DM sets for the area and the character decides upon, but it should be better than average living conditions or the DM may impose further penalties to time or the character's chance to learn the spell due to poor living conditions.

THE MANUFACTURE OF POTIONS

The mage or priest may begin to manufacture potions when they achieve 7th level, but only if they employ an alchemist. Little will be written here about this as they actually did a fairly good job on potions, the main requirement being the time to make them, the money to run a lab and employ an alchemist, and the material components necessary to make a wide variety of potions. For the most part, I will deal with these things briefly just to fix the rates for my world and my economy.

The Lab: This should cost at least 2,500 GP.

The Alchemist: To keep this man (or women) in your employ - full time is really necessary - their annual salary is $100,000 or 1,000 GP/year.

Upkeep: Aside from the alchemist's salary, the upkeep for the lab and replacement lab wear and fuel will run 10% of the cost of the lab. For the minimum, this is 250 GP per year. If you purchase three Continual Heat sources - 1000 GP each for 3,000 GP - the upkeep becomes only 5% of the cost of the lab. At the minimum, 125 GP per year.

Multiples: If you pay 80% of all this again - that is 180% of the minimum - you double the capacity. If you pay a further 60% more - 240% - you treble it. If you pay 40% more - 280% - you quadruple it. Finally, if you pay 20% more - 300% - you quintuple it. Thus, for 7,500 GP for the lab, 3,000 GP for 5 alchemists, and 300 GP for replacement and fuel, you can have as many as five potions being concocted at the same time.

Remember that the main thing about alchemists and potions rest with the acquisition of rare ingredients in unusual circumstances. For example, unseen water collected at the back of the waterfall on the night of a full moon might actually have different properties from the water you could see from the front, or at any old time of day. A more complete listing can be found on my potion tables.

At name level, the mage or priest can do without the alchemists, though they will still need the lab - and upkeep cost only half of what it would with alchemists running around. The time to manufacture a specific potion varies, but as a general rule, assume one day/500 GP value or fraction thereof.

ENCHANTED CRYSTALS

Like potions or scrolls, the practice of using crystals - usually grown in various solutions by mages or alchemists - is quite common on Orlantia as well as many other worlds. These crystals may be enchanted with Enchant An Item and then imbued with one spell like function. When broken, the spell like function is "cast." Advantages to this method include: a.) they are hard to stop in combat, b.) they make nice traps, such as when the opening of a drawer, chest, or door may break the crystal, c.) they can be used as grenade like devices or placed on arrows and fired - though they must fail their save vs. crushing blow for crystal in order to work, but those failing to break may be gathered and used again - d.) they can be used to cast spells with very long casting times in one round - for after breaking them, the spell function occurs one round later at the top of the round no matter how long the spell normally takes to cast, and e.) they are easily stored. Disadvantages include: a.) they are easily broken and difficult to carry around, especially in combat, and breaking one accidentally may have exceedingly dire consequences - the DM may even have a field day with your character if they choose to carry such items around - b.) they are slow to make - slower than scrolls - c.) they are expensive - usually more expensive than potions, and - d.) they are easily dispelled - as easy as potions - using a Dispel Magic Spell.

The crystals must be nigh flawless, but the bigger the crystal, the higher the level spell can be contained within, though the chances of developing a flaw also increases with size. This is quite expensive, but characters of any class may usually employ them simply by breaking the crystal. Also, in addition to the base cost, other factors and costs - such as expensive material components - must be paid for as well. Finally, this takes time. The Enchant An Item alone takes days, but just growing the crystals takes 1 week/spell level. The following table summarizes these facts. The size reflects how high a level spell may be stored within such a crystal, the chance of a flaw is rolled after waiting the appropriate number of weeks, and the cost of a flawless crystal reflects all the time and materials necessary to obtain one of sufficient quality. The materials to make the solutions cost 1/100th of the crystal's cost if you wish to make them yourself, or you may just pay for the completed crystal at an alchemist shop.

NOTE: As this process needs supervision, only an experienced mage or alchemist may tend to it, and though only a few minutes/day are required thus, it effectively makes it very difficult to adventure while growing crystals - especially big ones - though a full time alchemist may be hired to do this for you - see the cost above for Alchemist shops.

Thus, for example, in order to obtain a crystal of high enough quality to place the 3rd level spell Fireball into it, one must pay 1/100th of 1,000 GP or 10 GP for materials - just for the attempt - grow the crystal for 3 weeks, then roll 11% or higher on 1d100. Or your character may just buy one for 1,000 GP ready made if they are in a major city where such things are sold. Next, they - or some NPC mage - cast Enchant An Item upon it, taking N days where N = level of the spell to be placed within the crystal.

NOTE: This is a special application of this spell, taking less time than normal, and done in quantity, it cost less. In this case, 500 GP plus 50 GP/level of the mage.

