| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Metafictional06-26-07, 07:45 AM | My game, strangely enough, features two Rogues. They work fairly well together, but recently an argument came up about the Use Magic Device Skill. Rogue #1: Man, next level I'm going to so take Skill Mastery for UMD! That's going to rock. (Note: This is before I came to the forums to check on whether that's a legal application of Skill Mastery. It's not, sadly.). Rogue #2: I was wondering where you were wasting all your Skill points. Rogue #1: What do you mean, wasting? UMD is like, the best skill ever! Rogue #2: Pfft. Ok, the DC's are insanely high, to the point even you are wishing you could take 10 on them. And how often have you actually used the skill? Big deal, you can use a wand or a scroll or something. I don't know that you've noticed this, but we already have characters who can use the wands and scrolls we find just fine. In fact, for us to have wands or scrolls they could use is hoarding treasure that should be theirs. Sorcerer: I heard that! Me, the DM: Now hang on a second. UMD is good for two reasons. Well make that three. 1, it allows another character to use one of the Cleric's scrolls to cast a healing spell if the Cleric goes down, or a similar dire circumstance... Cleric: are you kidding? If I go down, these guys are FUBAR'd. Rogue #2: Exactly. DM: Ahem. I suppose you're forgetting about that Reincarnate Scroll? Rogue #1: Yeah! If I hadn't had that, we'd have lost the Barbarian for sure! Barbarian (our only female player): I guess that's true, although I'm still not so keen on being reincarnated as a Halfling. DM: Well, it could have been worse. Besides, haven't you said it's made your character better? Barbarian: Oh don't get me wrong, I'm cool with it, and it's funny as hell that our tank is a little girl. Still, I do miss getting reach with Enlarge. Sorcerer: Yeah, I had to change out that spell, you were the only person who was getting much use out of it, especially now that Clericzilla over there has Righteous Might. Cleric: Hey! I used that one time! We all talked about this when I made my character, I'm still primary healer. Rogue #2: You kind of have to be, since you're a Cloistered Cleric. Cleric: Yeah, unless I use Divine Power...hehehe. Anyways, that Reincarnate was bogus. You only threw it out there because he had UMD. If he didn't, we'd have found a Raise scroll, I'd have used it, and we'd still have a Half-Elf Barbarian. About the best thing that could have happened out of that is we'd have gotten a Bugbear; Half-Elf wasn't the best choice, but losing a level to become a Halfling isn't much better. Barbarian: Oh so you like hairy girls? DM: Ok guys, enough... l wasn't done. The next good thing is that you can use Scribe Scroll and Craft Wand to spread out your spell lists. It's hard to cast more than one spell a turn, if the Rogue can fire one off at the start of combat... Rogue #2: Instead of, you know, helping me get in an assassination attempt by sneaking up on people. DM, glaring at Rogue #2's player: ...it can be quite handy. And you don't always get a chance to Sneak Attack people. Rogue #2: Well of course not, since you always use enemies with high Spot and Listen, or stupid stuff like Tremorsense. And let's not talk about the Constructs or Undead... Rogue #1: You have a point there. But that wand of Scorching Ray helped us fight those mummies. Sorcerer: It was handy, but I get more Rays than you do. Plus I have Fireball and Wall of Fire. You're actually better off saving that Wand for the things you can Sneak Attack, more damage. DM, a little huffy: I think I distinctly remember the Cleric telling you guys what to expect in these ruins when he made that Knowledge check. Don't blame me for the monster choices. And finally, the last reason, is to give your character more versatility. It's kind of nice having a last-ditch spell effect, like a Teleport or an Invisibility you can use yourself, isn't it? Rogue #1: I think so. Rogue #2: Waste of time. I'd rather save up some cash and get a Helm of Teleportation I can use more than once. Besides, all that's good for is helping me do solo actions. You yourself said you wanted us to be a team, so I felt not wasting points on UMD would let me focus on my own job, and let the spellcasters focus on theirs. ~it went downhill from here~ Sorry if that went long, but the gist of it is, is Rogue #2 right? I always thought of UMD as a Rogue class feature, and a very useful one, letting the Rogue have more options, especially when the game dynamic changes to let the magic users have more power. But to hear him talk, in a balanced group, no Rogue should ever need to burn skill points on something that has no payoff until higher levels. If you really need someone to use a Wand, he's convinced a one level dip into Cleric with the Magic Domain is more useful, and anyone could do that. And he's right, if we didn't have a UMD user, I would snip all uncastable/unuseable wands and scrolls from the treasure, most likely. I'd like to hear other people's thoughts and arguments about Use Magic Device, so I can present them to my group. If UMD is a substandard tactic, I may allow Rogue #1 to recoup his skill points, as he has been spreading himself a bit thin. |
| Leilond06-26-07, 07:52 AM | Well... I will always waste my points into "UMD" The "take a level in cleric with magic domain" is a totally metagaming powergaming issue. And what if, as a rogue, I don't want to be submitted to any god or church? What if I don't want to pay for the XP penalty for multiclassing? I want to be a pure rogue, and being able to use any wand in any moment (DC 20 is really low, letting you use it without very low chance to go wrong at 9th level, and nearly never miss any check at 12th level). Also having some 1st level spell scrolls as "backup" weapon is great. A wand of inflict wounds is great for sneakattack moster with a DR I cannot overcome easly. A wand of scorching ray? Isn't that very nice? I can sneak attack with that too! It isn't a matter of "doing my job", it is a matter of "versatility" and the rogue hase enought skill point to "waste" some into UMD In the end, it is a matter of preferences and no one can say "it is better"... but the "multiclass into a cleric with the magic domain" is a very metagame way of playing it |
| JellyPooga06-26-07, 08:26 AM | UMD rocks! The Warlocks affinity for the skill is probably it's best feature. The fact that Rogues get it is even better (even if they can't take Skill Mastery). Rogues are the most competant characters in the game, what with their wide variety of skills and large number of skill points and better than average combative ability (if 3/4 BAB, Sneak Attack and Improved Uncanny Dodge isn't better than average, I don't know what is). Adding the ability to use Wands, Scrolls and all manner of magic items from any spell list (not just the Wizard and Cleric spell lists that you get access to from taking a level of Cleric with the Magic domain - we're talking Druids, Bards, Paladins, Rangers, Wu Jen, etc.) just makes them even more bad-a than they already are. UMD is one of the best skills available to any character...if you have the money, it's all the cheese of CoDzilla and Wizards in one tidy little skill...without the religious connotations or complete lack of fighting prowess or lack of HP or lack of other skills or spellbook reliance (well o.k. so you're reliant on the items that you're using, but you know what I mean). Your Mr.Rogue-who-doesn't-like-UMD is gravely mistaken. So what if other party members can do it just as well? Who wouldn't want a second Cleric or Wizard in the party who can also disarm traps, unlock doors, bluff their way past guards, steal stuff from under the authorities nose, sneak attack, climb any surface, sing every song, dance every dance, walk a tightrope, etc. etc. etc. |
| Dalthbar06-26-07, 09:06 AM | Personally, I think UMD should be removed from all skill lists and listed as a Class Feature for specific classes (rogue, artificer and warlock immediately come to mind). Just lower the DCs for 3-5 and you're done. Since the only way UMD is useful is to max it out anyway, there wouldn't be any harm in doing this. The only reason it's a skill is a throwback from 2nd ed. since it was a thief class ability and they shoehorned it into 3rd ed (poorly). But it can certainly be useful - it just may not be _as_ useful for rogue #1 in _that party_ is all. The scenarios you listed are all great examples though, but sometimes setting up for a sneak attack will render a better result than a scorching ray. UMD will be as useful as the items that you give your rogue to use it with. If they just have dinky wands or scrolls that don't have a huge impact, then a maxed UMD skill is a waste for that rogue. If, however, you give that rogue some cool stuff that nobody else in the party can use that can be useful in various situations, then they can both contribute to the party and make use of their UMD skill. You might want to get creative with the next item drop and toss that rogue a bone to use their UMD skill more efficiently. |
| Southernskies06-26-07, 09:30 AM | Scroll/Wand of Faerie Fire would be a good start to show the value of UMD. Have the bad guys use mirror image, blur, blink or any of the other miss chance spells to show the power of accessing druid spells. Or if the PCs use those spells (which they probably do), add some 1st level druids to encounters to "dispel" those spells. |
| goawayugh06-26-07, 09:41 AM | UMD is quite possibly the best skill there is. I always play spellcasters so it's not really an issue with me, but we almost ALWAYS have a rogue, and don't always have a healer. When they're Cleric goes down, who is going to save him? Rogue #2 with his sneak attack? or Rogue#1 with his maxed UMD and his wand of cure light wounds? Wizard: (after doing detect magic) Wow, we found a new magic item. I wonder what it does? Tank: I wonder how we can activate it. Rogue#2: Oh who cares, just give it to the Cleric, he can use it. Cleric: Me?!? I have no idea what that thing is! Rogue#1 (with maxed UMD): Give it to me (makes UMD check)... COOL! A WAND OF GREATER INVISIBILITY! (@ Rogue#2) Well, I guess it's mine since you can't use it. *Rogue#1 goes on to Sneak Attack nearly everything until he runs out of charges* *Rogue#2 is ashamed of how little he gets to use his Sneak Attack...* UMD ROCKS! |
| Leilond06-26-07, 09:54 AM | I don't understand why someone say "you still have an arcane caster and you don't need the rogue use any arcane wand" Why? What if do you encounter an enemy that is "vulnerable to fire"? Won't you be happy if your rogue has a good "scorching ray wand" to sneak with? I remember that the sneak attack damage is of the same type of the original damage: fire! The wizard, no matter of the level, can use ONE wand each turn, pheraps two (with some "exotic" feats), but no more than that. Having a rogue that, in the right moment, can make the damage dealt grow up with wands or scrolls can be very usefull. If the opponent has a very good AC, the rogue can have some problem to hit. A good "touch attack wand" (inflict wounds) or "ranged touch attack wand" can help to deal damage, sneak attack damage if "flanking" with the inflict wounds wand All is more and more usefull if the wizard can craft wands, giving it to the rogue for 75% price (for example) of for free (every now and then) |
| tui06-26-07, 11:20 AM | Right, the problem isn't with UMD. There are plenty of ways UMD could be useful to your party. The problem is, the party members aren't thinking like that. If they really are determined not to think of it as an asset and factor it into their team strategy, then indeed it will be waste of skill points. But if they treat it as just another versatile asset of a party member, and work on figuring out how it can be used to compliment the rest of the party, I'm sure they'll be pleasantly surprised. |
| Leilond06-26-07, 11:25 AM | Right, the problem isn't with UMD. There are plenty of ways UMD could be useful to your party. The problem is, the party members aren't thinking like that. If they really are determined not to think of it as an asset and factor it into their team strategy, then indeed it will be waste of skill points. But if they treat it as just another versatile asset of a party member, and work on figuring out how it can be used to compliment the rest of the party, I'm sure they'll be pleasantly surprised. Let him take the points and buy a "scorching ray wand" or an "acid arrow wand", sneak attacking with it them two or three times. Let him buy a "ray of Enfeeblement" (only 750 golds for 1d6+1 strenght penalty). After a while they'll undersand the power of UMD with with this very simple issue. I'm sure the second rogue will want to put points to UMD too... and the DM will start to have some real problems ;) |
| tarkin06-26-07, 11:43 AM | Let him take a wand of Grease, and see Sneak Attacks happen cause the guys are balancing. UMD is in all probability the single MOST powerfull skill If anything, the DC's should be raised, because of how powerfull it is. The idea that it is not worth it is pretty funny. Potions cost twice the value of a scroll. Why? Because anyone can use it. Wands, staves, and scrolls are WAY cheaper than a Wonderous Item that anyone can use. They are perfect equiptment for a smart Rogue. OK, they don't work all the time, and have charges, but they are just so worth it. |
| jaelis06-26-07, 11:47 AM | I've always gotten a lot of use out of it, even when it's taken cross-class. |
| mostholy206-26-07, 12:04 PM | UMD for Rogues can be a great skill to invest in, but it really depends on the availability of magical items for the campaign. If the DM allows purchasing of items, then Rogues should definitely invest in UMD. If the DM restricts the items to what the group finds, it will still come in handy, but less of a boon to the character. Even at mid-levels you can start using it to activate wands and lower level scrolls. This works particularly well with personal range spells that improve your combat or skill checks. Remember Personal range spells cannot be made into potions, so they can only be utilized by a non-caster by using UMD. There are numerous spells from all classes that will prove useful to Rogues, which is what makes UMD more useful than taking a 1 lvl dip into cleric with the magic domain. Examples of good spells for good lower level UMD activatable items include: Improvisation (luck pool to gain luck bonus to skills or attack rolls), camoulflage (+10 to hide checks), ebon eyes (see in the dark, no miss chance because of dark), embrace the wild (gain blindsense, +2 listen/spot), linked perception (gain untyped bonus to spot and listen/per ally), alter self!!! (do I need to go into the benefits of this spell?), etc...SO many more. If you are allowing the rogues to purchase items, UMD is definitely the way to go. Any skill ranks that you end up sacrificing in the other "rogue" skills can almost always be made up for by casting a personal spell to make up for it. |
| tui06-26-07, 01:27 PM | Let him take the points and buy a "scorching ray wand" or an "acid arrow wand", sneak attacking with it them two or three times. Let him buy a "ray of Enfeeblement" (only 750 golds for 1d6+1 strenght penalty). After a while they'll undersand the power of UMD with with this very simple issue. While I certainly agree that these are powerful and worthwhile uses of UMD, I don't think it addresses the problem the party is having. I don't think they need someone to demonstrate that UMD can be powerful as much as they need to see that it can work WITH the team, rather than DESPITE the team. See, using Grease like Tarkin's example, can be VERY useful... but not if the other rogue is built around (and anticipating using) melee sneak attacks and for whatever reason doesn't have ranks in Balance. Ranged sneak attacks are great, but not if the other rogue needs you to flank... instead of allowing two people to SA, you're only getting one, which is worse for the party. What's great about this party is they really are thinking as a team, which can actually be pretty rare in D&D. So that needs to be encouraged by focusing on ways the TEAM can use the character's UMD skill. |
| mostholy206-26-07, 02:57 PM | What's great about this party is they really are thinking as a team, which can actually be pretty rare in D&D. So that needs to be encouraged by focusing on ways the TEAM can use the character's UMD skill.OK, there are plenty of ways that UMD can be used to improve the TEAM aspect of the party, primarily again in supplementing low skill checks or improving combat effectiveness of the party or an individual. Most of these come from the Spell Compendium, but there are also plenty good spells in the SRD. Need a scout with good spot/listen/skill checks to be able to fly, burrow or swim (alter self, burrowing, or master air)? Need better spot checks for everyone (linked perception)? Want to make sure that your party members can climb up a cliff (easy climb)? Let the party sneak through an area (Iron silence and mass camoulflage)? Give your allies an immediate AoO on a threatened opponent slapping hand? All of these spells are 1st or 2nd level spells and easily activated by UMD at midlevel and purchasable or scribable by others in the party. The only real question is the availability of these spells as scrolls or wands in the game you are playing. If the DM is being strict and only allow you the items found on adventure then UMD becomes much less useful, but if the DM allows purchasing of items during downtime, then go hog wild! Sure, you could have another spellcaster spend a round casting these spells, but how often do you have a party with members of all the various classes (particularly ranger/druid/cleric/mage combination AND 2 rogues) that can cast all these spells? And it also frees up your casters actions and spell slots to spend their actions casting even better spells. |
| spyderfreek06-26-07, 03:42 PM | Another point of note, But to hear him talk, in a balanced group, no Rogue should ever need to burn skill points on something that has no payoff until higher levels. If you really need someone to use a Wand, he's convinced a one level dip into Cleric with the Magic Domain is more useful, and anyone could do that. I am plyaing an Arcane Archer with 1 level of Battle Sorc. I can only use scrolls with first level spells on them with out a chance for failure. If they want to lose a rogue level, to gain the abilit to cast scrolls only from their spell list at 1st level, let them. That would be a waste of a level. UMD confirs the ability to use scrolls & wands of all clases (which has been said before). A single level dip would be a very expensive way to gain what UMD gives. |
| Centauri06-26-07, 10:21 PM | Rogue #2: Well of course not, since you always use enemies with high Spot and Listen, or stupid stuff like Tremorsense. And let's not talk about the Constructs or Undead... It's amusing to me that Rogue #2 can say that an still not see the value of Use Magic Device. He should invest in some scrolls of Summon Monster and Silence for his buddy and then he'll never have to worry about flanking or sneaking again. |
| Metafictional06-26-07, 11:48 PM | Thanks a lot guys, I fully plan on showing Rogue # 2 this thread come next game night. |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 12:33 AM | UMD is just the start for a really powerful rogue. There are two feat in CAr that I just love. One and i don't know the name but it lets you set a wand to yourself so next time and every other time later on you can use it with out rolling UMD. 2nd is wand strike. Which lets you hit a creature with the wand for 1d6 and then activate it so the spell takes effect. I like using this with lightning bolt. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 02:41 AM | Guys, Not to sound too contrarian but rogue 2 has a point even if he is overstating it. Let's look at some of those UMD DCs. Use Wand: DC 20 This is probably the most common and easiest way that UMD is used. Unfortunately DC 20 is nothing to sneeze at especially for rogues. Remember that you have a mishap if you fail by 10 or more and remember that charisma is at best the fourth most important stat for a rogue (after Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution) which means your Charisma bonus is likely to be small (or even negative) AND you can't take 10 on UMD checks nor can you be assisted with them. That means that you need to be 7th level just to insure that you don't have a mishap even with the most simple use of UMD and you will fail 50% of the time at that. [This can be improved with Cha boosting items and feats, but they take resources away from being a good rogue elsewhere.] Thus assuming a modest Cha modifier (likely), a rogue isn't likely to risk even the simpliest (DC 20) checks with UMD until at least mid levels (at least 7th level or higher), and other checks are higher....often much higher. By this point, it's simply easier to use non-standard magic items in other ways, ESPECIALLY since item-cast/item-use magic tends to be very weak when compared with that from pure casters (and even scrolls made from pure casters). The point is that UMD takes too long to be useful. I don't deny that it can have it's uses, but by the time it does, the party is powerful enough to solve problems with other and easier ways....and prior to that, the skill is simply too risky to use. This analysis changes significantly with the Artificer or Warlock who can take 10 with this skill, but for rogues, the skill is a bit of a white-elephant. It looks good, but it really isn't all that tremendous. -Polaris |
| Leilond06-27-07, 03:39 AM | Guys, Not to sound too contrarian but rogue 2 has a point even if he is overstating it. Let's look at some of those UMD DCs. Use Wand: DC 20 This is probably the most common and easiest way that UMD is used. Unfortunately DC 20 is nothing to sneeze at especially for rogues. Remember that you have a mishap if you fail by 10 or more and remember that charisma is at best the fourth most important stat for a rogue (after Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution) which means your Charisma bonus is likely to be small (or even negative) AND you can't take 10 on UMD checks nor can you be assisted with them. That means that you need to be 7th level just to insure that you don't have a mishap even with the most simple use of UMD and you will fail 50% of the time at that. [This can be improved with Cha boosting items and feats, but they take resources away from being a good rogue elsewhere.] Thus assuming a modest Cha modifier (likely), a rogue isn't likely to risk even the simpliest (DC 20) checks with UMD until at least mid levels (at least 7th level or higher), and other checks are higher....often much higher. By this point, it's simply easier to use non-standard magic items in other ways, ESPECIALLY since item-cast/item-use magic tends to be very weak when compared with that from pure casters (and even scrolls made from pure casters). This analysis changes significantly with the Artificer or Warlock who can take 10 with this skill, but for rogues, the skill is a bit of a white-elephant. It looks good, but it really isn't all that tremendous. -Polaris 1) Negative charisma is a bad idea for a thief 2) At 10th level you'll have: 13 skill point + 3 for skillfocus(UMD). At least +16, if you were not farsighted to put a good "12" on charisma. Fail only with a 3. At 12th level you stop failing to activate a wand It is that tremendous The point is that UMD takes too long to be useful. I don't deny that it can have it's uses, but by the time it does, the party is powerful enough to solve problems with other and easier ways....and prior to that, the skill is simply too risky to use. No one said "without that the party cannot solve problems" but we say that "the party will be really happy to have a such rogue". Don't doing that is not using one of the most powerfull things of rogues/bards: UMD as class skill |
| tui06-27-07, 08:02 AM | Remember that you have a mishap if you fail by 10 or more and remember that charisma is at best the fourth most important stat for a rogue (after Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution) which means your Charisma bonus is likely to be small (or even negative) That may be true for the sorts of Rogues you play, but one of the main archetypes people play is the "Social Rogue" -- Rogues have Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Gather Information, and Intimidate as class skills... and have the skill points to devote to them. For this sort of character, Charisma is one of the most important stats.. probably 1st or 2nd. This might actually be what Rogue #1 has done, due to the comment from Rogue # 2: "I was wondering where you were wasting all your Skill points." So for a character like that... 5th level, Cha 16, with Skill focus: UMD. They've got a +14 UMD check... sure, that's not fabulous; 25% of wand attempts will fail, but you won't have a mishap. By 10th level you can use your wand without fail (or 9th level if you devoted your level-up points to Cha). Now, even that character at 2nd level (probably the first time they'll get wands), they've still got +11, which has a very significant chance of failure, but also has no chance of a mishap. So if you're playing a very low-level campaign, and don't like any risk of your UMD check failing, then sure, stay away. If you're playing a social rogue, or otherwise want to concentrate on UMD as a primary asset, and are willing to take risk that your action may fail, it can be very powerful even at low levels. And if you're playing a moderately high campaign (levels 10+) it is totally solid. |
| DragonDan06-27-07, 08:42 AM | I would just play a human with Able Learner, with good Dex and high Int, then take level(s) in Wiz, then proceed into a PrC that advances Rog skills and spell level (ie. SWS; DSM; USeer; etc) if you want. Bam, use all the wands and scrolls you want. UMD is a wasted skill these days and wasting a feat on the useless Skill Focus is even worse. |
| Leilond06-27-07, 08:55 AM | I would just play a human with Able Learner, with good Dex and high Int, then take level(s) in Wiz, then proceed into a PrC that advances Rog skills and spell level (ie. SWS; DSM; USeer; etc) if you want. Bam, use all the wands and scrolls you want. UMD is a wasted skill these days and wasting a feat on the useless Skill Focus is even worse. What if I simply want to play a rogue? I like the rogue, I want to play the rogue, and UMD is a greate skill for such a character. You only pointed out a metagame min maxer solution to a problem that cannot be solved that way because the character are still leveled up enought. What if I simply don't like my character to be wizard at all? We aren't in the "character optimization forum". We were talking about a REAL PROBLEM that happened in a party with two rogues, it is a bit too late to reroll the characters |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 10:08 AM | There is a feat in the PHB that gives +2 on UMD and DS checks. That puts fail on wands at a one until 11th level. |
| penchant06-27-07, 10:18 AM | One other thing to remember. The rogue can BUY his wands and have them crafted at higher caster levels. If the sorcerer has two rays then the party is at least 8th level. Let the rogue buy a wand of scorching ray (higher price tag but worth it) and then he can have two rays as well.... Oh yeah, and since there are two rays and two rolls to hit, he gets Sneak Attack twice. Yeah, thought you'd like that. So that's 8d6 from scorching ray and at least 8d6 from SA. Both rolls are at highest BAB as Touch attacks so it likely also betters full attacking with TWF. Since the CL is double the standard item thats only about 9000gp. A big chunk of change for sure, but well worth it. Its much more affordable if the Sorc would craft it for half the fee. As much as a wizard, a rogue is a character of preparation. He has to build his toolkit carefully and never depend on random treasure to fufill his needs. UMD allows a rogue to do ANYTHING. |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 11:16 AM | One other thing to remember. The rogue can BUY his wands and have them crafted at higher caster levels. If the sorcerer has two rays then the party is at least 8th level. Let the rogue buy a wand of scorching ray (higher price tag but worth it) and then he can have two rays as well.... Oh yeah, and since there are two rays and two rolls to hit, he gets Sneak Attack twice. Yeah, thought you'd like that. So that's 8d6 from scorching ray and at least 8d6 from SA. Both rolls are at highest BAB as Touch attacks so it likely also betters full attacking with TWF. Since the CL is double the standard item thats only about 9000gp. A big chunk of change for sure, but well worth it. Its much more affordable if the Sorc would craft it for half the fee. As much as a wizard, a rogue is a character of preparation. He has to build his toolkit carefully and never depend on random treasure to fufill his needs. UMD allows a rogue to do ANYTHING. I thought on multi attacks the rogue only get sneak on the first one. It would be the same as rapid shot. |
| tui06-27-07, 12:23 PM | ...and wasting a feat on the useless Skill Focus is even worse. True, it isn't a great feat, especially for a Rogue who doesn't get a lot of feats anyway. If you prefer, you can replace it with a Circlet of Persuasion which gives a +3 competence bonus for 4500 gp. Or you can combine that with skill focus. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 12:56 PM | 1) Negative charisma is a bad idea for a thief No it's not. It's dead easy with a rogue to get +4 and possibly even +6 synergy bonus on diplomacy. The only skill that really suffers is bluff, and bluff is generally NOT the best way to generate sneak attack opportunities, stealth and flanking generally are. 2) At 10th level you'll have: 13 skill point + 3 for skillfocus(UMD). At least +16, if you were not farsighted to put a good "12" on charisma. Fail only with a 3. At 12th level you stop failing to activate a wand It is that tremendous No, it really isn't. First of all skill focus EXCEPT for skill focus concentration is a really crappy feat, and as I explained above, any rogue will desperately need Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution prior to Charisma even for a social rogue and possibly even Strength and Wisdom if they aren't. That doesn't leave a lot of character points for charisma. Furthermore, 10th level or even 7th level is a long time to wait to use even the weakest aspect of UMD especially when any class can use wands at any level as long as that spell appears somewhere on their class list. When you consider that of the 11 PHB classes only 4 don't have a class list, and when you consider that between a cleric and wizard, you cover a good 90% of the possible spells (and more if you also have a Paladin and/or Ranger in the group), it's situational at best and at low levels a waste of points at worst. No one said "without that the party cannot solve problems" but we say that "the party will be really happy to have a such rogue". Don't doing that is not using one of the most powerfull things of rogues/bards: UMD as class skill Not really and especially not with Able Learner in the Mix. With Able Learner in the Mix sorcerers make far better UMD masters than rogues ever will. Edit: What some of you are forgetting is that the first few levels are critically important, and UMD will be effectively wasted skill points since the skill is too dangerous to even try then. -Polaris |
| Polaris06-27-07, 01:05 PM | I would just play a human with Able Learner, with good Dex and high Int, then take level(s) in Wiz, then proceed into a PrC that advances Rog skills and spell level (ie. SWS; DSM; USeer; etc) if you want. Bam, use all the wands and scrolls you want. UMD is a wasted skill these days and wasting a feat on the useless Skill Focus is even worse. Exactly. There was a time when it was very likely that a potent magical item couldn't be used by the group. As things are now, however: 1. It's dead easy to insure that you can with minimal investment (see Dan's post above)....for ANY group...and it doesn't require a rogue or bard to do it. 2. It's probably better to sell such an item especially if your wizard/casters have item creation feats (quite likely), because even for a 50% value, you get full value back (because of item creation) in items that are specifically tailored to your group. This gets even better with feats like Merchantile which let you sell such items for even more (75%) allowing you to make a net profit via item creation. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 01:18 PM | It's only crappy if you pick the wrong skill. A rogue that uses it in this way would get lots of use out of this feat. By 3rd level he/she could easily get a 2 (cha)+ 3(SF)+2 (MA)= +7. With a max rank at 3rd of 6. Put him/her at a total bonus of 13. at 7th that would be +17. Even at 3rd he would only need 7 or better well above average roll of 10. Not including +2 for activated the item before. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 01:24 PM | It's only crappy if you pick the wrong skill. A rogue that uses it in this way would get lots of use out of this feat. By 3rd level he/she could easily get a 2 (cha)+ 3(SF)+2 (MA)= +7. With a max rank at 3rd of 6. Put him/her at a total bonus of 13. at 7th that would be +17. Even at 3rd he would only need 7 or better well above average roll of 10. At 5th he would not need to worry about magical mishap. Two Words: OPPORTUNITY COST A rogue doesn't have the feats to spare, and SF: UMD would still not push the UMD DCs over 20 until around level 7-10. For that the rogue could have gotten much better feats that ....um... help him as a rogue? +2 Charisma? Don't think so. Even a social rogue needs Dexterity, Intelligence, and Constitution first, and +2 costs 6 points the Rogue can't afford. The OP said it: Rogue 1 is suffering because his resources are stretched thin....because he bought into the UMD hype. -Polaris |
| mostholy206-27-07, 01:34 PM | Furthermore, 10th level or even 7th level is a long time to wait to use even the weakest aspect of UMD especially when any class can use wands at any level as long as that spell appears somewhere on their class list. When you consider that of the 11 PHB classes only 4 don't have a class list, and when you consider that between a cleric and wizard, you cover a good 90% of the possible spells (and more if you also have a Paladin and/or Ranger in the group), it's situational at best and at low levels a waste of points at worst.I would have to disagree with this. Even at a +1 modifier for CHA and no items, feat usage, or skill synergy, a rogue at 5th lvl could have an excellent chance of using a wand from any class's spell and a 50% chance of activation during combat (max rank lvl5=8+1CHA = UMD+9. So you need an 11 on a 1d20). There is no backfire chance for activation of an item unless you are activating "blindly". In addition, you can continually try to re-activate a wand if you have numerous rounds to prep before a big combat or non-combat situation. It's only if you roll a natural "1" that you lose the ability to try to activate the item (and in that case you will be able to try again 1 hour later). The only drawback of trying to activate a wand is if you try to do it in combat, where you potentially may waste actions trying to activate something. The Main benefits of being able to UMD is that you can cast personal range spells on yourselves AND you have the flexibility of using items from ANY caster class. Your other casters cannot cast personal range spells on the rogue. I've already outlined a number of really good 1st and 2nd lvl spells to use with UMD, some of which are only available through the ranger/druid spellists and/or are personal spells. I would also argue that the Sorc would not be a better UMD than a rogue because of the 2+INT skill points/lvl progression for skills. A sorceror could potentially be better at UMD than a rogue, but would require a feat (able learner) AND precious skill ranks that would be better suited to other skills. Me, I'd rather stick with rogue (or even better a BARD!) and not suffer the loss of a feat and many skill ranks to spread around for UMD. |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 01:42 PM | Two Words: OPPORTUNITY COST A rogue doesn't have the feats to spare, and SF: UMD would still not push the UMD DCs over 20 until around level 7-10. For that the rogue could have gotten much better feats that ....um... help him as a rogue? +2 Charisma? Don't think so. Even a social rogue needs Dexterity, Intelligence, and Constitution first, and +2 costs 6 points the Rogue can't afford. The OP said it: Rogue 1 is suffering because his resources are stretched thin....because he bought into the UMD hype. -Polaris Not everyone uses points buy and he could easily get one of those pluses by items. 1st MA feat, if he goes human 2nd rogue feats, 3rd SF, 6th AMD feat from CAr, 9th Wand strike. With a plus 13 at 3rd he could easily roll and it would only cost a charge for failure. Magical mishap happen at 9 or more on a miss. With Attune magical device at 6th he could attune the wand to him self before hand and not have to roll UMD at all when using that wand. With wand strike he could attack with the wand for 1d6 and then acti it for full effect. I like using this with the Combust spell Because there is no save for half and damage is 1d8 per caster. If he paid extra and the DM allowed it he could attack with average of 45 at 6th, 48 at 9th. A 6th level rogue could sneak for average of 14 not including with weapon. This spell 5th caster level wand at 7,500 gp would average 22.5. Min 3rd would be 4,500 and still give 12 average and it is 1d8 better than most rogue used weapons. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 01:44 PM | I would have to disagree with this. Even at a +1 modifier for CHA and no items, feat usage, or skill synergy, a rogue at 5th lvl could have an excellent chance of using a wand from any class's spell and a 50% chance of activation during combat (max rank lvl5=8+1CHA = UMD+9. So you need an 11 on a 1d20). That's horrid in combat. You spend a standard action (same as anyone else for activating a wand) and there is a 50-50 chance you get nothing out of it. If you want to use a skill in combat, the chances of sucess (because failure means you have done nothing...at best....and ceded initiative to the enemy) needs to be overwhelming (nearly 100%). There is no backfire chance for activation of an item unless you are activating "blindly". In addition, you can continually try to re-activate a wand if you have numerous rounds to prep before a big combat or non-combat situation. It's only if you roll a natural "1" that you lose the ability to try to activate the item (and in that case you will be able to try again 1 hour later). The only drawback of trying to activate a wand is if you try to do it in combat, where you potentially may waste actions trying to activate something. Incorrect. If you fail a UMD check by 10 or more, you suffer a mishap no matter what (see the main skill description on page 85). Even on a '1' it's too much just as fumbles on a '1' were too much in late 2nd ed. The Main benefits of being able to UMD is that you can cast personal range spells on yourselves AND you have the flexibility of using items from ANY caster class. Your other casters cannot cast personal range spells on the rogue. I've already outlined a number of really good 1st and 2nd lvl spells to use with UMD, some of which are only available through the ranger/druid spellists and/or are personal spells. Not at the caster levels that those items typically have. In short it's generally a waste of money....and there if those personal range spells are really important, there are several ways that true full casters can extend personal range spells to other people. I would also argue that the Sorc would not be a better UMD than a rogue because of the 2+INT skill points/lvl progression for skills. A sorceror could potentially be better at UMD than a rogue, but would require a feat (able learner) AND precious skill ranks that would be better suited to other skills. Me, I'd rather stick with rogue (or even better a BARD!) and not suffer the loss of a feat and many skill ranks to spread around for UMD. The Sorcerer would blow the Rogue (or any other character class) out of the water because of his insane charisma modifier...and it's not like the sorcerer needs copious amounts of skill points (concentration is the only "must have" skill for a sorcerer). -Polaris |
| Polaris06-27-07, 01:53 PM | Not everyone uses points buy and he could easily get one of those pluses by items. 1st MA feat, if he goes human 2nd rogue feats, 3rd SF, 6th AMD feat from CAr, 9th Wand strike. With a plus 13 at 3rd he could easily roll and it would only cost a charge for failure. Magical mishap happen at 9 or more on a miss. I don't see an "Attune Magical Device Feat" in my copy of Complete Arcane. Even if you did, you are spending FOUR out of SEVEN feats to do what a wizad can do only crappier? That's what rogue 2 is talking about (and you only get sneak attack damage from the first want btw). As for point buy, the same point remains even for rolling stats. A rogue's charisma is only his fourth most important stat even if a social rogue which means it's not going to be all that great. With Attune magical device at 6th he could attune the wand to him self before hand and not have to roll UMD at all when using that wand. With wand strike he could attack with the wand for 1d6 and then acti it for full effect. I like using this with the Combust spell Because there is no save for half and damage is 1d8 per caster. If he paid extra and the DM allowed it he could attack with average of 45 at 6th, 48 at 9th. Feats not in evidence, and besides, that nothing a rogue 1/wizard X-1 or even a full wizard couldn't do better WITHOUT a feat cost. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 02:00 PM | sorry it's in CM called Magic Device Attunement. Online says page 44. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 02:03 PM | sorry it's in CM called Magic Device Attunement. Online says page 44. Even so, my point stands. Congrats, you've spend a feat for something your party casters can do for free. -Polaris |
| mostholy206-27-07, 02:30 PM | Hrm...we must be reading different sources. From the SRD the only section in the UMD description that describes a "mishap" is in the activate blindly section.Activate Blindly: Some magic items are activated by special words, thoughts, or actions. You can activate such an item as if you were using the activation word, thought, or action, even when you’re not and even if you don’t know it. You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate. You get a special +2 bonus on your Use Magic Device check if you’ve activated the item in question at least once before. If you fail by 9 or less, you can’t activate the device. If you fail by 10 or more, you suffer a mishap. A mishap means that magical energy gets released but it doesn’t do what you wanted it to do. The default mishaps are that the item affects the wrong target or that uncontrolled magical energy is released, dealing 2d6 points of damage to you. This mishap is in addition to the chance for a mishap that you normally run when you cast a spell from a scroll that you could not otherwise cast yourself. Now let's look at the other parts of the feat description:Decipher a Written Spell: This usage works just like deciphering a written spell with the Spellcraft skill, except that the DC is 5 points higher. Deciphering a written spell requires 1 minute of concentration.Emulate an Ability Score: To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard spells, Wisdom for divine spells, or Charisma for sorcerer or bard spells). Your effective ability score (appropriate to the class you’re emulating when you try to cast the spell from the scroll) is your Use Magic Device check result minus 15. If you already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability, you don’t need to make this check.Emulate an Alignment: Some magic items have positive or negative effects based on the user’s alignment. Use Magic Device lets you use these items as if you were of an alignment of your choice. You can emulate only one alignment at a time.Emulate a Class Feature: Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item. In this case, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20. This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class. It just lets you activate items as if you had that class feature. If the class whose feature you are emulating has an alignment requirement, you must meet it, either honestly or by emulating an appropriate alignment with a separate Use Magic Device check (see above).Emulate a Race: Some magic items work only for members of certain races, or work better for members of those races. You can use such an item as if you were a race of your choice. You can emulate only one race at a time.Use a Scroll: If you are casting a spell from a scroll, you have to decipher it first. Normally, to cast a spell from a scroll, you must have the scroll’s spell on your class spell list. Use Magic Device allows you to use a scroll as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. The DC is equal to 20 + the caster level of the spell you are trying to cast from the scroll. In addition, casting a spell from a scroll requires a minimum score (10 + spell level) in the appropriate ability. If you don’t have a sufficient score in that ability, you must emulate the ability score with a separate Use Magic Device check (see above). This use of the skill also applies to other spell completion magic items.Use a Wand: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill also applies to other spell trigger magic items, such as staffs. Is there anywhere in ANY of the descriptions of the individual uses of UMD or other parts of the UMD description that describes a backfire effect OTHER than activate blindly? If so, I'm not reading it. Now if your DM plays that ANY time you try to UMD you can backfire, then yes there is potential danger. But even then for DC=20 to activate wands, you backfire on a natural "1" with the aforementioned +9 UMD modifier at 5th lvl. Well worth a measly 2d6 damage on a 5% roll to gain access to spells. And at later levels or a spellsight goggles for scrolls, this risk is minimized or negated completely In terms of using it in combat, I agree that at 5th lvl (with no other bonuses other than maxing UMD) is probably not worth the potentially wasted effort, but for pre-combat buffing it is quite good. Not at the caster levels that those items typically have. In short it's generally a waste of money....and there if those personal range spells are really important, there are several ways that true full casters can extend personal range spells to other people.In terms of getting casters to be able to cast "personal" ranged spells on allies. I would like to know how to do that as my players are really wanting to do that. Even better, how do you do that at 5th lvl? To top that off, do you really want your casters wasting actions/spell slots for these spells to cast on the rogue? Let's see...personal range spells that are quite useful: Alter Self, Shield, Expiditious retreat, true strike, mirror image, false life, divine favor, longstrider...that's only including spells in lvl 1-2 spells from the SRD. If you also include spells from Spell Compendium, the list is easily doubled AND can make up any small deficiency in skill ranks that you might have because of the UMD committment. (jump, camouflage, improvisation, instant search, hearing lorecall, balancing lorecall, helping hand, embrace the wild, climb walls, instant locksmith, glibness, share talents, divine insight...the list goes on). You can easily supplement (and easily surpass) almost any skill that you've not committed fully to using spell buffs from UMD. |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 02:40 PM | There is no auto hit and misses on skill checks so no fumbles ether. Attuning happens before combat and even without cha mod that is still a +14 and he would need 6 on a roll. Easy roll. Then he would be able to use it anytime. We use this allot in big boss fights or hard ones where the rogue can attack well. We let the rogue use the wiz wands and that frees up wiz to cast his spells. You only say it crappy because of the way you build that is not the same as someone else. I will not get in to that same old argument about which is better. A UMD rogue can be more powerful than a reg rogue if built right. Not saying for him to replace a wizard. But to do the same thing the rogue would have to go 1 rogue/ 1 cleric/ 1wizard. This is a good build for a rogue. but not for everyone. I run a high power game and Require a Average of +2 mod. Not everyone plays low powered game and could easily get +2 mod on cha. Average rolls on high powered game are 18,16,16, 14, 11,10 And attunment feat only requires 1 rank in UMD which means you could get it 1st level and do what the others could do. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 02:43 PM | Hrm...we must be reading different sources. [SNIP] [quote] No we aren't. In order to use any spell completetion item, you have to "activate blindly" which means you have to made the DC 25 check before the others making it any worse. You don't know what the special word, thought, action is to activate a wand (for example) unless it's on your class list, and thus you have to activate it blindly (same with all other spell completion items). [quote] Now if your DM plays that ANY time you try to UMD you can backfire, then yes there is potential danger. But even then for DC=20 to activate wands, you backfire on a natural "1" with the aforementioned +9 UMD modifier at 5th lvl. Well worth a measly 2d6 damage on a 5% roll to gain access to spells. And at later levels or a spellsight goggles for scrolls, this risk is minimized or negated completely And it only works 50% of the time to boot? This is pretty crappy for the return. In terms of using it in combat, I agree that at 5th lvl (with no other bonuses other than maxing UMD) is probably not worth the potentially wasted effort, but for pre-combat buffing it is quite good. I don't see how since you aren't going to be able to afford the time to prebuff this way NOR afford the cost to have items that have any meaningful duration. Also Dispell Magic while normally worthless against buffs, completely hoses the UMD using rogue because of the caster level disparity. In terms of getting casters to be able to cast "personal" ranged spells on allies. I would like to know how to do that as my players are really wanting to do that. Even better, how do you do that at 5th lvl? You really can't do it at fifth level either with UMD (at least not efficiently), and using UMD the personal range spell is still....personal range. However, IIRC there is "touch spell" and other ways to change spells of this sort via the Archmage PrC (to name one) at high enough levels. Let's see...personal range spells that are quite useful: Alter Self, Shield, Expiditious retreat, true strike, mirror image, false life, divine favor, longstrider...that's only including spells in lvl 1-2 spells from the SRD. If you also include spells from Spell Compendium, the list is easily doubled AND can make up any small deficiency in skill ranks that you might have because of the UMD committment. (jump, camouflage, improvisation, instant search, hearing lorecall, balancing lorecall, helping hand, embrace the wild, climb walls, instant locksmith, glibness, share talents, divine insight...the list goes on). You can easily supplement (and easily surpass) almost any skill that you've not committed fully to using spell buffs from UMD. Two things: 1. Cost. Given that the DCs for Ability Emulation and Reading Scrolls is so high, you almost have to use wands and wands cost 750xlevel of spellxminimum caster level of spell minimum means you can't afford to made use out of this huge investment in your character resources (which has made you a worse rogue). 2. Dispell Magic. This is a non-starter for normal casters using buffs at normal levels, but dispell magic will eat the UMD rogue for breakfast. -Polaris |