Finally, the NPC mage can charge it with any 3rd level spell, or any spell caster can charge it with any 3rd level spell, whether it is your PC mage using a Fireball, your PC Priest using a Cure Disease, or any spell caster using any other 3rd level spell. Any material components for these spells are still paid for and consumed while charging the crystal, but they must be charged within a day of being enchanted. One nice thing about such devices is they may carry healing spells, as the consequences of "accidentally" being healed are not too dire, and these devices are hard to stop and rather quick - though breaking such a crystal takes about half of one round's action - thus preventing one attack or half your normal movement.

Naturally, sometimes this method is the best method to obtain the desired results, but other times there ARE easier and less expensive ways to obtain similar results, so check out your options and determine if a scroll or potion or even another spell may be a better way to go.

ENCHANT AN ITEM

This spell is exceedingly complex the way it is written, and kind of confusing. Furthermore, with few examples as to its actual application, one can't help but feel a bit bewildered. Thus, I have altered it, summarized it, shortened it, or whatever, and will give a few detailed examples as to how it may be used. I will also take my characteristic stab at the book and the official word and tell you why I find it unpalatable. Hopefully, you will agree, but if not, I'm sure you have your reasons, too.

Firstly, this 6th level spell can only be cast by a 12th level wizard, so the manufacture of less ephemeral - or more permanent - magic items will not even be a big consideration for those characters less than 12th level - unless they hire an NPC to do it, and the DM can just fudge it then, though he should have some consistent idea of what the magic item might cost.

The first requirement of the spell is simple and straightforward, though it may take imagination. The item to be enchanted must be of 'top quality,' and its price should reflect that fact. But price can consider many things. Not only rarity of substance - mithral, platinum, gold, etc., or top quality ivory, teak, diamond, ruby, sapphires, emeralds, etc., silk, high thread count, or whatever - or difficulty in the material's acquisition - earth from below Mt. Weathertop, iron from the elemental plane of earth, a tree limb from atop the world's highest peak, a pearl from the deepest ocean, materials gathered from rare and exotic creatures that must be found and convinced to give them and/or fought and defeated, or even jade from the wastelands of Tor - an exceedingly long voyage - if the item is hard to get, it is part of its value - and may often need to be quested for. Finally, craftsmanship of the highest caliber, perhaps racial in nature - dwarven, elven, draconic, titanic, etc. All of this could and should reflect the intended purpose of the finished item. And this is just the beginning. Each item may require several components, each rare and valuable. Also, they may require special placement, rituals, etc., at specific times and locations, all of which will make them harder to accomplish and rarer. Remember that if it is easy, there should be a lot of them made, but if it is hard then the item may virtually be unique.

Surprisingly, one of the nice things about Enchant An Item is that it makes charged items quite easily and in a rather simple manner. Take the top quality item, enchant it - 2+1d8 days - make your save vs. spell - you have no magical items to use for bonuses since they must not interfere with the enchantment process - and if that fails, cast the spell again. If it succeeds, start putting the spell functions you desire on the item and keep doing it until you've had enough. Each function will take 2d4 hours and you can only work 10 hours/day, but this will just tell you how long you spend doing this, so it's not too confusing. The DM must, however, keep track of each spell function you dump into the item and the DM will roll your save vs. spell to see if it worked. This information is hidden from the character, though a subsequent Identify spell would probably reveal these things. For each function that made its save, the item can cast that function ONCE and never again - though you can put multiple or duplicate spells on the item if you wish. Naturally, each time the mage cast a spell like Identify, or leaves to go adventuring, they will have to cast Enchant An Item again. I think, as long as they keep the item safely away from other magic and in a safe pace, the mage should be allowed to do this in a more piecemeal fashion since this makes game considerations easier and helps out all players - to do otherwise is practically tantamount to saying PCs aren't allowed to make magic items, and that's bogus for a good game. However, for every break, there is that extra 2 + 1d8 days added, and this can really add up, so it is to their advantage to take as few breaks as possible. No other limits need be placed upon them when this time constraint is enough.

EXAMPLE 1: Creating a Belt Buckle of Dimension Door. Belt buckles are normally cheap, but not this one. The DM required it be made of platinum, ornately designed, and Blessed while on the astral plane - where he claims Dimension Door actually operates. Total cost: 5,000 GP. And that's just for starters. Now, the item is enchanted with Enchant An Item. 2+1d8 days later, roll his save vs. spell. If he fails, he simply spends another 2 +1d8 days and tries again. If he succeeds, he begins to cast Dimension Doors into the buckle. Each time he does this, it takes 2d4 hours/level of the spell function, an average of 5 hours/level or 20 hours or two days/Dimension Door. The DM may limit him to a few charges, or just the maximum his brain will hold at his current level - one 'brain set,' as I call it - or he may let him go wild and stay there, putting them on until he tires of it. Personally, I think limits are a must. So, if he wished more charges than his brain could currently hold, I'd make him Enchant An Item again - costing an additional 2+1d8 days, the save, etc., and only then may he continue. Furthermore, I'd also make him include an extra 1000 GP gem on the buckle for each 'brain set' beyond the first. However the DM limits it, this item is now complete. Let us say, for example, he cast only 4 Dimension Door spells into it - one brain set at 12th level, and on the average this takes 14.5 days for this example. The DM rolls save vs. spell for the character 4 separate times. Each one that makes it, charges the buckle. We will further assume only three out of four made it. Thus, the Belt Buckle of Dimension Door has three charges in it. It is NOT rechargeable, and when the last charged is used up, the belt buckle crumbles into valueless dust. Total cost: 5,000 GP for buckle and 15 days of effort - from the point when he started to enchant it. What would he sell this for? Well, let us say, considering no permanent harm or expense from unusual material components, about twice the buckle's value plus 25 GP/level/day or 10,000 GP + 4,500 GP. (25x (12 levels of spells) x 15(days)) = 4,500, and double the 5 K GP = 10,000 GP. Thus, 14,500 GP. Expensive little thing, isn't it?