| Polaris06-27-07, 02:47 PM | Ace-of-Time, Actually Cleric 1/Rogue X with the Magic Domain voids the need for UMD entirely (or pretty much anyway) given that Clerics with the Magic Domain have both Wizard and Cleric spells on thier list for item purposes. That's not trying hard and such a rogue is STILL a better rogue than one who has invested all those feats and skill points into a skill that doesn't really become useful until moderate to high levels. OTOH, the Cleric 1/Rogue 1 can gain all those neat item advantages you like so much when he takes his one and only cleric level (which could be as soon as level 2 or as late as he wants depending of the campaign). -Polaris |
| JellyPooga06-27-07, 02:47 PM | Umm...I've heard some peopel saying that Consitution is more important for a Rogue than Charisma and my brain is overloading with the WTF waves coming from these statements. I mean WTF? Con is a Rogues 6th most important ability score. In order: 1)Dex - to improve AC, ranged attacks, initiative 2)Int - Skill points 3)Cha - 'social' skills, UMD 4)Str - to carry loot 5)Wis - spot and listen + Will saves 6)Con - what do you need this for? HP? don't get hit. Fort Saves? don't get hit (practically everything that requires a Fortitude save also requires that you be hit by something first)...ummm, anything else? Admittedly, 4 and 5 are interchangeable, as are 1 and 2, depending on style, but 3 and 6 are pretty much given. Whoever heard of an uncharismatic Rogue? Charisma is practically what being a Rogue is all about...you might not actually be all that good at something, but by all the gods you look good doing it. Any Rogue relying on Constitution seriously needs to look at his priorities...it's the domain of Fighters and Barbarians to go around getting hit by stuff and soaking up all the damage. You're the one who lurks on the edge, mostly ignored until you deliver incisive strikes that cripple you foes (at which point attention will probably be brought to you and you run like a bastard). Anyway, sorry for the slight off topic, but it always gets to me when people say that Wizards and Rogues should have high constitution scores "for the HP". Having low HP is what being a Rogue or Wizard is all about...that's why they have low Hit Die. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 02:52 PM | Umm...I've heard some peopel saying that Consitution is more important for a Rogue than Charisma and my brain is overloading with the WTF waves coming from these statements. Because Constitution is more important than Charisma for a rogue. Constitution gives hit points which a rogue as a non-casting class will need at high levels (UMD notwithstanding) AND gives a bonus to a weak save (Fortitude...and you don't want to fail Fort saves). That's not just me talking. That comes straight from the Char-Op people who are probably the closest things we have to experts on this. [It's worth noting that unless your Charisma is stellar, i.e. Sorcerer level, Charisma for skills...even UMD...is generally a losing proposition since there are better ways to get targeted skill bonuses.] -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 02:52 PM | Not if you have your party wiz make them for you. That acti blindly only counts if he finds a wand and doesn't know what or how it is acti. If the rogue had his made for him had could find that out from the operson who made it or the party wizard. People who play talkative rogue don't plan on getting hit much. The rogue get 8 + int mod every level and only needs one point per level for UMD. How is this miss use of skill. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 02:57 PM | Not if you have your party wiz make them for you. That acti blindly only counts if he finds a wand and doesn't know what or how it is acti. If the rogue had his made for him had could find that out from the operson who made it or the party wizard. That's your interpretation. The rule simply says that you activate blindly if you don't know the word, gesture, thought, etc needed to activate the item. For a spell completetion item of any sort, that's automatic unless it's on your class list. Also if the wizard can make the wand for the rogue, then there is no incentive for the wizard to make the wand for the rogue because the wizard would automatically be able to use it better. For that matter if you really want an item using rogue, take one level of Cleric with the Magic Domain, and you are automatically set at least for spell completion items WITHOUT investing the feats or copious skill points. -Polaris |
| JellyPooga06-27-07, 02:59 PM | 6)Con - what do you need this for? HP? don't get hit. Fort Saves? don't get hit (practically everything that requires a Fortitude save also requires that you be hit by something first)...ummm, anything else? Yeah, I just quoted myself. :P Seriously though, unless you're playing Thug-Rogue, Con shouldn't be all that important. Stereotypical-Rogue has Con at the bottom. It's generally held that melee rogues are fairly suboptimal anyways (they tend to be fragile without Heavy Armour or high Hit Dice), so HP shouldn't be an issue 9/10 times. As for Fortitude saves, like I say, mostly Fortitude saves require being in the line of fire and getting hit. If you're getting hit, you're doing something wrong. If you're in the line of fire, you're doing someting wrong. Just my opinion though... |
| Polaris06-27-07, 03:01 PM | People who play talkative rogue don't plan on getting hit much. Funny how the monsters (especially those with blindsight, tremorsense, and the like, have other plans. The rogue get 8 + int mod every level and only needs one point per level for UMD. How is this miss use of skill. Because those skill points are WASTED until he gets a reasonable chance to made that DCs (6+isn't reasonable....2+ is). OTOH, for 6 skill points (partially offset by some great class abilities), a rogue that takes one (and only one) level of cleric voids the problem entirely. It's not like rogues actually have skill points to spare when you sit down and actually spread them out over essential rogue skills. [A point the OP made indirectly with regard to rogue 1 who spread himself out too thin.] -Polaris |
| Polaris06-27-07, 03:05 PM | Yeah, I just quoted myself. :P Seriously though, unless you're playing Thug-Rogue, Con shouldn't be all that important. Stereotypical-Rogue has Con at the bottom. It's generally held that melee rogues are fairly suboptimal anyways (they tend to be fragile without Heavy Armour or high Hit Dice), so HP shouldn't be an issue 9/10 times. As for Fortitude saves, like I say, mostly Fortitude saves require being in the line of fire and getting hit. If you're getting hit, you're doing something wrong. If you're in the line of fire, you're doing someting wrong. Just my opinion though... Go read the Char-Op boards on rogues then. There are many things that require Fort saves that you don't want to fail (Poisons anyone?) and are very much hazards to a rogue's line of work. Also many spells are line-of-sight, save-or-die type spells which are overwhelmingly fort or will saves. The rogue can (slippery mind) do a lot to effectively boost his will save. His Fort Save? Not so much. Also even assuming UMD, protections from magical items don't hold a candle to those from full casters and even full casters like all the Con they can afford. In fact the lower your hit-dice, the more valuable Con becomes on a relative basis. This is why many people regard Consitution as the second most important stat after Intelligence for a wizard. The same argument applies to a rogue, but even more so because of his lack of magical defenses (relatively speaking). -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 03:16 PM | One the 2nd part of your post is not in the skill entry of UMD activate blindly. "For a spell completetion item of any sort, that's automatic unless it's on your class list." Please post link. How many of these monsters do you plan on fighting at low levels. "Funny how the monsters (especially those with blindsight, tremorsense, and the like, have other plans." Most rogues don't have much use for Deities. With a few exceptions. And UMD lets him use all magic items for any class and not many builds can do that easily. And just FYI, Wands and staffs are spell trigger not completions. In the DMG page 213 it says all he would have to do is know what spell is on the wand . |
| BW022206-27-07, 03:43 PM | Folks, Nothing wrong with that tactic and, IMO, it's actually pretty smart. As for the arguements... We already has spell casters 1. They can't do everything. Combat only typically lasts 5-10 rounds. It is amazing that by 7th-level or so, clerics rarely get time to cast bless, bull strength the fighter, etc. They need to get their big spells out now. Being able to cast these minor spells from scrolls or wands is mighty nice. At higher levels often your wizard doesn't have time to get her protective spells up. 2. Often you don't want your spellcasters having to spend all their time on specialty case spells. For example, suppose the party is surprised by a fire elemental. You don't want the cleric to have to spend three rounds reading scrolls of resist energy... you'd rather get the protections up sooner so the cleric can get on with divine power or something. 3. Your cleric can't be everywhere. The cleric might be able to help the fighter, but when another nasty comes to the rear, the cleric can't always rush back and forth and keep two folks alive. 4. Your cleric can drop. Someone needs to be able to heal them and potions are a full round action. 5. Many spell combos require multiple rounds. For example, say your sorceror likes using web followed by stinking cloud. It is much more effective if folks get hit by both in the same round ... before having a chance to say light the web on fire. 6. There are still lots of spells which your caster's don't have access to. For example, druids and rangers have some mighty nice lower-level spells -- hide from animals, pass without trace, speak with animals, etc. which the cleric and sorceror simple can't have. 7. There are times when the casters are not present. When sneaking into a dungeon, when you need to disquise self to get past a guard, detect magic to find if the hall is magically trapped, etc. Rogues often find themselves alone. The DC is too high 8. It isn't hard to get UMD into reasonable levels. +2 charisma, 5 ranks, +2 from decypher script, and +3 due to skill foucs, gives a 2nd-level rogue a 50% chance of getting a scroll off. Add magical aptitude and some charisma items and by 6th or so, it can be nearly automatic. 9. In a lot of non-combat situations it doesn't matter. You can usually try again. If you want pass without trace or speak with animals, you can try for three or four rounds until you get it off. There are better feats or skills to take 10. Magic can make up for nearly any feat or skill. Invisibility and silence are often superior to hide and move silently. A scroll of shield makes up for dodge many times over. etc. 11. Rogues often find themselves in situations where they are useless. Against some undead or in a ranged combat, without sneak attack, rogues are mighty useless. The ability to buff other party members, cast defensive spells, etc. It is a great tool against the general uselessness of rogues against certain creature types. 12. There are numberous magical spells which greatly benifit rogues. For example, a wand of acid splash is cheap and great for sneak attacks. No feat allows ranged touch attacks. Flame blade or produce flame for melee touch attacks. Shield for boast AC. Blink? A lot of these items are actually better on a rogue than a wizard or druid -- who have better things to do than enter melee and don't benifit from say finese and sneak attack. 13. There are some 'killer' type items which can always be kept in reserve. A scroll of raise dead -- in case the cleric falls? A scroll of t-port in case something happens to the sorceror? Such items can get folks out of jams which no other feat can. 14. The feat can be used on a lot of things besides wands and scrolls. Holy sword, evil artifact, etc. can all be used if necessary. Certain magical traps by passed, etc. 15. There aren't a lot of other feats which help the rogue that greatly. There are few must take feats. Maybe weapon finesse or TWF, but neither is that critical. You often see rogues going for secondary feats such as stealthy, improved initiative, etc. Can you live without UMD and the feat? Sure. Will the character with the feat dominate the game? No. However, it allows him to fill a lot of rolls which others are simply too busy and unable to handle. If you have too rogues, it is a great thing. The other rogue can focus on 'pure rogue' feats and sneak attack combat, while he can serve as a backup rogue, healer, buffer, etc. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 03:45 PM | One the 2nd part of your post is not in the skill entry of UMD activate blindly. "For a spell completetion item of any sort, that's automatic unless it's on your class list." Please post link. Read the DMG under Magic Items, particularly Spell Completion and Spell Trigger Items. All require at least a word or action to use and you can't unless you know the spell (or it's on your list for spell trigger items). How many of these monsters do you plan on fighting at low levels. "Funny how the monsters (especially those with blindsight, tremorsense, and the like, have other plans." So what? How much stealth do you think you are going to have at the same levels? Sneak-Attack is the rogue's primary offensive class ability and that requires the rogue to be within 30' of the target (at best). That means the Rogue is going to be munched on and THAT means the rogue needs hit points at any level. Most rogues don't have much use for Deities. With a few exceptions. And UMD lets him use all magic items for any class and not many builds can do that easily. There is nothing in the rules that says a rogue can't take one level of cleric, and it's easier and cheaper than investing skill points you can't afford into UMD. And just FYI, Wands and staffs are spell trigger not completions. In the DMG page 213 it says all he would have to do is know what spell is on the wand . Which still means you have to activate it blindly. -Poalris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 04:10 PM | 1st level you get 8 times 4 with no int mod. thats 32 (36) MS, Hide, Listen, spot, search, UMD at 4 ranks takes 24. That still leaves you 8 points for other thing. 8 (9) points per level minus 6 to keep everything at max rank leaves 2 point for everything else. So at 6th level gives you 9+3 for ability gives 12 for bex skills and 10 for wis and int. It only say you have to know the spell on the wand. The rest is covered by the reg DC20 UMD check. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 04:11 PM | Folks, Nothing wrong with that tactic and, IMO, it's actually pretty smart. As for the arguements... For a warlock or artificer maybe. For a rogue, not so much. Now down the point by point: We already has spell casters 1. They can't do everything. Combat only typically lasts 5-10 rounds. It is amazing that by 7th-level or so, clerics rarely get time to cast bless, bull strength the fighter, etc. They need to get their big spells out now. Being able to cast these minor spells from scrolls or wands is mighty nice. At higher levels often your wizard doesn't have time to get her protective spells up. By the time this matters, the primary casters can have quicken spell or persistant spells (and clerics can use these with Divine Metamagic) which obviates the problem entirely. Also the minor spells from minor items generally have a duration too short to do much good and if they don't have a low casting level, then they have a prohibative cost compared with permanent magical items you could get. Also many items can and should be used outside of combat (such as wands of cure light wounds) and primary casters do it better. 2. Often you don't want your spellcasters having to spend all their time on specialty case spells. For example, suppose the party is surprised by a fire elemental. You don't want the cleric to have to spend three rounds reading scrolls of resist energy... you'd rather get the protections up sooner so the cleric can get on with divine power or something. Resist type spells last a long time (10min/level) and apply against the energy type you first face. Non-issue. As for special case situations, yes this is where scrolls and wands shine, but again the primary casters can (and do) do this better. 3. Your cleric can't be everywhere. The cleric might be able to help the fighter, but when another nasty comes to the rear, the cleric can't always rush back and forth and keep two folks alive. Neither will the rogue considering the relative lack of casting level inherent in magic items. In general, magic item spells are too weak and have too low a DC to be worthwhile in combat. 4. Your cleric can drop. Someone needs to be able to heal them and potions are a full round action. Potions are always a standard action. Read the rules. Also clerics, druids, bards, paladins, and rangers can all use wands of CLW (and you only need one level in any of these classes) and that's just PHB core. You can add wizard and sorcerer to that list with some builds. Nearly every class can heal a little bit. 5. Many spell combos require multiple rounds. For example, say your sorceror likes using web followed by stinking cloud. It is much more effective if folks get hit by both in the same round ... before having a chance to say light the web on fire. Crappy Spell Levels and Crappy DCs negate most of the effectiveness of this approach using magic items. That's what Quicken spell, Twin Spell, and other variations are for. 6. There are still lots of spells which your caster's don't have access to. For example, druids and rangers have some mighty nice lower-level spells -- hide from animals, pass without trace, speak with animals, etc. which the cleric and sorceror simple can't have. Between a Cleric (with at least two domains) and a wizard, you can get access to virtually any spell you need with a little planning. It's not worth the cost. 7. There are times when the casters are not present. When sneaking into a dungeon, when you need to disquise self to get past a guard, detect magic to find if the hall is magically trapped, etc. Rogues often find themselves alone. Take one level of cleric with the magic domain, or heck, take one level of rogue and then all wizard, and you don't have to worry about the skill at all and sneak just as well (if not better actually). That takes care of this. The DC is too high 8. It isn't hard to get UMD into reasonable levels. +2 charisma, 5 ranks, +2 from decypher script, and +3 due to skill foucs, gives a 2nd-level rogue a 50% chance of getting a scroll off. Add magical aptitude and some charisma items and by 6th or so, it can be nearly automatic. +2 Charisma is unreasonable for a rogue because it costs six build points and there are at least three other attributes more important to a rogue. I'll give +1 MAYBE but not +2. Skill Focus is a lousy feat and it makes you a worse rogue. Decipher Script is a lousy skill that is made nearly worthless with comprehend languages. You also need the attribute needed to cast the spell from a scroll AND you need to decipher the scroll and those DCs are (at least) five higher. In addition to that you need to activate blindly (certainly if an unknown scroll). All this reduces your chance for a second level rogue down to 5% chance or even no chance at all. 9. In a lot of non-combat situations it doesn't matter. You can usually try again. If you want pass without trace or speak with animals, you can try for three or four rounds until you get it off. Not when activating blindly which is the norm for any spell completion and spell trigger item. There are better feats or skills to take 10. Magic can make up for nearly any feat or skill. Invisibility and silence are often superior to hide and move silently. A scroll of shield makes up for dodge many times over. etc. You are ignoring: 1. The cost of the item especially when the same money could be spent for other items that the rogue could have (or the party's casters could have). 2. The fact that the spell levels will be low (which means the durations will be lousy) AND the fact they are dead easy to defeat/dispell (almost automatic after a while). 11. Rogues often find themselves in situations where they are useless. Against some undead or in a ranged combat, without sneak attack, rogues are mighty useless. The ability to buff other party members, cast defensive spells, etc. It is a great tool against the general uselessness of rogues against certain creature types. Item cast spells are nearly worthless because of low casting levels and low DCs (for offensive magic). 12. There are numberous magical spells which greatly benifit rogues. For example, a wand of acid splash is cheap and great for sneak attacks. No feat allows ranged touch attacks. Flame blade or produce flame for melee touch attacks. Shield for boast AC. Blink? A lot of these items are actually better on a rogue than a wizard or druid -- who have better things to do than enter melee and don't benifit from say finese and sneak attack. Not true. Magical Training (FR) allows for any character to start with a small selection of cantrips some of which are ranged touch attacks. 13. There are some 'killer' type items which can always be kept in reserve. A scroll of raise dead -- in case the cleric falls? A scroll of t-port in case something happens to the sorceror? Such items can get folks out of jams which no other feat can. If you are high enough level for raise dead, then you are high enough level for contingency. Enough said. 14. The feat can be used on a lot of things besides wands and scrolls. Holy sword, evil artifact, etc. can all be used if necessary. Certain magical traps by passed, etc. Rogues don't need UMD to pass magical traps. That's part of the rogue trapfinding ability and Disable Device. As for evil type items and such sure.....for a DC of 35+ or even higher. What's better? Having the rogue use an unholy avenger, or to sell is for half cost and MAKE a holy avenger for the party Paladin (or lacking a paladin, using the money to MAKE a weapon just as good for the party warrior type)? See the opportunity cost here? 15. There aren't a lot of other feats which help the rogue that greatly. There are few must take feats. Maybe weapon finesse or TWF, but neither is that critical. You often see rogues going for secondary feats such as stealthy, improved initiative, etc. Really? Depends on what you want, but if going pure rogue there is precise shot and improved precise shot which is invaluable to a ranged rogue. If you want items this bad, you can dip into one and only one level of cleric with the magic domain and use almost all items with impunity since you have the cleric spell list, wizard spell list, AND two domain spell lists. Can you live without UMD and the feat? Sure. Will the character with the feat dominate the game? No. However, it allows him to fill a lot of rolls which others are simply too busy and unable to handle. If you have too rogues, it is a great thing. The other rogue can focus on 'pure rogue' feats and sneak attack combat, while he can serve as a backup rogue, healer, buffer, etc. The problem is for a rogue, it takes away critical feats and skill points that is desperately needed for him to fill his duties as party expert and 'expert treasure finder'....and you don't get much return for it especially early. -Polaris |
| Polaris06-27-07, 04:16 PM | 1st level you get 8 times 4 with no int mod. thats 32 (36) MS, Hide, Listen, spot, search, UMD at 4 ranks takes 24. That still leaves you 8 points for other thing. 8 (9) points per level minus 6 to keep everything at max rank leaves 2 point for everything else. So at 6th level gives you 9+3 for ability gives 12 for bex skills and 10 for wis and int. You are forgetting a few things such as: Bluff (if you are investing in Cha, you want this) Diplomacy Sense Motive SEARCH!!!!!!! This is the signature skill of any rogue worthy the name. Disable Device Open lock. You were saying about copious skill points? Most of these need maximal ranks to be effective. [quote] It only say yopu have to know the spell on the wand. The restr is covered by the reg DC20 UMD check. No it doesn't say that. It says that a spell trigger item requires special spell knowledge and a spoken word. Obviously if you don't know the word (which you wouldn't without the spell knowledge), then you have to activate it blindly using the skill precisely as written. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 04:21 PM | potions are a full round if you don't have them out. Standard if you have it in you hand. From the SRD "Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Anyone with a spell on his or her spell list knows how to use a spell trigger item that stores that spell. (This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin.) The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity." This part is cover with the DC20 UMD check "Anyone with a spell on his or her spell list knows how to use a spell trigger item that stores that spell." You only use the blindly DC of 25 on wands he doesn't know what spell is on it. And he could found out the word again when he had it made or from the wizard. |
| mostholy206-27-07, 04:22 PM | In order to use any spell completetion item, you have to "activate blindly" which means you have to made the DC 25 check before the others making it any worse. You don't know what the special word, thought, action is to activate a wand (for example) unless it's on your class list, and thus you have to activate it blindly (same with all other spell completion items).OK, interesting interpretation of the description which I don't particularly agree with. Let's look at the activate blindly action in UMD again:Activate Blindly: Some magic items are activated by special words, thoughts, or actions. You can activate such an item as if you were using the activation word, thought, or action, even when you’re not and even if you don’t know it. You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate. You get a special +2 bonus on your Use Magic Device check if you’ve activated the item in question at least once before...Now this to me suggests that you don't need to do this action to use a wand or scroll if it has already been identified or desciphered (which should have been done well before hand at purchase, during creation or between adventures). If we are talking about items just found or picked up during the adventure, then yes, you would have to activate blindly. I don't see how since you aren't going to be able to afford the time to prebuff this way NOR afford the cost to have items that have any meaningful duration. Also Dispell Magic while normally worthless against buffs, completely hoses the UMD using rogue because of the caster level disparity.1) Time: Often times during adventures you have situations where your party knows there is a combat coming up. During this time you (and your casters) traditionally buff yourself and the party up, UMD allows a wider range of buffs for the rogue. In addition, many of the spells I outlined are non-combat skill enhancing spells. You can cast those any time and get as many tries as you want (so long as you don't roll the "1"). You don't lose the charge or the scroll upon a missed UMD check, you just need to try again. 2) Costs: Wand costs can be high, but often worth it for longer-lasting buffing spells considering you get 50 uses/wand. Divine Insight (CL3, +8 insight to 1 skill check, 3hr, 4500 gp), Camouflage (CL1, +10 hide, 10 min, 750 gp), alter self (CL3, +6 nat AC, alternative move speeds, 30 min, 4500 gp), clear mind (CL2, +4 saves vs. mind-effecting spells, 20 min, 1500 gp), embrace the wild (CL1, blindsense 30, scent, 10 min, 750 gp), sign (CL1, +4 bonus to initiative, 10 min, 750 gp), surefoot (CL2, +10 to climb, tumble, balance, & jump checks, 20 min, 1500 gp). These spells are useful and will be used often over the course of the rogue's development and a single adventure, but are unavailable to the non-UMD rogue (because of the personal range thing). IMO it clearly make the UMD rogue better than the non-UMD rogue at a pretty minor cost of 1 skill rank/lvl they put into maxing out UMD AND costs associated with the wands (for long-term use) or scrolls (for single adventures). If a UMD rogue is short on cash, scrolls of these low level spells work just as well and are very affordable (25 gp CL1, 50 gp CL2, 150 gp CL3/lvl2), particularly if you have a wizard or cleric in the party that can scribe them for you (make those costs half) and are not that much more difficult to activate DC=21-23 for the spells I've outlined. 3) Dispel magic. Yes, it can be VERY effective against any buffs you do via UMD. But is your opponent going to cast a targeted dispel magic on the rogue with an alter self? Or your barbarian fighter with the haste/bull's strength? I would suspect that even though the rogue's buffs are MUCH easier to dispel, that he'll opt for the more dangerous foe. For area dispel magic it will only remove a single buff per casting and targets the highest CL (which will most likely be one of the "real" caster's buffs). |
| Polaris06-27-07, 04:38 PM | potions are a full round if you don't have them out. Standard if you have it in you hand. By this argument so are wands or pretty much anything else. There are lots of ways to pull out items as a free action (like a Haversack for example). OK, interesting interpretation of the description which I don't particularly agree with. Let's look at the activate blindly action in UMD again: activate blindly Activate Blindly: Some magic items are activated by special words, thoughts, or actions. You can activate such an item as if you were using the activation word, thought, or action, even when you’re not and even if you don’t know it. You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate. You get a special +2 bonus on your Use Magic Device check if you’ve activated the item in question at least once before... Now this to me suggests that you don't need to do this action to use a wand or scroll if it has already been identified or desciphered (which should have been done well before hand at purchase, during creation or between adventures). If we are talking about items just found or picked up during the adventure, then yes, you would have to activate blindly. It may suggest it to you, but it doesn't say it especially when you consider that there are several wonderous items that explicitly require command words. It just so happens that all wands and spell completetion items also require such words and if you don't know them (and you can't without the spell knowledge) then you have to make this DC check. It's a straight line read of the rules as they are written. I note that even in the section you quoted, it only says you get a +2 even if you've activated the item before....so such knowledge is NOT automatic even with a UMD check. 1) Time: Often times during adventures you have situations where your party knows there is a combat coming up. During this time you (and your casters) traditionally buff yourself and the party up, UMD allows a wider range of buffs for the rogue. In addition, many of the spells I outlined are non-combat skill enhancing spells. You can cast those any time and get as many tries as you want (so long as you don't roll the "1"). You don't lose the charge or the scroll upon a missed UMD check, you just need to try again. Yes, and each try is a standard action at least (may be longer depending on the spell), and there isn't much point if the duration is 10 rounds or less and you want to activate multiple spells. This is why wands of bless are really bad unless it's the only item you use for prep. 2) Costs: Wand costs can be high, but often worth it for longer-lasting buffing spells considering you get 50 uses/wand. examples Divine Insight (CL3, +8 insight to 1 skill check, 3hr, 4500 gp), I can get +5 forever for my imporant skills for less. Camouflage (CL1, +10 hide, 10 min, 750 gp), Ring of Camouflage is dirt cheap, lasts indefinately and gives the same bonus...which even stacks with an Elven cloak. alter self (CL3, +6 nat AC, alternative move speeds, 30 min, 4500 gp), Polymorph is better and potionable and thus cheaper (because you won't be using 50 charges no matter what). Edit: OK, Polymorph being a 4th level spell would require a special PrC to be potionable (it is in FR however or whenever that PrC exists...Alchemist I think). Regardless, Polymorph targets others and thus is scrollable (and thus cheaper) for others to use on you. clear mind (CL2, +4 saves vs. mind-effecting spells, 20 min, 1500 gp), If you aren't seen you aren't subject to mind-affecting spells. Also see Ring of Invisibility (same effect) or even the slippery mind rogue feature. embrace the wild (CL1, blindsense 30, scent, 10 min, 750 gp), 3.5 blindsense is crap if you have good sensory skills (and rogues will). sign (CL1, +4 bonus to initiative, 10 min, 750 gp), Improved Init lasts forerever and it's free (since virtually all rogues should take it). surefoot (CL2, +10 to climb, tumble, balance, & jump checks, 20 min, 1500 gp). Again you can get +5 that lasts forever for about the same cost. These spells are useful and will be used often over the course of the rogue's development and a single adventure, but are unavailable to the non-UMD rogue (because of the personal range thing). IMO it clearly make the UMD rogue better than the non-UMD rogue at a pretty minor cost of 1 skill rank/lvl they put into maxing out UMD AND costs associated with the wands. If a UMD rogue is short on cash, scrolls of these low level spells work just as well and are very affordable (25 gp CL1, 50 gp CL2, 150 gp CL3/lvl2), particularly if you have a wizard or cleric in the party that can scribe them for you (make those costs half) and are not that much more difficult to activate DC=21-23 for the spells I've outlined. Again this just isn't true as I've demonstrated. Also the rogue that takes one level of cleric with the magic domain also gets these abilities for NO skill cost. 3) Dispel magic. Yes, it can be VERY effective against any buffs you do via UMD. But is your opponent going to cast a targeted dispel magic on the rogue with an alter self? Or your barbarian fighter with the haste/bull's strength? I would suspect that even though the rogue's buffs are MUCH easier to dispel, that he'll opt for the more dangerous foe. Read dispell magic again. When used in an area, it will affect EVERY target in that area and it stops once it strips one enchantment (but only for that target) or runs out of enchantments (but again only for that target). Also if a caster is going to use Dispell magic, he'll want to use it to maximal effectiveness and a smart caster (and most wizards and other casters ARE smart), they will target the person who is hurt the worst by it.....the UMD rogue. Dispell magic is a crapshoot and generally a wasted again against most targets, but against the rogue (and spellcraft will tell the enemy caster the rogue has personal buffs up), it's golden....and thus will be dispell bait. For area dispel magic it will only remove a single buff per casting and targets the highest CL (which will most likely be one of the "real" caster's buffs). Read the spell. It's one buff per casting per target for an area effect dispell. -Polaris |
| Polaris06-27-07, 04:42 PM | potions are a full round if you don't have them out. Standard if you have it in you hand. From the SRD "Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Anyone with a spell on his or her spell list knows how to use a spell trigger item that stores that spell. (This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin.) The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity." This part is cover with the DC20 UMD check "Anyone with a spell on his or her spell list knows how to use a spell trigger item that stores that spell." You only use the blindly DC of 25 on wands he doesn't know what spell is on it. And he could found out the word again when he had it made or from the wizard. Yes, but you are missing my point. I am not saying that your interpretation is unreasonable, but it IS an interpretation. What I am saying is that the "blind activation" DC applies if you don't know the word, thought, action, etc required to use the object. Since you don't have the spell on your list, that means this check would have to apply. I note again that the check specifically applies even if you've used the item before (and thus presumably know what it is). I admit I am reading the rule in it's most narrow way, but the rule CAN be read that way. You are making an interpretation. -polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 04:45 PM | A wand of true strike could come in handy to a rogue too. Any ability buffs also. |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 04:49 PM | Yes, but you are missing my point. I am not saying that your interpretation is unreasonable, but it IS an interpretation. What I am saying is that the "blind activation" DC applies if you don't know the word, thought, action, etc required to use the object. Since you don't have the spell on your list, that means this check would have to apply. I note again that the check specifically applies even if you've used the item before (and thus presumably know what it is). I admit I am reading the rule in it's most narrow way, but the rule CAN be read that way. You are making an interpretation. -polaris I under stand what your saying but most words of acti are give to the person the item is for when it is made. most people who make items don't let people walk away not know how something works wouldn't get much return biss. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 04:50 PM | A wand of true strike could come in handy to a rogue too. Any ability buffs also. False and False. True-Strike really only comes into it's own when you combine it with quicken spell, but since wands (and scrolls) require a MINIMUM of a standard action to activate, that makes it pretty crappy....especially since a wand requires a verbal trigger (so much for that move-silently check). As for ability buffs, they are invariably enhancement bonuses. Items last forever and are a much better deal (for anyone). -Polaris |
| Polaris06-27-07, 04:53 PM | I under stand what your saying but most words of acti are give to the person the item is for when it is made. most people who make items don't let people walk away not know how something works wouldn't get much return biss. Most people can't use wands or other spell trigger devices without spell knowledge either. It makes perfect sense that such knowledge is required in order to know/use the word. In fact it makes a large amount of sense for item creators to keep such things secret. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 05:06 PM | Most people can't use wands or other spell trigger devices without spell knowledge either. It makes perfect sense that such knowledge is required in order to know/use the word. In fact it makes a large amount of sense for item creators to keep such things secret. -Polaris Yes but some rogues can fake having that knowledge with a UMD check. That why it gives you a DC20 for activ wands in the skill Entry. DC 20 UMD checks covers this.. "Most people can't use wands or other spell trigger devices without spell knowledge either. It makes perfect sense that such knowledge is required in order to know/use the word. In fact it makes a large amount of sense for item creators to keep such things secret." Wand are not spell completion item they are spell trigger items. There are 50 pre cast spells in the wand and when acti the spell triggers. Scrolls have a spell almost complete on them. the reader has to complete these when he reads the scroll. That's why the DC for scrolls are high 20 + caster level. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 05:12 PM | Yes but some rogues can fake having that knowledge with a UMD check. That why it gives you a DC20 for activ wands in the skill Entry. Yes, IF you know the activation word/action/whatever. However UMD doesn't actually give you that knowledge. DC 20 UMD checks covers this.. "Most people can't use wands or other spell trigger devices without spell knowledge either. It makes perfect sense that such knowledge is required in order to know/use the word. In fact it makes a large amount of sense for item creators to keep such things secret." No. It allows you to fake it. Not the same. Wand are not spell completion item they are spell trigger items. There are 50 pre cast spells in the wand and when acti the spell triggers. Scrolls have a spell almost complete on them. the reader has to complete these when he reads the scroll. That's why the DC for scrolls are high 20 + caster level. True, but you still have to activate both blindly if you don't actually know the trigger and/or completetion. Actually it's worse for scrolls because you ALSO have to decipher the scroll which is 5 DC harder (and no one else can do it for you). -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 05:20 PM | Yes, IF you know the activation word/action/whatever. However UMD doesn't actually give you that knowledge. No. It allows you to fake it. Not the same. True, but you still have to activate both blindly if you don't actually know the trigger and/or completetion. Actually it's worse for scrolls because you ALSO have to decipher the scroll which is 5 DC harder (and no one else can do it for you). -Polaris As I have already said would be given to you when the it was made or by wizard in the group. decipher the scroll is done before hand then in combat he has to roll for cast the scroll which is 20 + caster level. These are two different actions. |
| Erato06-27-07, 05:26 PM | Rogue #2:<snip> In fact, for us to have wands or scrolls they could use is hoarding treasure that should be theirs. Sorcerer: I heard that! <snip> Barbarian (our only female player): I guess that's true, although I'm still not so keen on being reincarnated as a Halfling. <snip> Cleric: Yeah, unless I use Divine Power...hehehe. Anyways, that Reincarnate was bogus. You only threw it out there because he had UMD. If he didn't, we'd have found a Raise scroll, I'd have used it <snip> Rogue #2: Instead of, you know, helping me get in an assassination attempt by sneaking up on people. <snip> Rogue #2: Well of course not, since you always use enemies with high Spot and Listen, or stupid stuff like Tremorsense. And let's not talk about the Constructs or Undead... Rogue #1: You have a point there. But that wand of Scorching Ray helped us fight those mummies. <snip> Rogue #2: Waste of time. I'd rather save up some cash and get a Helm of Teleportation I can use more than once. Besides, all that's good for is helping me do solo actions. You yourself said you wanted us to be a team, so I felt not wasting points on UMD would let me focus on my own job, and let the spellcasters focus on theirs. <snip> And he's right, if we didn't have a UMD user, I would snip all uncastable/unuseable wands and scrolls from the treasure, most likely. I won't deny that UMD can be extremely usefull, but i think the real problem might be something completely different, even if it wasn't part of Rogue#2 and the Cleric's official complaint. You're adjusting the campaign to make UMD more useful than it would normally be, and in doing that, you run the risk of making the other players feel useless. Think about it: The Cleric suspects that you placed the reincarnation scroll instead of a raise dead, in order to make Rogue#1, and not the Cleric, be the one to save the day, Rogue#2 seems to believe that you purposefully choose monsters that aren't susceptible to anything a typical sneaky type of rogue can do, but require magic instead - all the time, and you even admitted yourself, that there wouldn't have been so many wands among the treasures if nobody could use them. Maybe the Cleric feels that his role as a healer is being undermined, not so much because Rogue#1 can use healing wands, but because the scrolls required to perform truly extraordinary actions in his own field, is suddenly aimed at Rogue#1 :nonono: And this is exactly the sort of thing that can cause him to use things like righteous might :gah: , because he doesn't feel apreciated as a healer. Rogue#2 probably think his build is better than Rogue#1's (and maybe he's right) and would like it to show, instead of running into hordes of monsters made specifically to make him useless :rant: There's also the subject of treasure. Rogue#1 uses consumeable treasure in order to shine, which is fine as long the group makes sure to give all characters an equal value of treasure, because then he pays for it himself. But if they divide the loot after the principle "items go the people who can make most use of them", Rogue#1 has just secured himself a very large part of the treasure :evillaugh And if he tends to use that treasure in a way that gives him a better place in the spotlight (blasting things himself, instead of helping Rogue#2 get a good sneak-attack), well...... :rolleyes: I think the core of it all, is that some of the players feel they would be able to do everything Rogue#1 does, if only you hadn't consistently made sure to favor him and his UMD with custom-made items and enemies. I'm not saying they are right, but please think about it ;) |
| mostholy206-27-07, 05:29 PM | It may suggest it to you, but it doesn't say it especially when you consider that there are several wonderous items that explicitly require command words. It just so happens that all wands and spell completetion items also require such words and if you don't know them (and you can't without the spell knowledge) then you have to make this DC check. A simple Identify spell or purchasing/crafting of the item will give you the "command word". Unless you are playing with a very hard (and IMO unreasonable) DM who decides that when you purchase an item that the merchant doesn't include the "command word" in the purchase price, this is really not an issue. But for you to argue that EVERY UMD check requires an activate blindly DC roll is (for the purposes of purchased/crafted/ID'd/or desciphered items) incorrect. Pricing. We will just go back and forth about this. Scrolls are perfectly affordable at any level and worth the 50-150 gp price per casting. Yes, they are 1 shot items, but if you REALLY need to disarm that trap, are you going to feel that spending that extra 150 gp to get the +8 insight bonus (divine insight) to your check, which can stack with every other bonus you get? Hell, borrow Rogue 1's +5 circumstance item and stack it with the +8 bonus. Dipping 1 lvl into magic domain cleric is pretty harsh IMO. Which would you rather have, spending 1 skill rank/lvl on UMD or dipping into a class which makes you lose out on SA progression, lose BAB and skill ranks, while gaining cleric spell lists (for wands), domain abilities, and 1st lvl cleric spells? dispel magic. Again our difference of opinion lies in what we think is the best strategy. I would rather target a dispel against the most dangerous foe that is benefitting the most from his buffs, even if I have a lower chance of dispelling all the effects on the UMD rogue. (see my previous example). I would hold this position unless the chance of dispelling the non-UMD rogue is VERY low (which it really shouldn't be unless the casters are significantly lower level than the party). BTW Sign (+4 to your next initiative check) stacks with improved initiative. So YES I would like a +8 to my next initiative check for 750 gp, or a 25 gp scroll. |