This example shows why, though it can be done, it is a shame to put all that effort into a nice magic item and not go the way of the Permanency. Thus, the next example.

EXAMPLE 2: All is as before in example 1, but now we plan to put a Permanency spell upon our belt buckle. We will still use multiple Dimension Doors. The actual number that work will indicate how many times that item can be used in a single day - and never more than once/round. Unfortunately, the book suggests a linear approach, thus making it only 1% harder to make a +5 sword than it would be to make a +4 sword. I really HATE that suggestion, and I think it lame and ill conceived. Thus, here, the more identical functions you pile on it, the more likely the whole thing will fail. But not all functions are identical and therefore do not need to pile on top of each other. Thus, a Dimension Door function and a +1 Protection function wouldn't interfere with each other, but two Dimension Doors might, so that is harder. However, identical functions only require one Permanency for them all, but different functions require a separate Permanency for each separate function, so there are ups and downs to this process. For this Belt Buckle, only one Permanency will be needed, but each Dimension Door exponentially increases the chance of failure.

I use the following as a rough guide - and though not actually exponential, it isn't linear, and that helps. The first function has a 5% failure percentage, the second IDENTICAL function has a 20%, the third is at 40%, the fourth is at 65%, and the fifth is at 95%. Thus, for example, it would be 30% harder to make a +5 sword than to make a +4 sword - as the fifth identical Enchant Weapon spell takes the failure from 65% to 95%. I like this better. Otherwise, only a great fool would make a +1 sword when, according to the book, it would only be 4% harder to make a +5 sword. Get real! Though each separate function should add something to the difficulty, so perhaps the additional 1% penalty/function is a good idea as well, but not in and of itself. This would make the buckle's 3 Dimension Doors go from 5% for one, 20% for two, 40% for three, plus 3% more for three functions, a total of a 43% chance of failure when Permanency is cast upon this item. This is why multiple spells/day within one item makes it more rare and more expensive, and why one would tend to make a lot more items with only one or two spells in it, rather than a handful of the same spell.

To reiterate. Since three Dimension Doors are on it and made their saves vs. spells, it went from 5%, to 20%, to 40% failure, and three functions gave it all a 43% chance of failure. This means the DM will roll for the Permanency - only one is required since all the functions are identical here. First, he rolls to see if the mage lost a point of constitution - a 5% change for each Permanency spell, but there is only one here in this example. Luckily, he didn't lose constitution this time. Next, he rolls 1d100. If he rolls 44% or higher, the Belt Buckle Of Dimension Door is a wonderful magic item that works three times a day. If he rolls 43% or less, well, let's talk about that.

The book suggests failure would make a cursed item, something that does the opposite of what was intended. They further insult our intelligence by throwing in yet another artificial rule to prevent a clever player from trying to make a cursed item - apparently much easier or whatever - failing, and getting an opposite results and one hell of a nice magic item. Quite frankly, this is just another stupid idea. When items fail in their design, more often than not, what they end up with is an item that is a useless pile of garbage or perhaps one that doesn't work as well as they had hoped. This is, then, what I have failure do on my world. The item is either destroyed outright or functions sporadically and/or less than expected. For example, if the Permanency failed, the belt buckle may still work, but only twice a day if his roll was off by a single percentage point, only once per day if the roll was off by less than 10%, and if off by less than 50%, it may just be like example 1, a charged item that will crumble to dust after its third use. If failure were by more than 50%, the item would instantly crumble into valueless dust. OR, the DM may make it work once/day, but only have a 50% chance of working. If the character tried to use it and rolled 50% or less, the Dimension Door would take him to his intended location - within the limitations of the spell, naturally - but if he rolled 51% or higher, he'd stay where he was and he would have used up his round's action. There are so many things the DM could do, but to make a cursed item that COINCIDENTALLY does the EXACT opposite of what you had intended, or to suggest the item is clever and knows when you are trying to fool it so you can't "pretend" to make a cursed item when your real intent is to make something good, is all rather silly and has no place in my game.