| Polaris06-27-07, 06:21 PM | As I have already said would be given to you when the it was made or by wizard in the group. Why would the group's wizard do this? If I were playing a wizard I certainly wouldn't? Anything I can make for the rogue, I can already use better than he can anyway. decipher the scroll is done before hand then in combat he has to roll for cast the scroll which is 20 + caster level. These are two different actions. Yes, but you STILL have to make that roll. The fact you can do it ahead of time is why I don't charge another standard action for it. That means effectively to use a scroll, it takes 25+spell level to use it, and that's IF you have the natural ability to otherwise cast the spell. Otherwise it gets even dicier because you have to emulated that ability. A simple Identify spell or purchasing/crafting of the item will give you the "command word". Unless you are playing with a very hard (and IMO unreasonable) DM who decides that when you purchase an item that the merchant doesn't include the "command word" in the purchase price, this is really not an issue. But for you to argue that EVERY UMD check requires an activate blindly DC roll is (for the purposes of purchased/crafted/ID'd/or desciphered items) incorrect. No. I am saying that the rogue has to have done an identify spell (and thus another UMD) FIRST. There are otherwise (such as using a feat that expands the Appraise skill), but in general you DO have to activate wands and spell completetion items blindly. Pricing. We will just go back and forth about this. Scrolls are perfectly affordable at any level and worth the 50-150 gp price per casting. Yes, they are 1 shot items, but if you REALLY need to disarm that trap, are you going to feel that spending that extra 150 gp to get the +8 insight bonus (divine insight) to your check, which can stack with every other bonus you get? Hell, borrow Rogue 1's +5 circumstance item and stack it with the +8 bonus. I love scrolls and items to cover emergencies or situations that aren't likely to come up, but "bang for the buck" consumable magical items (esp scrolls) are TERRIBLE investments of gold and centering a character around this isn't a great idea (as another poster just now indicated). If a rogue is getting more than his fair share because he needs to use consumable items all the time, then that's not right. Dipping 1 lvl into magic domain cleric is pretty harsh IMO. Which would you rather have, spending 1 skill rank/lvl on UMD or dipping into a class which makes you lose out on SA progression, lose BAB and skill ranks, while gaining cleric spell lists (for wands), domain abilities, and 1st lvl cleric spells? I'll take the cleric level every time. One level of cleric does not hurt your sneak attack progression at all. It only hurts your final bab by one (not a huge deal) and if you time the level correctly, that price can be put off for some time. You get on average a hit point out of it, AND one other domain ability (besides magic) AND you don't have to invest in UMD whatsoever. It does also have a one time cost of 6 skill points but over the life of the rogue, that's not a huge deal either (and in fact will save you a net 17 skill points over the life of your rogue). You also get turning which opens up even more items you can use, and lets you leverage that into more feats (some of which are great feats). The single level of cleric also opens up the possibility of sneak attacking undead (and with the magic domain golems). Oh...almost forgot. You also get a much needed +2 boost to both Fort and Will (your two weak saves). dispel magic. Again our difference of opinion lies in what we think is the best strategy. I would rather target a dispel against the most dangerous foe that is benefitting the most from his buffs, even if I have a lower chance of dispelling all the effects on the UMD rogue. (see my previous example). I would hold this position unless the chance of dispelling the non-UMD rogue is VERY low (which it really shouldn't be unless the casters are significantly lower level than the party). Disagree. Dispell magic is normally a wasted action because it's so unlikely to be effecitive enough vice using an offensive spell of your own. Using it to completely strip the buffed up rogue with impunity suddenly makes the action worthwhile. BTW Sign (+4 to your next initiative check) stacks with improved initiative. So YES I would like a +8 to my next initiative check for 750 gp, or a 25 gp scroll. One level of cleric will do you. -Polaris |
| tui06-27-07, 06:27 PM | Since you don't have the spell on your list, that means this check would have to apply. I think you're both looking in the wrong place.. don't look under Activate Blindly. Look under Use a Wand. Use a Wand: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. If it didn't have that clause, you would have to activate wands blindly.. but since it is there, with UMD you never have to activate a spell-trigger item blindly. And thus there is no chance of mishap (except for the roll-a-1 clause). |
| tui06-27-07, 07:07 PM | I agree that using UMD at low levels leaves a significant chance for failure... but really there are plenty of times in combat where rogues are practically useless. Such as against undead, constructs, and oozes. That latter are pretty rare, but undead are fairly common. Personally I'd rather have a 50% chance of having my wand of Control Undead work, than taking a shot at it with my shortbow or short sword for a chance to do 1d6+1 damage. A Cleric with the Magic domain is very cool, and gives lots of neat flexibility. Note that it doesn't give access to ALL spells, since (especially with the Spell Compendium) there are a number of pretty good spells that are on class-specific spell lists, such as Assassin, Paladin, and Ranger. Oh, and I think Erato (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12880524&postcount=66) definitely has a point that the OP should consider. Also, it's nice to intentionally put in treasure that different people in the party can benefit from, but it is also ok to put stuff totally randomly that no one can use... or that if they want to use they have to invest a feat, class level, or whatever. |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 08:25 PM | Why would the group's wizard do this? If I were playing a wizard I certainly wouldn't? Anything I can make for the rogue, I can already use better than he can anyway. Yes, but you STILL have to make that roll. The fact you can do it ahead of time is why I don't charge another standard action for it. That means effectively to use a scroll, it takes 25+spell level to use it, and that's IF you have the natural ability to otherwise cast the spell. Otherwise it gets even dicier because you have to emulated that ability. No. I am saying that the rogue has to have done an identify spell (and thus another UMD) FIRST. There are otherwise (such as using a feat that expands the Appraise skill), but in general you DO have to activate wands and spell completetion items blindly. I love scrolls and items to cover emergencies or situations that aren't likely to come up, but "bang for the buck" consumable magical items (esp scrolls) are TERRIBLE investments of gold and centering a character around this isn't a great idea (as another poster just now indicated). If a rogue is getting more than his fair share because he needs to use consumable items all the time, then that's not right. I'll take the cleric level every time. One level of cleric does not hurt your sneak attack progression at all. It only hurts your final bab by one (not a huge deal) and if you time the level correctly, that price can be put off for some time. You get on average a hit point out of it, AND one other domain ability (besides magic) AND you don't have to invest in UMD whatsoever. It does also have a one time cost of 6 skill points but over the life of the rogue, that's not a huge deal either (and in fact will save you a net 17 skill points over the life of your rogue). You also get turning which opens up even more items you can use, and lets you leverage that into more feats (some of which are great feats). The single level of cleric also opens up the possibility of sneak attacking undead (and with the magic domain golems). Oh...almost forgot. You also get a much needed +2 boost to both Fort and Will (your two weak saves). Disagree. Dispell magic is normally a wasted action because it's so unlikely to be effecitive enough vice using an offensive spell of your own. Using it to completely strip the buffed up rogue with impunity suddenly makes the action worthwhile. One level of cleric will do you. -Polaris Maybe because it is better for the group. Really heartless wizards can charge for it but most wouldn't charge because it is for the group. You take a XP penalty just to cast all wands. My players want even take item creation feats because of the XP cost. That is still 25%? Again and I know some have missed this but there is no auto failure on 1 on skill checks. No you don't change the game to let UMD be useful. Same items , same monsters, same players, and the same game. So you are saying that this would not be the same as a staff. Because the DMG says that wands and staff acti the same not wands and scrolls. With you mind set any magic item used by Players would require UMD before using unless they were a wizard. I wonder how those fighters mange to work those magic weapons and boots. Once a wand is made the acti word is given to you and then all you need is to use UMD DC 20. Note that deciphering a scroll is DC 25= spell level, but casting it is 20 + caster level. So a 1st level scroll of magic missile at 7th caster level would be 26DC to read but 27DC to cast. So that we are clear your saying that even if the rogue is told the word and what spell is on the wand you would still make him Acti it blindly? |
| mostholy206-27-07, 08:33 PM | No. I am saying that the rogue has to have done an identify spell (and thus another UMD) FIRST. There are otherwise (such as using a feat that expands the Appraise skill), but in general you DO have to activate wands and spell completetion items blindly.*sigh* This point seems pretty useless to argue further. On the one hand you put forward the argument that others in the party can cast the spells and/or activate the items with much better effectiveness than a UMD rogue, then you come back and give the exact opposite situation where the UMD rogue has NO allies and must do everything himself to show that a rogue must activate blindly to use any item by UMD. Well I'll just say (as with pretty much everything else in DnD) effectiveness of UMD will really depends on your game. In a solo rogue adventure where you cannot purchase items and must rely on things found, I'd defintely have more reservations of putting ranks in UMD. However, given the situation where you have a party and are purchasing items prior to adventures, UMD IMO is well worth it and can make a very effective rogue in enhancing his abilities. |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 09:50 PM | I would like to know if Polaris is a DM or just player? Any way about true strike, It gives you a +20 insight bonus on your next attack as long as it is made before the end of the next turn. Buffing spells would last long time too. ( one min per caster level) 3 minutes min caster. |
| Metafictional06-27-07, 10:13 PM | It is a point worth considering. A wise DM once told me that the players buy the game they are interested in. Rogue #1 wanted to get a lot of use out of UMD, and paid for the privilege. Rogue #2 didn't. To support Rogue #1, I allow for more items that he can use in the treasure. But you're right, that actively hinders the other characters at times. I don't often sell magic items in my game. I can't see "mass-producing" items, or "Ye Olde Magick Shoppe". What ends up happening is NPC's make items on commission, with a markup to cover the xp costs (5 gp per xp that would be needed to create the item). That's not core, and some would argue that charging more or reducing availability violates the Wealth by Level guidelines. Of course since those _are_ guidelines.... I also tend to be a little more lenient when it comes to found treasure. Magical treasures are very cool, and integral to the DnD experience. Buying the exact item you want doesn't seem as cool as questing and finding a rare treasure. But that's my view of the game, not others. I think I'm going to have to take this into consideration, however, and watch my game more closely. If UMD is taking more of a spotlight than other Rogue skills and Class Abilities, I will either have to make UMD a Class Feature, so all Rogues just get it for free, or cut back on pitching magic items to Rogue #1. |
| Astron the Wizard06-27-07, 10:24 PM | Well, as a player that usually plays a rogue, I can say that I often get UMD. However, about half of the time I play, we do not have a balanced group, with much less magic than the norm. Ergo, UMD is useful. If I had a chance to play in a well balanced group, I probably wouldn't get it (so I support Rogue #2). However, I sometimes find that my rogue has many skill points left over after he gets the essentials. As UMD is a rogue specific skill, I might get it. It depends on your group, and from the information I gathered on this thread, your group is balanced enough so that Rogue #2 wins this argument. EDIT: Unless you RP heavily, then it would depend on backstories and plot and all that jazz. |
| Psikerlord06-27-07, 10:44 PM | I'm guessing that UMD rocks. We are about to start a new campaign, hard-core only (PHB, DMG, MMI) and I am going to max out UMD, take skill focus and magical aptitude, and high charisma 16ish. Pretty sure that he'll be able to use wands and low level scrolls with close to 5-10% failure chance by about level 5. I did note recently however that using arcane scrolls retains the spell failure chance - so with mithril shirt that's 10% - but I can't see a way to avoid that. Any thoughts on how to avoid it? (PHB & DMG only). Also, does anyone know if you can use charisma as your stat as the basis of arcane spells scrolls (like a sorcerer), rather than intelligence (like a wizard)..? My PCs cha will be high, but I suspect his Int will be average 10ish. I rogue with grease, shield, slow, haste summon natures ally and various other goodies is a sure winner for any party I reckon! |
| Ace_of_time06-27-07, 10:53 PM | If he is having fun play this PC and not cause trouble for anyone then he is right no matter what anyone says. As having fun is the most important thing. |
| tui06-28-07, 10:39 AM | Any way about true strike, It gives you a +20 insight bonus on your next attack as long as it is made before the end of the next turn. True Strike CAN be useful, but it means attacking every other round... and you only get the +20 to your first attack; if you've got iterative attacks or something, you still only get it once. So if for some reason you're having a really hard time hitting (really high AC foe), are using a ranged weapon from REALLY far away, if you're fighting something with concealment, or if you've got a single big attack that with a lot of payoff that you really don't want to miss (e.g. 2-handed power attack, leaping or otherwise)... then indeed, True Strike can be very good. If you're a TWF rogue, who wants to get a ton of flanking SAs in there, giving up 2+ attacks to get +20 to one attack, probably isn't that great, and you may end up doing much less damage. |
| DrRufio06-28-07, 11:53 AM | umd = pure awesome. My 3rd level character has a +12 UMD currently, which means I only backfire on a 1 for wands and up to 4rd level scrolls. I may only get it to work 50% of the time, but that doesn't matter out of combat, where that scroll of invisibility is really useful. |
| BW022206-28-07, 01:39 PM | Polaris, By the time this matters, the primary casters can have quicken spell or persistant spells (and clerics can use these with Divine Metamagic) which obviates the problem entirely. Sorry. Few clerics are going to waste 5th-level spell slots just to quicken a cure light wounds or bless spell. Even fewer are going to use a 8th-level spell slot to have a persistance bull's strength up on someone. Not even including that fact that the campaign is half over before the first is an option and 90% over before the later is an option. And even then, how many quickened spells to you have? If the rogue has nothing better to do, why not let him toss up a bless rather than waste your 5th-level spell slots doing so? Also the minor spells from minor items generally have a duration too short to do much good and if they don't have a low casting level, then they have a prohibative cost compared with permanent magical items you could get. Bless lasts one minute. That is 10 rounds. Most combats rarely go beyond that and more than enough to affect the key rounds. Bull's strength would last for a three minutes. Virtually every aiding and defensive spell will last long enough for typical combats. If the combat goes beyond 10 rounds, use another charge from the wand. Except for round/level spells, I've rarely seen duration on wands and scrolls as a serious issue. Also many items can and should be used outside of combat (such as wands of cure light wounds) and primary casters do it better. There are few spells other than cure and restore type spells which you need outside of combat. Yes, the primary caster is better, but... if your cleric is down, it is nice to have someone to heal him. It is also nice if you have a time crunch to have multiple people using said items. Spending time on specialty spells Resist type spells last a long time (10min/level) and apply against the energy type you first face. Non-issue. As for special case situations, yes this is where scrolls and wands shine, but again the primary casters can (and do) do this better. Either you didn't read or you are missing the point. You have been surprised by the elemental. If your cleric would like to spend four rounds getting protections on the entire party, half of them will be dead. With a rogue to share the duties, you get the protections up in half the time. Cleric can't be everywhere Neither will the rogue considering the relative lack of casting level inherent in magic items. In general, magic item spells are too weak and have too low a DC to be worthwhile in combat. Again, you are not reading or missing the point. The OP already said that his party has a cleric. This isn't a choice between a cleric and a rogue. The rogue can be places where the cleric is not. The party can't always be within 30' of each other. It saves the cleric from having to run around the battle field drawing AoOs to reach someone that the rogue can reach. And what do save DCs have to do with clerics needing to move around and heal people? There are no saves with healing, defensive spells, etc. Cleric goes down Potions are always a standard action. Read the rules. DMG p.229. "A character can carefully administer a potion to an unconcious creature as a full-round action, trickling the liquid down the creature's throat." Any more reading tips? Also clerics, druids, bards, paladins, and rangers can all use wands of CLW (and you only need one level in any of these classes) and that's just PHB core. ... Except we know that other than the cleric, there are none of these characters in the party. Nor could other necessarily be expected to break off combat or reach the cleric. Rogues usually have reasonable movement and can tumble to folks without drawing AoOs. Multiple Spell Effects Crappy Spell Levels and Crappy DCs negate most of the effectiveness of this approach using magic items. That's what Quicken spell, Twin Spell, and other variations are for. You realize that a quicked web is a 6th-level spell, that twin spell is completely useless in spell combos, and that the DC of a web spell is pretty meaningless? And at those levels 2nd-level spells (quickened or not) don't have much of a difference to the save. Whether they save against the DC 13 web spell or not isn't the point. They still need to spend several rounds inside the wizard's stinking cloud waiting for a fire to burn their way out or needing to use make checks to move 5' or 10' per round. Access to other Spells Between a Cleric (with at least two domains) and a wizard, you can get access to virtually any spell you need with a little planning. It's not worth the cost. Get real. Clerics have two domains. There are lots of useful spells which druids, rangers, bards, and paladins gets which are not on the wizard or cleric list. What domain has detect plants or animals, pass without trace, animal messenger, tree shape, speak with plants, barkskin, longstrider, awaken, etc. At best you'll get a couple of these. Lots of great spells which the cleric and wizard will not be able to cast. Rogues can be alone Take one level of cleric with the magic domain, or heck, take one level of rogue and then all wizard, and you don't have to worry about the skill at all and sneak just as well (if not better actually). Well, other than the fact that costs you a BAB, a lot of skill points, a level back on your abilities (sneak attack, trap sense, and other abilities), inability to wear armor, etc., etc. -- you might not have the intelligence or wisdom (either for the class or for higher level scrolls), you still need to make CL checks on higher level scrolls, etc. DCs are too high +2 Charisma is unreasonable for a rogue because it costs six build points and there are at least three other attributes more important to a rogue. I'll give +1 MAYBE but not +2. ... All your opinions. Other than dex and con, there are no other attribute needed. Rogues have a ton of social skills -- bluff, gather information, diplomacy, disquise, etc., etc. I see no reason a rogue (especially one considering a UMD build) can't get a 14 charisma (2 extra points on a point buy), or take skill focus. In addition to that you need to activate blindly (certainly if an unknown scroll). Who carries around unknown scrolls? And who the heck casts them? You'd have to be an idiot to cast an unknown spell without knowing whether you are blessing the party or fireballing them. I think we can assume that he has either bought the scrolls, the wizard make them for him, or some of the casters did a read magic or identify on them if they were found. All this reduces your chance for a second level rogue down to 5% chance or even no chance at all. Nice try. You know what spell is on the scroll, because no one is stupid enough to activate blindly during combat. You have the feats, 5 ranks in decypher script, and charisma because you are trying for that build. You start at about 50% and by 7th level it is nearly automatic. Not when activating blindly which is the norm for any spell completion and spell trigger item. Except no one does that. Your spell casters don't grab a wand in combat, point it at the fighter, and say "I hope this is bull's strength?" do they. Of course not. You are ignoring: 1. The cost of the item especially when the same money could be spent for other items that the rogue could have (or the party's casters could have). Let me see... a wand of shield costs 750gp. It would last for about 50 combats or say 4 levels. It can be put on yourself, another rogue, a fighter without a shield, etc. There is no magical item in the DMG which gives the same benefit. Even similiar effects, say a +3 buckler is 9,000gp and it requires proficiency and a free arm. A wand of protection from evil hedges out summoned creatures. Any other item does that for 750gp? Sorry, wands and scrolls are cheap. Other than healing, they last a long, long time. 2. The fact that the spell levels will be low (which means the durations will be lousy) AND the fact they are dead easy to defeat/dispell (almost automatic after a while). Few fights go much longer than one minute. Even if they did, make the scrolls or wands at second level. Twenty+ round combats are almost unheard off. As for dispelling... they are no harder to dispell than the cleric or wizard using a wand or scroll to create that effect. And in most cases dispelling such low-level buff's/protections isn't an issue. If you do an area spell, they won't likely be dispelled because only the highest level spell will be effected. Chances are the fighter will keep his protection from evil up because he has bull's strength, displacement, stone skin, or some other higher-level spell up. If it is a targetted dispell, so what? Rogue just taps the fighter with the wand again. Chances are they enemy caster doesn't have 50 dispell magic's memorized. And of course, if the dispelling works, then again, the rogue and cleric can rebuff the party much faster than just the cleric alone. Item cast spells are nearly worthless because of low casting levels and low DCs (for offensive magic). Buffing, healing, and protection spells don't have DCs. There are lots of spells which have no saving throws or which saving isn't the issue. From fog cloud, web, acid arrow, ice storm, etc. there is either no save or saving isn't the real issue. There are lots of spells the rogue can be putting up while saving the wizard and cleric's intiatives to cast spells which do have saving throws. Not true. Magical Training (FR) allows for any character to start with a small selection of cantrips some of which are ranged touch attacks. I must have missed the part where the OP said he was playing in FR? Unless someone says they are playing in a specific environment can we keep stay in core-only. Otherwise, I'll point out that fact that he could have an flintlock or spaceship. If you are high enough level for raise dead, then you are high enough level for contingency. Enough said. Where should I start? 1. Raise dead is 5th. Contingency is 6th. 2. Contingency only affects the caster. i.e. the wizard. I fail to see how that helps the cleric. 3. Contingency only affects spells which the caster can cast. The wizard can not cast raise dead. 4. Contingency only allow a spell of up to one-third your level (rounded down). Thus, you'd need to be 15th-level to have a contingency spell hold a raise dead. But, thanks for the laugh. I almost thought you were serious. :eek: 14. Using other magical items You are completely missing the point. They rogue can use UMD to emulate other alignments and races and use items which the rest of the party can not. If there are no elves to activate the ancient elven runes then it much harder adventure. Really? Depends on what you want, but if going pure rogue there is precise shot and improved precise shot which is invaluable to a ranged rogue. We aren't talking about want, we are talking about need. Three feats (and 9th-level) to get this path? One could easily just use a wand of magic missiles or acid arrow (touch attack vs. most ACs typically gives you the same chance of hitting). The problem is for a rogue, it takes away critical feats and skill points that is desperately needed for him to fill his duties as party expert and 'expert treasure finder'....and you don't get much return for it especially early. Except, we know... 1. There is another rogue in the party. 2. That magic can be used to make up for any 'missing' skills -- invisibility scrolls for hide, silence scrolls for move silently, knock spells for open lock, etc. 3. None of those feats are critical. Using three feats so that you can fire into melee without penalty? Hardly critical. Just use a wand of magic missles or acid arrow (touch attack likely well worth |