EXAMPLE 3: We will next try to construct a limited Staff of Power. Wow! By this process, the SOP is limited to casting each spell only once per day instead of as often as the character desires in exchange for charges. For a full SOP, see below. Still, this is a hard item to make, even in limited form, and yet this may not be as hard as it first looks. First, the quality item, and considering what we are trying to make, we had better get a nice piece of wood rather than some ordinary stick. The DM may have many exotic trees - perhaps even intelligent ones, like an Ent who died by lightning, part of Yggdrassil or its avatar - yes, it could have a reflection somewhere, a shadow existence - or something really nifty and hard to obtain. Now its outside needs to have artistic carvings of the highest craftsmanship along its length. It need be planted in a druidic stone ring on the first day of spring and have the sun's illumination bath it. Next, he may require its core be carefully drilled out and a metal rod of mithral be inserted, and the ends be shod in the valuable metal. Staff, 25,000 GP, one pound of mithral, 100,000 GP. Total cost: 125,000 GP, and we're just getting started. This item is so complex and it may take many Enchant An Item spells to complete it, and lots and lots of time. Let us say, for example, one such spell for every two functions, and as there are 10 functions, this would be 5 spells. Thus, 10 +5d8 days just for that. That's an average of 32.5 days from the first day of spring. Now, each spell, in turn, need be placed on the item. Continual Light, Lightning Bolt, Darkness 5' R, Ray of Enfeeblement, Levitate, Cone of Cold, Shield 5' R, Major Globe of Invulnerability, Paralyzation, and Protection - that AC advantage function thing, and this limited form SOP may have that only work once/day instead of continuously, but it may work for an hour or more once activated. Since none of these spells are identical functions, they do not tend to overlap and do not therefore make it significantly harder. Yet, they will add 10% (or more) to the failure percentage since there are 10 different functions. Next, each of these ten functions requires a separate Permanency spell. At 5% chance/spell - I won't explain the mathematics to you - this makes it nearly 40% likely the mage will lose some constitution - at least one point, possibly more. This may involve a wish to recover it, so that sort of gets tossed into the cost factor if he's making this item for someone else. But if making it for himself, that's just the price of success, and he hasn't even succeeded yet. Fortunately, with no over lapping identical functions, it may easily succeed. The DM debates the merits, doesn't like the idea of such a powerful item in his world and will not allow it to pass so easily, and tacks on, instead of a 1%/function failure, a 5%/function, thus making the item only 50% likely to succeed - as so much power in such a tiny space has to overlap in some fashion, he thinks. Furthermore, each function had to make save vs. spell so may or may not be there. It is possible to stop, Identify it, confirm each function, then enchant the item again, but each time you do this it will add at least another 2 +1d8 days. However, since the point is to make this item, let us assume they did just that, adding another 20 + 10d8 days or, on average, 65 more days for a total of nearly 100 days.

Of course, the DM may do things differently, stating that the rechargeable nature of the Staff requires a special spell you need research, or perhaps it just adds a multiple similar function and that is why the 50% chance of failure. As this is fantasy and not an exact science, even though certain realistic and scientific looking calculations can be thrown at it for the sake of realism and game balance, in the end we are left with the same problem the authors recognized. It will be up to the DM, and if the DM even cares about such things, he'll want to make his own rules or ones he can agree with. Suffice it to say that making such a complex item may take more thought than I have given it here. Yet, we can begin to learn what is involved in such constructions. Also, the Retributive Strike is NOT a planned function, but a consequence of breaking the item thus, considering its construction. And finally, the standard SOP can use each spell as often as desired, or in exchange for a charge, so the standard SOP must incorporate extra materials, like mana crystals, or extra higher non-standard spells (see below) and perhaps even use a full powered Wish spell to overcome those limitations and bypass them, allowing some functions to be continuous, like the +2 to AC, or cost a charge, no matter how many times a day one desires to cast the same spell function. All this, of course, adds a great deal to the cost of a standard SOP, so it's pretty unlikely a PC will ever take the time or have the money or materials to do all that. That is why items of such power are usually only found in the game when awarded by the DM. I only mention this so one might understand how such an item could be made - not to actually suggest a PC should make the attempt.

As you might guess, magic items as complex as that one are better found in the game - if found at all - rather than manufactured by PCs. DMs should allow the PCs to make items, but not necessarily items of vast power. Small items, single use but rechargeable items, etc. are well within the player character's purview, but items like a Staff of Power, may not be, and might best be left up to the DM to decide when, or if, such power comes into his game. Of course, no rule should really prevent the PC from trying this, but the time and economic constraints would tend to do so. His fellow party members are not likely to be willing to sit around idle for a hundred days or more, thus effectively putting him out of the game until the others have adventured and/or trained for 100 days. And while a player might try to force them to wait, or use OOC pressure - i.e. "The game's no fun without me, so you WILL wait!" - the DM should stop any such OOC manipulative attempts by deliberately failing their OOC plans and making all such items fail - serves him right for trying that. Only if there is a bona fide IC reason for the others to wish to wait should normal dice rolls be made.