| Polaris06-28-07, 03:12 PM | Polaris, Sorry. Few clerics are going to waste 5th-level spell slots just to quicken a cure light wounds or bless spell. Even fewer are going to use a 8th-level spell slot to have a persistance bull's strength up on someone. Not even including that fact that the campaign is half over before the first is an option and 90% over before the later is an option. And even then, how many quickened spells to you have? If the rogue has nothing better to do, why not let him toss up a bless rather than waste your 5th-level spell slots doing so? Sorry, but YOU didn't read up on Divine Metamagic. With Divine Metamagic, the cleric can use turing attempts in the place of level increases, so he is quickening a spell for a first level slot...and doing persistance Divine Power for only a 4th level slot. As for Bull's strength and other attribute enhancers, they don't stack with items. Read the rules. Bless lasts one minute. That is 10 rounds. Most combats rarely go beyond that and more than enough to affect the key rounds. Bull's strength would last for a three minutes. Virtually every aiding and defensive spell will last long enough for typical combats. If the combat goes beyond 10 rounds, use another charge from the wand. Except for round/level spells, I've rarely seen duration on wands and scrolls as a serious issue. Sure, if that's the only item you are using, but if you are activating say five items, then that bless spell is half gone before you even get into combat. There are few spells other than cure and restore type spells which you need outside of combat. Yes, the primary caster is better, but... if your cleric is down, it is nice to have someone to heal him. It is also nice if you have a time crunch to have multiple people using said items. Long Term protective spells are cast outside of combat and so are long term utility spells. That's quite a few. Spending time on specialty spells Either you didn't read or you are missing the point. You have been surprised by the elemental. If your cleric would like to spend four rounds getting protections on the entire party, half of them will be dead. With a rogue to share the duties, you get the protections up in half the time. Mass Energy Resist should be up as a matter of course. That protects everyone and lasts 10min/level. Cleric can't be everywhere With "mass" spells in Spell Compendium, they can come very close. Again, you are not reading or missing the point. The OP already said that his party has a cleric. This isn't a choice between a cleric and a rogue. Isn't it? If the cleric can use either the same items or similiar items (or even BETTER items that do the same thing), then should the cleric use them. At least one situation in the OP's post indicated that rogue 1 effective 'stole' part of the cleric's role with the complicit cooperation of the DM. The rogue can be places where the cleric is not. The party can't always be within 30' of each other. It saves the cleric from having to run around the battle field drawing AoOs to reach someone that the rogue can reach. When applying long-term buffs you can certainly assure that everyone is within 30' of each other (and should). Furthermore, the one thing you want to avoid is getting caught in isolation (a big reason in the dungeon crawl why melee type characters are favored over missile type characters), without getting so close as to be fireball bait. And what do save DCs have to do with clerics needing to move around and heal people? There are no saves with healing, defensive spells, etc. There are saves for healing spells....when applied against the undead. Also the cleric does such a better job than the rogue with UMD at healing it's not even funny. Cleric goes down In almost all of my DnD experience, the cleric or druid is the last one or nearly the last one to go down. There are a number of things that can stop this including having Zealot Pact on all party members for a nominal cost (well worth it). Even should that happen, most classes can heal a LITTLE....and even if the cleric does recover, during the battle, the party is likely hosed regardless given the power of the cleric class. Basically, if the cleric goes down, you can spend a round stabizing the cleric if you have nothing better to do and then pray....because you are likely all nearly dead by this point anyway. DMG p.229. "A character can carefully administer a potion to an unconcious creature as a full-round action, trickling the liquid down the creature's throat." Any more reading tips? The correction is noted for the UNCONSIOUS person, but the snide remark wasn't needed. Except we know that other than the cleric, there are none of these characters in the party. Nor could other necessarily be expected to break off combat or reach the cleric. Rogues usually have reasonable movement and can tumble to folks without drawing AoOs. Except that unless the cleric is nearly dead, it's generally not a good idea to stabilize dying characters anyway. It's more important to try to end the combat and THEN try to stabilize....and anyone can do that once the combat is over. Multiple Spell Effects You realize that a quicked web is a 6th-level spell, that twin spell is completely useless in spell combos, and that the DC of a web spell is pretty meaningless? And at those levels 2nd-level spells (quickened or not) don't have much of a difference to the save. You realize that once monsters/characters have anykind of fire-resistance, web is pointless anyway, right? Just burn it away. Bad example. Whether they save against the DC 13 web spell or not isn't the point. They still need to spend several rounds inside the wizard's stinking cloud waiting for a fire to burn their way out or needing to use make checks to move 5' or 10' per round. Or move at half speed (the DC is so low it will be likely be made) and get out of the web in one round. Web is again a bad example. Access to other Spells Get real. Clerics have two domains. There are lots of useful spells which druids, rangers, bards, and paladins gets which are not on the wizard or cleric list. What domain has detect plants or animals, pass without trace, animal messenger, tree shape, speak with plants, barkskin, longstrider, awaken, etc. At best you'll get a couple of these. With two domains (well one after the magic domain), you can cherry-pick the best spells. In short, I am "being real". Lots of great spells which the cleric and wizard will not be able to cast. There are lots more that they can (and do the same job) especially when one is allowed to cherry pick a floating domain. Rogues can be alone This is a party strength how? If anything it seems to be causing party tension in the OP's post. Well, other than the fact that costs you a BAB, a lot of skill points, a level back on your abilities (sneak attack, trap sense, and other abilities), inability to wear armor, etc., etc. -- you might not have the intelligence or wisdom (either for the class or for higher level scrolls), you still need to make CL checks on higher level scrolls, etc. Back one on Bab? You can postpone that for three levels and it's not like Rogue's live or die by their Bab anyway. If you are using the admittedly optional fractional Bab rules it doesn't even do that since clerics and rogues share the same bab progression. A lot of skill points? It costs you SIX. That's all...and you get to save 23 because you don't need to take UMD. Net savings of 17 skill points. A level back on your abilities? 20th level rogue is a dead level. Think about it. Inability to wear armor? Clerics can wear more armor than rogues can. In fact the rogue gains the shield proficiency if he wants it. As for scrolls, the CL requirements are piddling. Much less than for UMD checks, and you can always use wands with no check whatsoever. DCs are too high All your opinions. Other than dex and con, there are no other attribute needed. Rogues have a ton of social skills -- bluff, gather information, diplomacy, disquise, etc., etc. I see no reason a rogue (especially one considering a UMD build) can't get a 14 charisma (2 extra points on a point buy), or take skill focus. A solid rogue is going to need Spot, Listen, Move-Silent, Hide, SEARCH, Disable Device, Open Lock just to start. That's 7 of the starting eight and that's before you branch out. Rogues need that high Int score and between that and Con and Dex, that doesn't leave much for Charisma. Maybe +1 but not +2. Who carries around unknown scrolls? And who the heck casts them? You'd have to be an idiot to cast an unknown spell without knowing whether you are blessing the party or fireballing them. You have to read a scroll to be able to cast it unless you want to activate blindly. Just because a wizard has deciphered it doesn't mean you have. For wizards it's pretty much automatic either via read magic in down-time or spellcraft which wizards generally have in spades. For you it's a very hard DC 25+level UMD check. I think we can assume that he has either bought the scrolls, the wizard make them for him, or some of the casters did a read magic or identify on them if they were found. That helps YOU how? Nice try. You know what spell is on the scroll, because no one is stupid enough to activate blindly during combat. You have the feats, 5 ranks in decypher script, and charisma because you are trying for that build. You start at about 50% and by 7th level it is nearly automatic. Except it's not as I've already proven. Except no one does that. Your spell casters don't grab a wand in combat, point it at the fighter, and say "I hope this is bull's strength?" do they. Of course not. Wizards and sorcerers get read magic universally. Identify is a first level wizard spell. Get the drift? Let me see... a wand of shield costs 750gp. It would last for about 50 combats or say 4 levels. It can be put on yourself, another rogue, a fighter without a shield, etc. There is no magical item in the DMG which gives the same benefit. Even similiar effects, say a +3 buckler is 9,000gp and it requires proficiency and a free arm. A wand of protection from evil hedges out summoned creatures. Any other item does that for 750gp? A buckler has a -0 ACP and therefor effectively does not require proficiency. Also while you were doing that, you could have been doing something worthwhile. Sorry, wands and scrolls are cheap. Other than healing, they last a long, long time. Actually no they aren't. They have a cheap item price but if you add it all up, consumables are a terribly ineffecient use of converting gold into magical support with very few exceptions (like wands of CLW). That doesn't mean they don't have their place. They most certainly do and I love items, but not as the main emphasis of a character (i.e. the UMD rogue). Few fights go much longer than one minute. Even if they did, make the scrolls or wands at second level. Twenty+ round combats are almost unheard off. This is the problem with min/level duration spells. They don't last long enough to cast outside of combat becaus they don't last long enough (especially for items!), but they aren't worth the standard action opportunity cost in it. That applies to the UMD rogue in spades. Eventually pure casters get around this via metamagic and simple scaling. The UMD user never really does. As for dispelling... they are no harder to dispell than the cleric or wizard using a wand or scroll to create that effect. And in most cases dispelling such low-level buff's/protections isn't an issue. If you do an area spell, they won't likely be dispelled because only the highest level spell will be effected. Chances are the fighter will keep his protection from evil up because he has bull's strength, displacement, stone skin, or some other higher-level spell up. If it is a targetted dispell, so what? Rogue just taps the fighter with the wand again. Chances are they enemy caster doesn't have 50 dispell magic's memorized. A couple of things wrong with this. The pure caster doesn't depend on his consumable items for his combat power. They help him out (especially by having magic ready for special circumstances so he doesn't have to waste a slot prepping a situational spell). In combat (certainly IMX across many varied groups with wildly different playing styles), once an item buff has been dispelled, it's not worth the standard action to reestablish it. If the rogue recasts the wand buff on the fighter than he has spend at least a standard action that would have better been spent ending the battle (i.e. killing the enemy). The reason why dispell magic is normally such a crappy spell is that the likely results aren't worth the standard action. In the cast of item-cast spells, that's not true anymore. And of course, if the dispelling works, then again, the rogue and cleric can rebuff the party much faster than just the cleric alone. Terrific. That takes two characters out of combat. Not. A. Good. Idea. Buffing, healing, and protection spells don't have DCs. There are lots of spells which have no saving throws or which saving isn't the issue. From fog cloud, web, acid arrow, ice storm, etc. there is either no save or saving isn't the real issue. There are lots of spells the rogue can be putting up while saving the wizard and cleric's intiatives to cast spells which do have saving throws. Such spells are best used outside of immediate combat which mitigates and even obviates much of the supposed advantage of the UMD rogue. I must have missed the part where the OP said he was playing in FR? Unless someone says they are playing in a specific environment can we keep stay in core-only. Otherwise, I'll point out that fact that he could have an flintlock or spaceship. You made a claim. You said there was no feat that granted a ranged touch attack. I proved you wrong. Where should I start? 1. Raise dead is 5th. Contingency is 6th. 2. Contingency only affects the caster. i.e. the wizard. I fail to see how that helps the cleric. 3. Contingency only affects spells which the caster can cast. The wizard can not cast raise dead. 4. Contingency only allow a spell of up to one-third your level (rounded down). Thus, you'd need to be 15th-level to have a contingency spell hold a raise dead. But, thanks for the laugh. I almost thought you were serious. :eek: In the situation where the cleric died but no one else did AND you had a convenient scroll of raise dead, then sure, the UMD rogue gets to shine. Really, just how common is this? What I was trying to point out is that the cleric can protect himself (and others) so well, that if he died, then you most likely are looking at a TPK situation. This is also assuming only one cleric in the group which is the case for OP's group, but more and more can not be assumed (it's becoming widely known that the second cleric is insanely useful to a group...and not just as a safety net). 14. Using other magical items You are completely missing the point. They rogue can use UMD to emulate other alignments and races and use items which the rest of the party can not. If there are no elves to activate the ancient elven runes then it much harder adventure. YOU are the one missing the point. It's called "opportunity cost". Given the choice between using item badly by the UMD rogue or "cashing it in" to give an equally potent item that is designed with the party in mind, it's a no-brainer. You should get the custom item. We aren't talking about want, we are talking about need. Three feats (and 9th-level) to get this path? One could easily just use a wand of magic missiles or acid arrow (touch attack vs. most ACs typically gives you the same chance of hitting). Which is three feats that could have been used to improve yourself as a rogue. Except, we know... 1. There is another rogue in the party. Situational. 2. That magic can be used to make up for any 'missing' skills -- invisibility scrolls for hide, silence scrolls for move silently, knock spells for open lock, etc. Only to a degree. Hide works even against True-sight. Invisibility does not. 3. None of those feats are critical. Using three feats so that you can fire into melee without penalty? Hardly critical. Just use a wand of magic missles or acid arrow (touch attack likely well worth Magic Missile is a horrible choice for a rogue since without a ranged attack, he gets no sneak attack damage (his bread and butter offensive ability). As for feats being critical, I've never said that any one feat is critical....but putting yourself three feats behind a rogue that's specialized as a rogue (in whatever area) is suboptimal to say the least. -Polaris |
| mostholy206-28-07, 03:24 PM | Whew! That is a mouthful. Impressive post Polaris. |
| Polaris06-28-07, 03:27 PM | I would like to know if Polaris is a DM or just player? Missed this. I happen to be both. I tend to prefer being a player, but I have quite a bit of experience being a DM as well. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-28-07, 03:47 PM | True Strike CAN be useful, but it means attacking every other round... and you only get the +20 to your first attack; if you've got iterative attacks or something, you still only get it once. So if for some reason you're having a really hard time hitting (really high AC foe), are using a ranged weapon from REALLY far away, if you're fighting something with concealment, or if you've got a single big attack that with a lot of payoff that you really don't want to miss (e.g. 2-handed power attack, leaping or otherwise)... then indeed, True Strike can be very good. If you're a TWF rogue, who wants to get a ton of flanking SAs in there, giving up 2+ attacks to get +20 to one attack, probably isn't that great, and you may end up doing much less damage. In tough fights when the rogue couldn't normaly hit every other round is better then no attacks at all. Only use this when need not for every combat encounter. |
| Leilond06-28-07, 03:49 PM | Interesting post polaris. Buyt I think you miss a point If in any given moment can be usefull to use a spell, it isn't important that there's still someone that can cast it, wiothout the need of a rogue. There's the possibility that "having two at the same time" is even better. It is possible that the one that can, has something more better to cast. And here YOU are the one missing the point. It's called "opportunity cost". Given the choice between using item badly by the UMD rogue or "cashing it in" to give an equally potent item that is designed with the party in mind, it's a no-brainer. You should get the custom item. Badly? Why "badly"? A 12th level rogue can use any wand, very well |
| Ace_of_time06-28-07, 04:05 PM | They made UMD class skill because some people might speicalize in it. To say that it is a waste to give up the other thing for what is normally a rogue thing doesn't' make sense because UMD is a rogue thing. I already posted the other post that the other +1 could come from a item. any way a +1 ether way won't matter. I already had search on my list so adding your DD and OL would still Keep with rogue skill points per level. It seem like you don't like it because you wouldn't roll a rogue that way and to me that is not fair. |
| tui06-28-07, 04:37 PM | Another point worth considering is that the OP isn't talking about having the player reroll a new character... but just to have him redistribute his UMD skills into other skills. So really the argument isn't about whether a Rogue is the optimal class for a UMD character, or even whether the same effects could be achieved easier/cheaper by another class... but rather whether UMD is effective for this particular rogue to use with this particular party. As a side note, a great spell for UMD is Last Breath (reincarnate without level loss as a fourth level spell, if you do it within 1 round); you could make it a wand, but hopefully you won't use it enough for it to be worth the price, so better take it as a scroll. |
| Leilond06-28-07, 05:02 PM | A rogue have 8 skill point each level (at least) He can become fully effective with UMD in two level and a feat (no more than 3 level then)... no "redistribuition" is necessary |
| Ace_of_time06-28-07, 09:20 PM | This was posted on post #80. But I think it needs said again. Rogue cleric with magic domain is smart and a good start but then you have to take one level in bard, 1 in druid, 1 in paladin, 1 in ranger, and that will cover core casters in PHB. Then you can start with DMG pro classes. Then we can go to levels from all the non core spellcasting classes. Then at epic levels you can start playing your rogue. UMD lets you use any magic items for any class. Any wand or scroll from any spellcasting class. I had umd rogue that just used his produce flame wand for his ranged attack. Made it with max caster level. I think 5th. It is one of the best 1st level spells in the game. |