NOTE: One may soon notice that often times the cost to manufacture a standard magic item will be considerably more than the cost the DM may charge for the item if it were ever available for sale in a magic shop, or the value placed on it for sale or trade by various NPCs should you happen upon them and they wished to sell or trade an item. But how can this be? The simple reason is most magic may last centuries, millennia, or more. Once made, a Staff of Power, for example, will happily lay around in some forgotten tomb or cavern for thousands of years and not be degraded or harmed in the least. Magic is almost eternal like that; self-renewing, self-sharpening, self-repairing, and virtually immune to the normal wear from the elements. So often the current owners didn't actually have to pay for the cost to manufacture the item, but much less - maybe they even just found it - so its worth to them is whatever they can get for it, from a drink of water in a vast desert to your 500,000 GP castle you'd happily trade for the Staff of Power. Prices are like that. It's only worth what it's worth to you, or what you can afford to pay, or what somebody is able to get for it - and no more, really, so what it may have cost to make many centuries ago often doesn't enter into those negotiations. Furthermore, this is another reasonable and realistic reason why most PCs would rather adventure for whatever items they can find rather than try to manufacture them - for at least the very powerful and very expensive ones. And that's probably a good thing, since honestly, the DM should be one who decides when and if such a powerful item will enter their campaign, and not some PC with way too much time of their hands.

EXAMPLE 4: Spell-storing Devices. These, I think, are rather easily made, or at least are straightforward, even if expensive. They involve writing a scroll of the spells you wish to store in the device, the manufacture of the QUALITY device, and a simple way to merge the two. Limited Wish may do it for low powered devices, or perhaps Alter Reality, Divine Intervention, or Wish may be required and are typical examples of how this may be done. Enchant an Item may still be employed, and Permanency may yet be needed. However, this is about all. If the device is simple and command word activated - as mental activation adds another spell to be researched, another step, and another Permanency as well as a greater chance the whole thing will fail - then the roll is probably good for success, perhaps as high as 95% - no higher, since 96%+ should always fail. Thus, we can make a gauntlet to hold Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Strength, and Haste Spells, for example. After a spell is used, the gauntlet has to have the used spell cast directly into it before that function will function again, and this will typically function at the level of the person who charged it. Such items are rather nice, straightforward, but perhaps expensive. Even if Enchant An Item and Permanency are not required, if the price of a Wish is included, we are talking about 160,000 GP just for the Wish. Most likely, though, we only need Limited Wish for such a simple one or two spell device - though Wish may be needed beyond two spells - and Limited Wish costs about 60 to 75 K GP.

If Enchant An Item and Permanency are used, we may not need the Wish. A spell function alone can do all that, as in example 1, but would require several Permanency spells and no scroll. Both ways may be employed, and each has their own advantages and disadvantages.

EXAMPLE 5: Contingent Devices. These items must be worn and will activate upon a certain set of circumstances. A Ring of Feather Falling, for example, is such a device. It can probably be made with an Enchant An Item, Feather Fall, and Contingency Spell, and Two Permanency spells. Quality ring, 5,000 GP, the Enchant An Item and Permanency together run about 10 K GP. To make this item might run you about 25,000 GP since it may require two Enchant An Items and two Permanency spells. But if you were lucky and found it in a magic shop, it might only cost 14 to 19 K GP since someone else, in times past, have already paid this burdensome cost - or perhaps the mage who made it paid the costs, but those would have been in time, effort, and material components which include aging, constitution loss, and other considerations.

EXAMPLE 6: Loop Spells. These are devices that have been cleverly designed to work with one function with repeated energy being dumped through it when summoned. A Chime of Opening is an example. A simple function, similar to the Knock spell, it is built in a quality mithral or platinum chime, but the device is not repeatedly charged with Knock after Knock after Knock, but with Energy Gate to drive the spell. Only certain spells may work this way - I suppose, yes, as a matter of game balance - and your DM will know which ones. These devices never have more than one function. They are never rechargeable. When the last charge is expended, the item crumbles into useless dust. Essentially, however, to make such a device one need only cast Enchant An Item, Knock, Energy Gate - or something like that - and Pattern Lock. Sure, this is nonstandard stuff and I have no intention of writing these spells up, but as a means to circumnavigate the previous rules with things the DM feels do not endanger game balance, it is a way to do it with a simple, relatively harmless device. The idea behind it is that the device doesn't contain the energy - all those charges - but a way to summon it or gate it in. I'd like to think some property can be enchanted (Pattern Lock) that imbues the device with an intrinsic quality - a natural resonance with the universe - to open a very small gate and bleed in a little energy from the universe into the device, thus powering its function. Of course, every time you do this, the pattern weakens until it essentially crumbles into dust. So it really doesn't contain charges so much as one spell that decays with use. At any rate, since only the DM will be able to decide which spells may work this way, it is probably not all that useful to the player except as an example of a one function, non-rechargeable, "charged" device. Such devices, however, usually may be employed by anyone of any class, since the item itself contains all it needs to function, and does not require an active knowledge of the arcane arts to manipulate at the time of its use. Most single function, non-rechargeable items that are not class specific may be of this type.