| BW022206-28-07, 09:40 PM | Polaris Sorry, but YOU didn't read up on Divine Metamagic. .... We aren't talking about your cleric build, we are talking about the OP. He said nothing of his cleric have divine metamagic, Complete Divine, quicken spell, or being ultra-high level. The rest of use are in the reality of the orginal post. Two rogues, a cleric, and a wizard. Sure, if that's the only item you are using, but if you are activating say five items, then that bless spell is half gone before you even get into combat. How many times does the bad guy allow you to cast five or six spells immediately prior to combat? How much noise do you have to make before they flee, start buffing themselves, come out and attack you, etc. You can pre-cast 10 min./level spells well outside the dungeon, sure. But even 10th-level folks can rarely cast minute/level spells outside of combat for fear that it takes 20 minutes to search a room. In any case, you cast your higher level spells first, and cast bless last. And it still doesn't change the fact that a cleric can't do any any better than the rogue using using scrolls or wands either. He'd have to blow memorized spells. He certainly can't cast five or six spells prior to every combat anyway. Cleric memorizes a lot of higher level buffs and casts them. You fill in with a few lower level spells. Mass Energy Resist should be up as a matter of course. That protects everyone and lasts 10min/level. Where do you get this stuff? Did the OP say he had a 13th-level cleric in the party or something with endless array of spells? How about giving practical advice other than wishing his characters to ultra-high levels and using books he didn't say he was using? There are saves for healing spells....when applied against the undead. I don't think the OP said that any of his characters were undead. If you want to avoid the issue that a cleric can't heal two people in the same round and that even getting to another PC might draw multiple AoOs, with talk about saving throws on healing splls, then any rational discussion is pointless. There are a number of things that can stop this including having Zealot Pact on all party members for a nominal cost (well worth it). Give me a break. If you want to include stuff which isn't core, which the OP didn't say anything about, and at levels which folks don't have, then go give advice to someone else. Even should that happen, most classes can heal a LITTLE....and even if the cleric does recover, during the battle, the party is likely hosed regardless given the power of the cleric class. Most classes? For the OP which class would that be -- the two rogues or the wizard? Sorry, presumably whatever just dropped the cleric is standing next to him. If you take out a potion (AoO) one round, and then pour it down the cleric's throat (another AoO). Assuming that the bad guy doesn't just cream to unconcious cleric during that time, the poor buy trying it may be down too. I'll vote for a rogue with a wand. Is the rest of the fight going to be fun. No. But at least the rogue can keep the cleric from dying. Take him positive, the the cleric can play dead or perhaps cast defensively on the ground. The correction is noted for the UNCONSIOUS person, but the snide remark wasn't needed. Your exact quote was "Potions are always a standard action. Read the rules." I said that the cleric was down. As for the snide comments, I suppose your comment of "Read the rules" wasn't snide? You realize that once monsters/characters have anykind of fire-resistance, web is pointless anyway, right? Just burn it away. Bad example. You do realize that it only burns away at 5' per round and the creatures need a source of fire? And of course this is another dodge of the point. The point is that spell combos work much better if you cast multiple spells are once. The rogue is a great way of getting the spells off before they can continue the individual spell. Is there any reason why I give an example of 3rd and 2nd-level spell combos, you toss out stuff that doesn't exist at APL 5? If it was a hell hound, then obviously they wouldn't use that tactic. If they were playing APL 12, they would be using blade barrier and sleet storm or something. With two domains (well one after the magic domain), you can cherry-pick the best spells. In short, I am "being real". There is no reason the rogue can't go and buy scrolls of most of those spells. Of course they are the best spells. That's why the rogue (and the party) would want them! This is a party strength how? If anything it seems to be causing party tension in the OP's post. Because rogues can go scouting. They may need to be ahead of the party looking for traps. They may need to sneak into an enemy camp to steal some plans or pickpocket some papers off the guard. They may be on guard duty or in a tree on look out. They may need to disquise themselves as clerics to get into an evil abbey. Maybe one of them fell into a pit trap or a sliding block separated them. Would I want to start combat separated. No. Does it sometimes happen. Yes. UMD is a nice backup such that there is some healing, protection, and offensive spells on the separated groups. A level back on your abilities? 20th level rogue is a dead level. Think about it. Wow. I don't believe the OP said that he started at 20th-level? Perhaps you forget that folks play more than half the campaign at 1st through 10th-levels. There are folks who never play high-levels -- just due to deaths, groups breaking up, etc. Why do you always jump to ultra-high levels as justification of how something doesn't affect the game? That helps YOU how? You only need to activate something blindly if it has command words or requires some special action to active. Identify tells you exactly how to activate it. And BTW, if you don't know how to activate it, then at least the UMD rogue can activate it with a flat 25. The cleric or wizard (even if they could use the item) can't use it at all. Wizards and sorcerers get read magic universally. Identify is a first level wizard spell. Get the drift? You do realize that there is a wizard and cleric in the OP party? You do realize the wizard can identify the item and then tell the rogue how to activate it? And if they can't identify items, then they hire someone in town to do it. If they can't get to town, then the rogue could still try to use it if he wanted to. Actually no they aren't. They have a cheap item price but if you add it all up, consumables are a terribly ineffecient use of converting gold into magical support with very few exceptions (like wands of CLW). That doesn't mean they don't have their place. They most certainly do and I love items, but not as the main emphasis of a character (i.e. the UMD rogue). They are cheap. For the cost of a +1 sword, you could fill the rogue's back with 1st and 2nd-level scrolls and wands. 50 characters on a non-healing wand lasts a long time. Even expensive consumables (say a wand of displacement at 11,500gp) might easily last 25+ combats, or well over a level. The amount of healing it could save would easily pay for itself. Terrific. That takes two characters out of combat. Not. A. Good. Idea. Except that some buffs nerf extremely high levels spells or abilities. For example, a higher level BBEG has a bunch of summoned elementals. In one round (with two wands of protection from evil), half the party is immune. Dispell magic is usually used to remove specific protections which prevent the BBEG from affecting the party. Without the pro. from evil, the elemental tears the party to ribbons. With it, they combat goes pretty smoothly. The elemental is blocked, the wizard blasts the BBEG, the cleric and rogues just keep putting up pro. evil each time the BBEG dispells it. And please don't give me the APL 18 fix to the situation. In the situation where the cleric died but no one else did AND you had a convenient scroll of raise dead, then sure, the UMD rogue gets to shine. Well, I see little reason a party wouldn't carry around a scroll of raise dead, just in case at those levels. Even if you never had to use it, I certainly can't see any reason each PC wouldn't want a 1200gp insurance policy. Character deaths do happen and clerics do die. Even if the cleric didn't drop, being in a dangerous location, possibly not able to rest until morning, I'd want the scroll just so that say the wizard would be around today. YOU are the one missing the point. It's called "opportunity cost". Given the choice between using item badly by the UMD rogue or "cashing it in" to give an equally potent item that is designed with the party in mind, it's a no-brainer. You should get the custom item. What choice? You found the item. You aren't in Walmart. You are sitting in the tomb of the dead elven prince and only his holy sword can defeat the demon. If you want to ask the demon to wait while you go back into town, sell the sword, and buy a demon slaying sword which non-elves can use... be my guest. Situational. Yes, the sitution which the OP told you was in effect. The only situation which matters. If the OP said the situation was different, I'd give different advice. |
| tui06-28-07, 10:00 PM | What choice? You found the item. You aren't in Walmart. You are sitting in the tomb of the dead elven prince and only his holy sword can defeat the demon. If you want to ask the demon to wait while you go back into town, sell the sword, and buy a demon slaying sword which non-elves can use... be my guest. While I disagree with Polaris's total dismissal of UMD as a useful skill, he does have a point here... if you've got spellcasters with item creation feats (and the time to craft), it can be very useful to sell found items off and craft specific items that you need more, with the only cost being xp. Certainly your casters won't have all the item creation feats, or access to all spells, but this can be an effective way to work together as a team to get what you really need. So item creation can't do everything for you, but neither can UMD. |
| Ace_of_time06-28-07, 10:13 PM | I'm still trying to figure out who in the world is going to set a web on fire with themsleves or an ally trapped in it. That is not very smart. Most wizard take item creation feats as a cheaper way to get items they want. Mata magic feats look cool but really aren't that useful when you can rods that do the same thing. So they take item creation feats for there bonus feats and use level feat for other things. Even cleric atleast have wand and scroll craft. |
| tui06-28-07, 10:43 PM | I'm still trying to figure out who in the world is going to set a web on fire with themsleves or an ally trapped in it. That is not very smart. His point, whether convincing or not, is that fire resistance (or immunity) is THE most common resistance. So just don't use Web on Devils, Demons, Hell Hounds, Salamanders, Red Dragons, anything really big, and the like. (And of course pretty much anyone can have resistance from a spell or item if they prepare ahead of time.) |
| Ace_of_time06-28-07, 11:30 PM | His point, whether convincing or not, is that fire resistance (or immunity) is THE most common resistance. So just don't use Web on Devils, Demons, Hell Hounds, Salamanders, Red Dragons, anything really big, and the like. (And of course pretty much anyone can have resistance from a spell or item if they prepare ahead of time.)I'll be sure to remember that the next devil I face.:detect: |
| angryscrub06-28-07, 11:49 PM | No. I am saying that the rogue has to have done an identify spell (and thus another UMD) FIRST. There are otherwise (such as using a feat that expands the Appraise skill), but in general you DO have to activate wands and spell completetion items blindly. gah. ok. i can't tell, are you really serious about this? this has to be the most out of control interpretation (and yours definitely is nothing more than a bizarre interpretation) of UMD ever. by your logic, there should be only one section under UMD. activate blindly. why do they even have the other sections? they are redundant. also by your logic, a hick from out on the farm with an int 8 and 4 ranks in profession (serf) who discovers he's a sorcerer one day, can use any wand of first level wizard/sorcerer spells because he knows the proper words to say? just think about that for a minute. you are saying that he can use the wand cause he already knows how to cast the spells, even though he only knows two? Back one on Bab? You can postpone that for three levels and it's not like Rogue's live or die by their Bab anyway. If you are using the admittedly optional fractional Bab rules it doesn't even do that since clerics and rogues share the same bab progression. A lot of skill points? It costs you SIX. That's all...and you get to save 23 because you don't need to take UMD. Net savings of 17 skill points. A level back on your abilities? 20th level rogue is a dead level. Think about it. Inability to wear armor? Clerics can wear more armor than rogues can. In fact the rogue gains the shield proficiency if he wants it. ermm, i know we're talking mechanics here, and not necessarily RP, but seriously, does anyone actually play with DMs that enforce what it means to be a priest? when i play rogues, they like to steal stuff. all the time. for themselves. not for some god. or higher power. or whatever. simply put, dipping into cleric is just not an option for a lot of rogue characters, for much the same reason dipping into paladin isn't. As for scrolls, the CL requirements are piddling. Much less than for UMD checks, and you can always use wands with no check whatsoever. A solid rogue is going to need Spot, Listen, Move-Silent, Hide, SEARCH, Disable Device, Open Lock just to start. That's 7 of the starting eight and that's before you branch out. Rogues need that high Int score and between that and Con and Dex, that doesn't leave much for Charisma. Maybe +1 but not +2. we know actually very little about this campaign, and that is certainly not a warranted assumption about every campaign. i have played in games where building a rogue that dumped str, dex, and con was not only doable, but almost desirable because of the amount of social interaction that went on in game. a "solid" rogue, as you put it, might actually have none of the skills you mentioned (except search, which i feel is a given for any rogue except possibly one focused purely on combat). how about appraise, bluff, diplomacy, disguise, forgery, gather information, knowledge local, and sense motive to start for a solid rogue? cha is going to be right behind or possibly ahead of int for #1 in that build, and if you think that's not a playable build, or useful to the team, well... we've obviously played in COMPLETELY different types of games. You have to read a scroll to be able to cast it unless you want to activate blindly. Just because a wizard has deciphered it doesn't mean you have. For wizards it's pretty much automatic either via read magic in down-time or spellcraft which wizards generally have in spades. For you it's a very hard DC 25+level UMD check. so let me get this straight, the wizards have downtime, but the rogues don't? how long does that decipher check take? a round? a minute? let's say a minute, though i think that's bogus, i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. so after, say, twenty minutes, a rogue with a +5 to his check is, statistically speaking, going to be able to decipher it. wizards have time to research and make custom items, which could take weeks or months, but rogues don't even have twenty free minutes ever to decipher a scroll? what truly odd game worlds you play in. Actually no they aren't. They have a cheap item price but if you add it all up, consumables are a terribly ineffecient use of converting gold into magical support with very few exceptions (like wands of CLW). That doesn't mean they don't have their place. They most certainly do and I love items, but not as the main emphasis of a character (i.e. the UMD rogue). well, if anyone actually tried to make a UMD rogue as a character concept, that would be quite odd. i'm not with some of the people suggesting skill focus and magical aptitude, but socially focused rogue builds are quite capable of incorporating it effectively, because despite what you say, not every rogue in every campaign requires the physical stats to be #1 on the priority list. universally panning UMD because it doesn't fit your personal concept of what a rogue should be focusing on seems a tad bit silly. A couple of things wrong with this. The pure caster doesn't depend on his consumable items for his combat power. They help him out (especially by having magic ready for special circumstances so he doesn't have to waste a slot prepping a situational spell). In combat (certainly IMX across many varied groups with wildly different playing styles), once an item buff has been dispelled, it's not worth the standard action to reestablish it. If the rogue recasts the wand buff on the fighter than he has spend at least a standard action that would have better been spent ending the battle (i.e. killing the enemy). The reason why dispell magic is normally such a crappy spell is that the likely results aren't worth the standard action. In the cast of item-cast spells, that's not true anymore. dude, you're all about opportunity cost every where else. it's amazing how selective you are about it. you've just sold me on why every party should be begging for a UMD rogue. apparently every BBEG is going to see that rogue, and be like, "A-HA! that rogue has been UMDing buffs on himself! my best course of action is clearly to dispel him, using 1 of my at most 2 actions for the round, and ignore whatever the hell else the other four people in the group attacking me are doing! BRILLIANT!" for the cost of a couple of charges in a wand, i have my enemies dispelling me every round. i'll take that trade any day of the week. YOU are the one missing the point. It's called "opportunity cost". Given the choice between using item badly by the UMD rogue or "cashing it in" to give an equally potent item that is designed with the party in mind, it's a no-brainer. You should get the custom item. oh look, opportunity cost. how amusing. as someone else pointed out, you don't always have that option. getting medical insurance is a suckers game, if you never use it. think about the opportunity cost. i mean, you never get sick right? so you don't need it, and you can spend that money on more beer. good luck to you. Which is three feats that could have been used to improve yourself as a rogue. yes, like opend minded, open minded, and oh yeah, open minded. but perhaps that discussion should wait for another day. Magic Missile is a horrible choice for a rogue since without a ranged attack, he gets no sneak attack damage (his bread and butter offensive ability). As for feats being critical, I've never said that any one feat is critical....but putting yourself three feats behind a rogue that's specialized as a rogue (in whatever area) is suboptimal to say the least. ummm. lessee. SA range is 30'. i'll give you the benefit of the doubt again and assume you're a crossbow sniper based rogue build (and gosh, what rogue that's an honest-to-god SOLID ROGUE isn't, really?), so you're looking at 60' range. minimum range on magic missile, assuming a first level caster, is 110'. and a guaranteed hit. gee, you're right, i can't think of any circumstances, ever, where the magic missile is going to be a superior option to SA. now i agree, devoting 3 feats to this might be a bit much, but you don't really have to, depending on your build. and how much do your flaming, icy burst, and acid crossbows cost? or are you carrying around fifty bolts of each type? cause let me tell you, you may not always need to make acid (or cold or fire or electrical) based sneak attacks, but the one time you do, and you can do it with one charge from an acid arrow wand instead of carrying around fifty bolts, or three different crossbows (or one really damned expensive one), you're going to be laughing at the guy standing there because he couldn't afford the one weapon enhancement that would overcome this particular creature's damage resistance or regeneration, and thought that UMD was a total waste of skill points. |
| Metafictional06-29-07, 04:16 AM | Wow, quite a debate we have going here. Ok, since some have mentioned this, time to give a few more details about the game. Mind you, I wanted to know if UMD was a good option generally, but this is fine too. Rogue #1: C/G Half-Elf Rogue 9. I'm approximating their stats, the guys insisted on die roll, even though I would prefer point-buy, and since they keep their sheets (I've been known to misplace them) this is going off of memory. Str 13, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 9, Cha 15 (his two level up points went into Con, he has the Sorceror's old Cloak of Charisma +2, Gloves of Dexterity +2, and his Feats are Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Skill Focus: UMD, and Weapon Finesse). His current weapons of choice are a Wand of Scorching Ray (1 Ray), Wand of Extended Acid Arrow (CL 5, I think), and his +2 Shocking Short Sword. Rogue #2: N/N Half-Orc Rogue 9. Str 18, Dex 16, Con 15, Int 12, Wis 13, Cha 11 (his two level up points went into Str, he has Gauntlets of Ogre Power and his Feats are Two-Weapon Fighting, Dodge, Mobility, and Spring Attack. He has this strange fascination with the staff as his double weapon of choice, since it's A) cheap, B) a double weapon, and C) he can just swing it two-handed when he uses Spring Attack. Right now he has a +1 Undead Bane/+1 Construct Bane Staff. Sorcerer: C/G Elf Sorcerer 9 Str 11, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 19 (two level up points went into Cha, he has a Cloak of Charisma +4, and his Feats are Eschew Material Components, Extend Spell, Heighten Spell, and Spell Focus: Transmutation (don't ask, the only spell this seems to work on is Slow). Uses the Metamagic Mastery feature from PHBII). Favorite spells: Slow, Fireball, Burning Hands, Wall of Fire...and Invisibility. Cleric: Human Cloistered Cleric 9 Str 11, Dex 13, Con 15, Int 18, Wis 19, Cha 16 (two level up points went to Wis, he has a Circlet of Persuasion Rogue #1 covets highly, and his Feats are Skill Focus Concentration, Brew Potion, Augment Healing (I think), and um...Craft Wand). Major focus on healing, debuff removal, and buffs. Fire and Earth Domains. As you can see, he has this thing about Turning things. Barbarian: Halfing Barbarian 8 Str 14, Dex 18, Con 18, Int 14, Wis 14, Cha 15 (Str -2 and Dex +2 from being reincarnated as a Halfling, 2 level ups into Con. Has Gauntlets of Ogre Power. Feats are Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack. Actually uses a +1 Frost Battleaxe and, as bizarre as this sounds, a +2 Shield). This isn't a complete list of their items, as you can see, our fights tend to go on a little long. After her first "death", the Barbarian decided she didn't like her original Power Attack build that used a Greatsword any longer. With lower Strength, and a newfound distaste for enemy Full Attacks, I let her retrain, and now she's a high AC skirmisher. It still seems pretty effective, but our fights do take longer. That doesn't seem to bother anyone but Rogue #2, who gripes that his Two Weapon fighting is going to waste, but doesn't want to retrain it. They're obviously not optimized fully either, but they're not badly built characters, and they have some pretty nice tactics, although, as I said, since flanking is used less often, Sneak Attacks aren't as plentiful as they could be. I allow for several non-core books, but the group decided they wanted to play a "classic" game, using as few non-core options as they can. We don't yet own Spell Compendium, and we got ToB after everyone was happy with their characters. Thank you for all the input so far! |
| mostholy206-29-07, 03:13 PM | Rogue #1: C/G Half-Elf Rogue 9. I'm approximating their stats, the guys insisted on die roll, even though I would prefer point-buy, and since they keep their sheets (I've been known to misplace them) this is going off of memory. Str 13, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 9, Cha 15 (his two level up points went into Con, he has the Sorceror's old Cloak of Charisma +2, Gloves of Dexterity +2, and his Feats are Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Skill Focus: UMD, and Weapon Finesse). His current weapons of choice are a Wand of Scorching Ray (1 Ray), Wand of Extended Acid Arrow (CL 5, I think), and his +2 Shocking Short Sword.Ah, finally some specifics...Well, seeing that the UMD rogue is already 9th lvl AND has both a high CHA AND skill focus (UMD) his check is going to be (if maxed out) +18 (more for scrolls if he has skill synergy). That's plenty good for using wands (fail only on a natural "1" during combat) and most scrolls. I would say since that's how he obviously developed his character to focus on UMD to go ahead and stick with UMD. It would help if he had a reliable way to always deny DEX to opponents to always get his SA in. If he really wants to make UMD his focus, I highly recommend that he take 1 lvl in the Extemplar PrC to gain even higher bonus on his UMD check. |
| penchant06-29-07, 05:34 PM | I thought on multi attacks the rogue only get sneak on the first one. It would be the same as rapid shot. Well now would be a good time to answer this question. A rogue gets sneak attack any time he qualifies for it, but only once per attack roll. Rapid shot simply adds to your full attack so if you qualify you get it for your extra rapid shot attack. However, I believe you meant to say Manyshot. This is different. It fires multiple arrows with one attack roll. Because of this you only get SA damage once. Just remember, anytime you roll to hit with anything that does HP damage, you can do SA damage too. This includes full attacks, touch spells, ranged touch spells, rays and even multiple rays. You can even SA with Disintegrate since it does damage and requires a roll to hit! I hope that helps. |
| Ace_of_time06-29-07, 05:40 PM | What about greater Invis? The spell doesn't say anything about it but it seems like it would caught them of guard. |
| Ace_of_time06-29-07, 05:46 PM | Well now would be a good time to answer this question. A rogue gets sneak attack any time he qualifies for it, but only once per attack roll. Rapid shot simply adds to your full attack so if you qualify you get it for your extra rapid shot attack. However, I believe you meant to say Manyshot. This is different. It fires multiple arrows with one attack roll. Because of this you only get SA damage once. Just remember, anytime you roll to hit with anything that does HP damage, you can do SA damage too. This includes full attacks, touch spells, ranged touch spells, rays and even multiple rays. You can even SA with Disintegrate since it does damage and requires a roll to hit! I hope that helps. So a 9th UMD rogue that has the wand strike feat would do 1d6 wand +5d6 +full spell damage? Why would even use a weapon? |
| Polaris06-29-07, 08:04 PM | Well now would be a good time to answer this question. A rogue gets sneak attack any time he qualifies for it, but only once per attack roll. Rapid shot simply adds to your full attack so if you qualify you get it for your extra rapid shot attack. However, I believe you meant to say Manyshot. This is different. It fires multiple arrows with one attack roll. Because of this you only get SA damage once. Just remember, anytime you roll to hit with anything that does HP damage, you can do SA damage too. This includes full attacks, touch spells, ranged touch spells, rays and even multiple rays. You can even SA with Disintegrate since it does damage and requires a roll to hit! I hope that helps. You are being misleading so I bolded the key word. The problem is that when you engage in multiple attacks from hiding or from standard invisibility, the target only loses his dex bonus from the first attack and first attack only. Thus one and only one attack would qualify. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-29-07, 08:12 PM | You are being misleading so I bolded the key word. The problem is that when you engage in multiple attacks from hiding or from standard invisibility, the target only loses his dex bonus from the first attack and first attack only. Thus one and only one attack would qualify. -Polaris Greater invis doesn't appear after your first attack. |