EXAMPLE 7: Rechargeable Items. These items have charges and may be recharged. A Wand of Illumination, a Staff of Power, and many other rods, staves, or wands are excellent examples of these devices. These may be similar to example 6 (loop spells) except a.) they may have several, though similar, functions, and b.) the can be recharged. However, recharging them essentially is like making the item all over again with the exception of making the quality item, and the Permanency spells. Thus, the Pattern Lock may have to be recreated each time, and this will involve Enchant An Item, the Spell functions, the Energy Gate, and the Reserve Power Capacitor. Yep, more nonstandard stuff. Fortunately, these spells may be taken as known, along with the Charge Spell - of a particular level - or the DM may require you acquire them and put them in your book if YOU wish to recharge the item. Or, he must just set a price for the mage guild or a temple to do it for you or something like that. Now, to recharge your rechargeable item, you need to cast Enchant An Item again, cast several spells, and then create a pocket universe to carry the power apart from the item and where the item may actually tap into this battery. This is where the charges are dumped. Unlike the loop spells that get their power from the universe at large, without being one of those lucky spells that will work that way, these spell functions need to have special access to prepared and ready power, yet since the power is apart from the actual item, the build up is not on the Prime Material Plane and may forgo the awful exponential nature of IDENTICAL functions. Unfortunately, to do this, most functions have to be derived from a similar power source and thus have similar functions. This is why the Wand of Fire, for example, is all fire type stuff and no cold spell can also be part of it.

So, to recharge a rechargeable item will take Enchant An Item - 2+1d8 days - another day for the specialty spells, and then however long it takes you to cast the Charge spells of the appropriate levels enough times to get the charges you desire. Since no Permanency is required, aside from the time, this will cost about 500 GP plus 250 GP/charge/level. For example, to charge a Wand of Fire the DM suggests a third level Charge spell is needed, and that cost 500 +250 x 3 = 500 + 750 GP/charge. He may go lower or higher, depending on game balance for that particular device, but the idea is you can get your items recharged at a fixed rate by some NPC who uses this process, as long as you can go without the item for a few days. If you still wish to do it yourself, it will take 3 + 1d8 days plus however long it takes you to cast N 3rd level spells where N is the number of charges you wish to put into the device - remember, you work only 10 hours/day.

NOTE: The item probably has limits to how many charges it may hold, like staves-25, rods-50, and wands-100. However, the books suggest the item must make save vs. spell each time you enchant it thus, else it be utterly destroyed. I think that's unnecessarily harsh. I prefer to have it make save and if it fails, to have to enchant it again - adding another 1+2 +1d8 days to the time. This is nasty enough. If the DM wishes to come down on you harder than that, he should never have given you that device, or better yet, made it non-rechargeable in the first place. I'd certainly go that way before I discouraged the spell casters with the threat of total destruction of their cherished items.

NOTE: DMs are encouraged to ignore the book's parameters, as well, if they wish to limit - or increase - an item's power and usefulness. For example, if the book says an item IS rechargeable, but the DM doesn't want to give it that much power, he or she should feel free to make in a non-rechargeable item - though they should point that out to the player then and there so as to avoid confusion later. Similarly, if it isn't too powerful in the DM's opinion, a non-rechargeable item may be made rechargeable.

Remember that just because the book says an item is rechargeable, it need not be so, since for some economic reason or time constraint, someone may have, in the past, made the item the cheap and dirty way to save time or money. Thus, a normally rechargeable item could easily be non-rechargeable. Also, the incredible considerations to make a quality item may be too expensive or time consuming, so one may easily forgo them, making an item of inferior quality that will not be able to withstand a more permanent enchantment or carry as many charges, so anything the DM wants to use to curtail that sort of power is far better than utter destruction of items from simply charging them. As another consideration, perhaps make it so each time they charge such an item, the device degrades and will hold, at most, one charge less than last time. This will prevent them from both recharging their items too frequently - if you feel time and money are insufficient constraints - and keep them from forever relying on the power of a magic item rather than their own intrinsic powers.

EXAMPLE 8: Self-Charging Items. These items are limited to how often they may be used in a given period of time. They are different from the above items in that they employ mana crystals instead of some of the nonstandard spells of which I speak. These self-charging crystals collect energy at a fixed rate until filled to capacity. The item then draws their power from these and may use all of it or part of it, and it will take time to recharge. Thus, the mana crystal replaces the Reserve Power Capacitor spell. Other than that, it will need things similar to example 7. A sword that cast Light three times a day is a fine example of this. The Light is enchanted in, made Permanent, and hooked to the mana crystal. That's all. Each separate function would need a separate crystal - Light needs one, but if it also cast Darkness it would need a second crystal, etc. - and these things are not easy to come by as they are supposedly the remnants of drops of blood fallen from gods or their avatars on the prime material plane during some epic battle of yore.

EXAMPLE 9: Creature mimics. These mimic special powers of certain creatures. For example, the Cloak Of Displacement. Essentially, this uses some of the same techniques but as a starting point, employs parts of the actual creatures and their natural abilities. The hides of displacer beasts, in this instance, need be collected to make the cloak, and further enchantments for the +2 protection proceed similarly to items in the above examples. Other consideration may come into play. Ask your DM, but pay his NPCs for information.

Normally, researching a spell to do what you want it to do, and then incorporating that spell into a device can handle many things. This may require your character spend additional time in the libraries and away from the field and adventuring, but as long as you don't do it too often, one or two items unique for your character can give you something memorable while still giving your character an opportunity to adventure.

EXAMPLE 10: Continuous Items. These items are always working. A +3 Long Sword, +2 Platemail, a +1 Ring of Protection, Bracers of Defense, etc. They mimic spell functions that are already continuous and need only a constant source of power. Chances are, they channel energy from the positive material plane, through various other planes to get special effects, eventually through the prime material plane - or whatever plane the item is intended for - through the actual item, and then out to the negative material plane via a few more intervening planes. This mana circuit constantly powers the item. A Dispel Magic Spell temporarily breaks this mana circuit, while an Anti Magic Shell would similarly do so while the item remains within the field.

A Continuous Item requires those minor Energy Gate spells, or just spells that already have those built into them, like Enchant Weapon, Continual Light, or similar continuous spells. Naturally, this starts with a quality item, then Enchant An Item, the spell functions - which just happen to be continuous - and Permanency. For example, to make a +5 sword we need a high quality sword - exceptional dwarven craftsmanship, perhaps, valuable metals - mithral or runic metals - purification rituals, blessings, etc., etc. The DM will tell you what all that might cost if your character pays consultation fees or does some research on the matter. Then, Enchant An Item is cast, etc. Enchant Weapon is cast upon it five times, and the failure percentage comes under that exponential rule of IDENTICAL functions, perhaps having a 95% chance of failure! For actual swords and similar items, I have made a special table and some special rules and reproduce them for you below.

NOTE: One effect of the enchantment process used to make magic items will transform normally soft metals like mithral, as well as platinum, gold, and silver, into unusually hard and strong metals. Also, the stronger the magic, the more multi-phasic the enchanted metal becomes. If the magic is dense enough, part of the existence of the item will be on other planes in addition to the prime material plane. Hence, magical items sometimes appear to be lighter and stronger than the metals from which they are constructed. Furthermore, this multi-phasic existence tends to give all metals a silvery, steel-like color no matter from what metals they are constructed. This is a side effect of the enchantment process for swords, armor, and other similarly "plus" protective devices, but is usually not a property of the enchantment process for rings, jewelry, and other similar items. Thus, even a gold sword would appear to be made of steel. Magic adheres to mithral better than any other metal, and this property, as well as the others mentioned, is why mithral magic weapons and armor are the best, as well as the most expensive in existence. The reason why the various metals in magic weapons look like steel is because the aura reflects and/or radiates that color while absorbing others. Naturally, most magic items of mithral are only coated or layered in the metal, or perhaps bonded to a lesser metal or folded into the metal using layers - like along the hard edge of a steel sword in a katana - rather than items of pure mithral. Or sometimes they are just alloyed with the mithral, which also makes a decent lattice structure and numerous magical bonding sites.

NOTE: The multi-phasic existence of many of these items also explains anomalies in what one would normally expect along the lines of weight, mass, momentum, impulse, and other physical factors, all of which make such items behave, well. . . unnaturally, almost like magic. Come to think of it. . . it is magic. Thus, magic weapons and armor and shields often defy common sense encumbrance rules, absorb and deflect energy from blows - dissipating it into the ether, or wherever - transmitting additional impetus and hitting harder or more accurately, or in short, doing all sorts of things that defy the normal 'rules' of the physical laws of time and space that one might normally expect from mundane weapons.

Enchantment success rates given below are for nominal conditions. Extraordinarily good conditions and/or materials and workmanship will improve the chance of success, just as poor workmanship and/or materials will lessen it. If the creator is 21st level or higher, add 5%, and if 17th level or lower, subtract 5%.

The first column is the "PLUS" of the item you are trying to make. The second column (N to N+1) is the % chance of success of going from a +N item to a +(N+1) item. For example, trying to further enchant a +3 sword to +4 sword has a 35% chance of success - and a 65% chance of destroying the item. The next column - going from 0 to +N - is the overall % chance from making an item from scratch and enchanting it all the way to +N. For example, going from +0 to +4 in one go has a 15.96% overall chance to succeed - and an 84.04% chance of failure. Naturally, this is still done in stages, so only the second column is really used with multiple rolls, one roll at each stage of enchantment, but the third column will tell you what chances you can expect overall before you start such an undertaking.

As you can see, less than 1% of all attempts to make a +5 item from scratch will succeed, and that's only 1 out of 125, so 124 people have paid the price for failure in centuries past. Thankfully, these items tend to last centuries, or longer - isn't magic nice?

Though not strictly true, it is generally accepted that only items of mithral could ever be enchanted past +5 - though runic metals are a possibility) - and items of platinum or better are needed to make +4 items, gold or better for +3 items, electrum or silver for +2 items, and many +1 items are typically made of iron or steel.

• M = Mithral
• P = Platinum
• G = Gold
• E = Electrum
• S = Silver
• C = Copper
• I = Iron or Steel.

Generally, 3/10ths of the weight of the item must be of its primary metal, 2/10ths of the next lesser metal, and 1/10th of the next lesser metal. The rest is probably iron or steel and of excellent workmanship - perhaps dwarven or elven.

If the most valuable metal in the sword is a capital letter, then add 5% for each CAPITAL letter to the RIGHT of that letter. If the primary metal is lower case, then subtract 5% for EACH letter - Capital or otherwise - to the LEFT of it.

EXAMPLES: We wish to make a +3 sword from a +2 sword. If it was made out of mithral, then there are three capital letters to the right of M, and this will add 15% to the 60%, so the chance would be 75%. 70% for a creator of less than 18th level, but 80% for a creator higher than 20th level. As you can see, mithral takes magic better. Now, if this sword had been made, instead, out of gold - gold being its primary metal - then only 5% would be added to the 60% as only one capital letter is to the right of the "G" in the +3 row. If the primary metal were steel or iron, then the inferior materials would cause a penalty of 6 x 5% or 30%, reducing the 60% to only a 30% chance of success, as there are 6 letters to the left of the "i" in the +3 row. This penalty is the price for making magic items out of inferior metals, but sometimes, they do it anyway to save on money. True, further enchantments may be much harder, but then, they are concerned with the here and now and what they can afford at the moment. The DM will ONLY tell you what your item is made out of if you hire a mage or priest - probably for 100 GP or so - to determine its composition.

Should one roll higher than the chance of success, the item is destroyed, though half its metal can be salvaged. For example, take a long sword, which weighs about 4 lbs. If made of out Gold as its primary metal, this means 3/10ths of 4 lbs. is gold, 2/10ths is electrum, and 1/10th is copper. The other 4/10ths is probably iron/steel. This means this sword had 1.2 lbs. gold, 0.8 lbs. electrum, 0.4 lbs. copper, and 1.6 lbs. of iron in it. But, failure yields only half of this in recovery, so you get back 0.6 lbs. gold, 0.4 lbs. electrum, 0.2 lbs. copper, and 0.8 lbs. of iron.

Here are the coin weights, in case you're interested.

Most +1 or +2 items are made of steel. If an item is made of lesser material, it may not even be possible to further enchant it - while realistically expecting it to work. Before any attempt is made to further enchant an item, the PC should have a mage or priest - depending on the item - confirm its makeup. As most metals end up looking like steel when enchanted, simple tests - density, hardness, color, etc. - are insufficient to ascertain it chemical composition.

PRIESTS MAKING MAGIC ITEMS

Priests, unlike mages, do not make magic items in this fashion, but for game balance reasons, they do it thus: They will still quest for and manufacture items of highest quality - and highest price, as it turns out. Then they will spend a similar amount of time in prayer, meditation, or even actively questing for the deity - perhaps something directly related to the item requested - as the mage typically may spend making something similar. Finally, additional costs are dumped on them in the form of sacrifices to their deity. Thus, for roughly the same amount of time, the same amount of money, and the same chance of success, their deity will make the requested item for them. The DM may increase or decrease this success rate depending on how pious the cleric has been recently. If their roll is successful, the item or items appear in place of the sacrifices. If the roll fails, the deity will give them something else - a lot less, but something - OR they will give them nothing. In any event, the sacrificed items will be taken.

FINAL THOUGHTS

And so I come to the end of this little article, perhaps not doing as well as I had hoped, but I think somewhat better than the DMG and PHB did. Of course, the wisdom of knowing the DM will make his or her own stuff was probably not really why they failed to include detailed examples so much as they wanted to save time and room in a rather limited book, I think, or they didn't want the headaches of working out a decent system that would ultimately be appreciate by a relatively small percentage of players. I had some extra room here, however, so I hope you enjoyed my use of it.

If you have any questions, email me. I'll try to explain in greater detail what the hell I was talking about and why. Of course, I'll probably update this paper a lot as time goes by or I get some decent feedback, but that, too, will come later. For now, enjoy it as you may.

Email Jim Your Comments (Send Praise, Critique, Complaints, Suggestions, Ideas, Corrections, or Submissions).

© February of 2000
by
James L.R. Beach
Waterville, MN 56096