| Polaris06-29-07, 08:18 PM | Greater invis doesn't appear after your first attack. Penalty, 15 yards. Moving the goalposts. You never specified greater invisibility along WITH a double wand attack. Good thing too because I would have pointed out that greater invisibility lasts for one round per level which means you can't even try to get that up until combat and as a 4th level spell is really too expensive for a wand. You can't assume that the rogue is always under greater invisibility for this argument (unless the rogue is a pixie but that's another thread). -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-29-07, 08:37 PM | What about greater Invis? The spell doesn't say anything about it but it seems like it would caught them of guard.So this doesn't say greater in front of it. And I never said Invis to begin with.:confused: :confused: :confused: Also never said double wand attack. That requires two weapon fighting and double wand wielder feats. He could get a wand of greater invis. We were trying to think of ways he could add he SA damage on his attacks if it matters. thanks. |
| Polaris06-29-07, 08:44 PM | So this doesn't say greater in front of it. And I never said Invis to begin with.:confused: :confused: :confused: Also never said double wand attack. That requires two weapon fighting and double wand wielder feats. He could get a wand of greater invis. We were trying to think of ways he could add he SA damage on his attacks if it matters. thanks. Doesn't matter. You and he were moving the goalposts which is why I flagged you. You can't use greater invisibility outside of combat to prep because the spell doesn't last long enough. That's especially true when cast from an item (7 rounds only). Thus the first round would have to be spend prepping the spell/item which means no attack, and THEN you'd get two ranged sneak attacks on the second round......which means you've broken even compared with just hiding. Of course after that, you lose them again since by the level you have enough UMD and wealth to afford a wand of greater invis, anti-invisibility magic is routine and the enemy will have had two rounds to respond to it's use. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-29-07, 09:16 PM | Doesn't matter. You and he were moving the goalposts which is why I flagged you. You can't use greater invisibility outside of combat to prep because the spell doesn't last long enough. That's especially true when cast from an item (7 rounds only). Thus the first round would have to be spend prepping the spell/item which means no attack, and THEN you'd get two ranged sneak attacks on the second round......which means you've broken even compared with just hiding. Of course after that, you lose them again since by the level you have enough UMD and wealth to afford a wand of greater invis, anti-invisibility magic is routine and the enemy will have had two rounds to respond to it's use. -Polaris As much as I love this cat and mouse game. Ok UMD is rolled as part of using the item/wand and takes up as much time as using the item would. This is RAW. He could pull his wand out of his handy sack, or with a caster glove wouldn't even need to pull it out, (free action) use wand with UMD check (Unless said rogue had attune magical device then no check would needed because after it is attuned, which can be done outside of combat, never need to roll UMD with that wand again) Standard action and still get a move action. Losing a attack first round so every attack after is SA. Your right that a horrible idea.:rolleyes: The wand cost 21,000 if he buys. having the group splint the cost as long as it is used on the whole group would only cost him 4,200. My post was for UMD rogue in general not just this one. Wizard and sorc that my players play alway have craft wand for cheap wands. then it would cost only 2,625. No most wizards don't mind making items for others and if the DM allows it can take the XP cost of the person they are making it for as long as they are there during the precess. Oh and some others have posted some thing for you to post back to also. Hope you can get to them before going back to the monk thread. |
| Polaris06-29-07, 09:29 PM | As much as I love this cat and mouse game. Ok UMD is rolled as part of using the item/wand and takes up as much time as using the item would. This is RAW. He could pull his wand out of his handy sack, or with a caster glove wouldn't even need to pull it out, (free action) use wand with UMD check (Unless said rogue had attune magical device then no check would needed because after it is attuned, which can be done outside of combat, never need to roll UMD with that wand again) Standard action and still get a move action. I am not going to make that admission. I was merely interpreting the rules in the best possible way for YOU. My point was not about UMD so much in this case, but about how you can't willy-nilly add spells to combos to make your point....it's called moving the goal-posts. Point in fact, if you really wanted to be a pain in the posterior, a DM could within a harsh interpretation of the rules require two rounds. Losing a attack first round so every attack after is SA. Your right that a horrible idea.:rolleyes: Actually it is. The rogue has his best opportunity to get in a sneak attack during round one. Giving that up is a horrible idea. Also, there's a list as long as my arm on how pretty much any class can counter invisibility once they know it's present, and given the price of a Wand of Greater Invis, all those abilities should be assumed to be present. That means by round 3 (four on the outside), your rogue's invisibility is meaningless. Furthermore as some of you pointed out, combats don't last very long anyway, so at best you might get one extra sneak attack in. For 21,000 that you have to reinvest. Blech. Greater Invis is a great spell, but it's a lot handier when used by Arcane Tricksters and the like. The wand cost 21,000 if he buys. having the group splint the cost as long as it is used on the whole group would only cost him 4,200. That's 21,000 out of the rogue's personal treasure bub and that's huge until at least 11th level or so (and even then). My post was for UMD rogue in general not just this one. Wizard and sorc that my players play alway have craft wand for cheap wands. then it would cost only 2,625. No most wizards don't mind making items for others and if the DM allows it can take the XP cost of the person they are making it for as long as they are there during the precess. You get a 50% discount on the cost of wands by making them, not a 75% discount. In addition, wands are great.....but not for high level spells in combat. That's true for consumable items in general. Oh and some others have posted some thing for you to post back to also. Hope you can get to them before going back to the monk thread. Why bother? They too are moving goalposts. The OP specifically asked a GENERAL question about UMD, and because some of you were losing points on the general discussion you tried to argue the specific. Shame on them (and you). -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time06-29-07, 10:40 PM | I am not going to make that admission. I was merely interpreting the rules in the best possible way for YOU. My point was not about UMD so much in this case, but about how you can't willy-nilly add spells to combos to make your point....it's called moving the goal-posts. Point in fact, if you really wanted to be a pain in the posterior, a DM could within a harsh interpretation of the rules require two rounds. Actually it is. The rogue has his best opportunity to get in a sneak attack during round one. Giving that up is a horrible idea. Also, there's a list as long as my arm on how pretty much any class can counter invisibility once they know it's present, and given the price of a Wand of Greater Invis, all those abilities should be assumed to be present. That means by round 3 (four on the outside), your rogue's invisibility is meaningless. Furthermore as some of you pointed out, combats don't last very long anyway, so at best you might get one extra sneak attack in. For 21,000 that you have to reinvest. Blech. Greater Invis is a great spell, but it's a lot handier when used by Arcane Tricksters and the like. That's 21,000 out of the rogue's personal treasure bub and that's huge until at least 11th level or so (and even then). You get a 50% discount on the cost of wands by making them, not a 75% discount. In addition, wands are great.....but not for high level spells in combat. That's true for consumable items in general. Why bother? They too are moving goalposts. The OP specifically asked a GENERAL question about UMD, and because some of you were losing points on the general discussion you tried to argue the specific. Shame on them (and you). -Polaris WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I have almost decide you are blind. They could splint the cost between the group. So the 21,000 gp wand ( FYI wealth by level for 9th is 36,000) which would make it 10,500 than that cost would and could be splint by the group ( average 4 person party) bring that to 2,625gp. Now I believe you said that most spells wouldn't be useful to the UMD rogue. I also try to point out useful spells that he could use with UMD. No the rule can't be taken to say 2 rounds. It clearly stats under action under UMD that it is part of using the item. And finally, So it is clear for all. You are saying that using UMD to cast greater invis and get SA on every round after first round is worse than just get SA on first?:confused: :confused: |
| angryscrub06-30-07, 12:20 AM | Why bother? They too are moving goalposts. The OP specifically asked a GENERAL question about UMD, and because some of you were losing points on the general discussion you tried to argue the specific. Shame on them (and you). -Polaris hmmm. see http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12899056&postcount=95 i believe you are the one moving the goal posts, sir, by making blanket statements about what qualifies as a good solid rogue based on your experience in campaigns where only wizards have down time, and then ignoring it when someone calls you out on it. |
| Polaris06-30-07, 12:50 AM | hmmm. see http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12899056&postcount=95 i believe you are the one moving the goal posts, sir, by making blanket statements about what qualifies as a good solid rogue based on your experience in campaigns where only wizards have down time, and then ignoring it when someone calls you out on it. Not my post. Nice. Actually I am the only one that's NOT moving the goalposts around here. I never said the rogue didn't have downtime. What I am saying is that unless the rogue can somehow 'identify' a wand ahead of time and/or decipher a scroll ahead of time (and only the second can be done SOLELY with the UMD skill at an insane DC), then it doesn't help the rogue. At best the rogue needs to add at least 250gp (the cost of an ID Item scroll) to each item he uses without activating it blindly. There is nothing in the rules that says that ID from a wizard counts for anyone else (but fortunately it doesn't matter much as long as the spell is on your list except for the UMD using character). BTW, there is a CAdv feat that lets you use appraise to ID such items. Let me also point out that the standard of what "makes a good rogue" is the same one that has been used since 1974 when the class (then Thief) was first introduced in the Chainmail supplements. The ability to use magical items (then read scroll) was never an important part of the class, and only avaiable for high level characters (and certainly not the centerpoint of the class). WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I have almost decide you are blind. They could splint the cost between the group. So the 21,000 gp wand ( FYI wealth by level for 9th is 36,000) which would make it 10,500 than that cost would and could be splint by the group ( average 4 person party) bring that to 2,625gp. 10 yard penalty. Gear over and above CR standard. Does the rogue have the wand in his possession? Yes or No? IF he does then it COUNTS against is wealth for that level, and as such his other gear needs to be discounted. You can't blithely give the rogue a 75% discount for gear by "being in party". The wizard when doing class comparisons doesn't get to do this; neither does the UMD using rogue. Now I believe you said that most spells wouldn't be useful to the UMD rogue. I also try to point out useful spells that he could use with UMD. 5 yard penalty. Misquote. What I said was that Item-based spells as the central THEME of the character wouldn't be very useful. I never said that items weren't useful and I never said that UMD was useless. I dare you to show differently (you can't). I said that rogue 2 had a point (but was overstating it) and that UMD was overrated. There is a difference....and I have shown that in the general case quite nicely. Just because you can show a case or even a small set of cases where UMD might be nice doesn't disprove my basic point. No the rule can't be taken to say 2 rounds. It clearly stats under action under UMD that it is part of using the item. Yes, if you are activating it blindly. I was assuming in that post, that SOMEHOW the rogue had ided it in advance. That's a gross assumption in your favor. If I don't assume that, then it does take 2 rounds (or activating blindly). And finally, So it is clear for all. You are saying that using UMD to cast greater invis and get SA on every round after first round is worse than just get SA on first? Yes I am. Again, it's opportunity cost. IMX most combats don't last terribly long...perhpas 5 rounds or so. Furthermore, by the time you can reliably use UMD, you're looking at 8-12th level or so, which means that anti-invisibility magic is ROUTINE. Invisibility Purge completely hoses the rogue since it voids all invisibility beyond the range in which a ranged sneak attack is possible and that's just the most obvious example. Given that, you'd have one round to activate your Greater Invis. Then....MAYBE....you get 2 sneak attacks (I say maybe because the targets need to be within 30', need to be critable, and need to lose their dexterity due to invisibility). I note that even the humble 2nd level barbarian is immune from sneak attack due to greater invis...and that's just the simpliest example (and IIRC the feat blind-fighting also makes you immune from the same). Thus you MIGHT get one round worth of sneak attack in before the anti-invis abilities kick in....maybe......and I do mean maybe at this level. No. You are better off getting as many sneak attacks off early as you can using methods that magic can't foil easily (stealth skills and/or flanking). -Polaris |
| tui06-30-07, 03:51 PM | [Quoting Polaris, but really responding to All] 10 yard penalty. Gear over and above CR standard. Does the rogue have the wand in his possession? Yes or No? IF he does then it COUNTS against is wealth for that level, and as such his other gear needs to be discounted. You can't blithely give the rogue a 75% discount for gear by "being in party". The wizard when doing class comparisons doesn't get to do this; neither does the UMD using rogue. Yeah, I generally agree that this wouldn't be appropriate considering the wealth guidelines, unless Rogue #1 used the wand on the rest of the party regularly. You see something similar with Wands of CLW, where characters are often responsible for supplying their own; the Cleric may hold them, but it's pretty clear who's is who's. Also, often times the person with the portable hole or bag of holding carries large items for other characters for convenience... no need for everyone to pay for an extra dimensional space in a cooperative party. But those seem like pretty different circumstances; unless this rogue is going to be using greater invisibility on other party members regularly, there's no reasonable reason they'd chip in so much money to buy him an item. Furthermore, by the time you can reliably use UMD, you're looking at 8-12th level or so, which means that anti-invisibility magic is ROUTINE. Invisibility Purge completely hoses the rogue since it voids all invisibility beyond the range in which a ranged sneak attack is possible and that's just the most obvious example. No. You are better off getting as many sneak attacks off early as you can using methods that magic can't foil easily (stealth skills and/or flanking). Indeed, there are lots of ways of foiling invisibility: glitterdust, invisibility purge, blind fight, detect invisibility, true seeing, blindsight, etc. But there are also plenty of ways to avoid other methods of getting sneak attacks: uncanny dodge, fortification, concealment (fog, blur, etc.), or be an undead, elemental, ooze, construct, or plant type. Investing in UMD gives versatility to allow the character to respond to various situations where he might otherwise be useless. Also, if an enemy spellcaster has to spend a round negating your invisibility, it gives your allies more time to kill them. That's not a waste of an action, but still really isn't worth 21,000 gp. Good spells for wands that you're going to use a lot need to be 0th, 1st, or maybe 2nd level spells. 3rd and 4th level spells are really too expensive to use regularly until really high level. And preferably choose spells without saves or SR. Extended Acid Arrow can be a VERY good choice, BTW, especially since this party's combats tend to be on the longer side... although it would get quite expensive to use regularly. Some other good offensive choices would be the Orb spells, Ray of Frost, Acid Splash, Chill Touch, Produce Flame. Some good team spells might be: Benign Transposition (L1) - Rogue #2 with Mobility zooms in next to BBEG, then switches places with Barbarian who full-attacks. Snake's Swiftness (L1) - Give the Barbarian an immediate attack at full BAB when you're facing undead or whatever. Enlarge Person (L1) - Gives reach, which can be pretty handy for anyone, probably especially the Barbarian and Cleric. Grease (L1) - Make bad guy balance to set up for SA. Haste (L2 or 1) - Great spell... Can be level 1 with Dungeonscape, since Trapsmith has it as lvl1; not to likely in this campaign, though. Various Summons - Can be used to get flankers for SA. Caltrops (L0) - Great for setting up traps or fleeing Going back a bit... A solid rogue is going to need Spot, Listen, Move-Silent, Hide, SEARCH, Disable Device, Open Lock just to start. That's 7 of the starting eight and that's before you branch out. Rogues need that high Int score and between that and Con and Dex, that doesn't leave much for Charisma. Maybe +1 but not +2. Generally that's true about the skills... you need someone in your party to do those things, so it usually falls on the Rogue, who needs all those to be well rounded. In this party, they've got two Rogues... and from Rogue #2's criticism, it sounds like he's already invested in those. So Rogue #1 really need not invest heavily in Search, Disable Device, and Open Lock. It would be wise to have enough ranks to be able to Aid Another reliably, but he need not be an expert. |
| Ace_of_time06-30-07, 08:03 PM | Not my post. Nice. Actually I am the only one that's NOT moving the goalposts around here. I never said the rogue didn't have downtime. What I am saying is that unless the rogue can somehow 'identify' a wand ahead of time and/or decipher a scroll ahead of time (and only the second can be done SOLELY with the UMD skill at an insane DC), then it doesn't help the rogue. At best the rogue needs to add at least 250gp (the cost of an ID Item scroll) to each item he uses without activating it blindly. There is nothing in the rules that says that ID from a wizard counts for anyone else (but fortunately it doesn't matter much as long as the spell is on your list except for the UMD using character). BTW, there is a CAdv feat that lets you use appraise to ID such items. -Polaris Page 212 DMG under trail and error under identifying items. in the last paragraph. The PC's may want to consult bards, sages, or high level spell casters who might be able to identify items either through their own spells, prior knowledge, and experience, or research. And again for the 100th time that info would be give to them when the had it made. Items found could easily be identify it for the party. |
| Ace_of_time06-30-07, 08:12 PM | Guys, Not to sound too contrarian but rogue 2 has a point even if he is overstating it. Let's look at some of those UMD DCs. Use Wand: DC 20 This is probably the most common and easiest way that UMD is used. Unfortunately DC 20 is nothing to sneeze at especially for rogues. Remember that you have a mishap if you fail by 10 or more and remember that charisma is at best the fourth most important stat for a rogue (after Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution) which means your Charisma bonus is likely to be small (or even negative) AND you can't take 10 on UMD checks nor can you be assisted with them. That means that you need to be 7th level just to insure that you don't have a mishap even with the most simple use of UMD and you will fail 50% of the time at that. [This can be improved with Cha boosting items and feats, but they take resources away from being a good rogue elsewhere.] Thus assuming a modest Cha modifier (likely), a rogue isn't likely to risk even the simpliest (DC 20) checks with UMD until at least mid levels (at least 7th level or higher), and other checks are higher....often much higher. By this point, it's simply easier to use non-standard magic items in other ways, ESPECIALLY since item-cast/item-use magic tends to be very weak when compared with that from pure casters (and even scrolls made from pure casters). The point is that UMD takes too long to be useful. I don't deny that it can have it's uses, but by the time it does, the party is powerful enough to solve problems with other and easier ways....and prior to that, the skill is simply too risky to use. This analysis changes significantly with the Artificer or Warlock who can take 10 with this skill, but for rogues, the skill is a bit of a white-elephant. It looks good, but it really isn't all that tremendous. -Polaris Lets see. Here you say that UMD on wand is DC 20 now after we point out that is easy to get at low levels you charge the DC to DC25. just to prove your point. |
| Ace_of_time06-30-07, 08:16 PM | That's horrid in combat. You spend a standard action (same as anyone else for activating a wand) and there is a 50-50 chance you get nothing out of it. If you want to use a skill in combat, the chances of sucess (because failure means you have done nothing...at best....and ceded initiative to the enemy) needs to be overwhelming (nearly 100%). Incorrect. If you fail a UMD check by 10 or more, you suffer a mishap no matter what (see the main skill description on page 85). Even on a '1' it's too much just as fumbles on a '1' were too much in late 2nd ed. Not at the caster levels that those items typically have. In short it's generally a waste of money....and there if those personal range spells are really important, there are several ways that true full casters can extend personal range spells to other people. The Sorcerer would blow the Rogue (or any other character class) out of the water because of his insane charisma modifier...and it's not like the sorcerer needs copious amounts of skill points (concentration is the only "must have" skill for a sorcerer). -Polaris Here is you saying personal range spells are a waste. |
| Ace_of_time06-30-07, 08:22 PM | Because Constitution is more important than Charisma for a rogue. Constitution gives hit points which a rogue as a non-casting class will need at high levels (UMD notwithstanding) AND gives a bonus to a weak save (Fortitude...and you don't want to fail Fort saves). That's not just me talking. That comes straight from the Char-Op people who are probably the closest things we have to experts on this. [It's worth noting that unless your Charisma is stellar, i.e. Sorcerer level, Charisma for skills...even UMD...is generally a losing proposition since there are better ways to get targeted skill bonuses.] -Polaris Here is you telling every how they should be making there own rogue when that isa up to the player and not all build one the same. Some DM's don't use traps that often. |
| Ace_of_time06-30-07, 08:25 PM | [QUOTE=mostholy2;12877843]Hrm...we must be reading different sources. [SNIP] [quote] No we aren't. In order to use any spell completetion item, you have to "activate blindly" which means you have to made the DC 25 check before the others making it any worse. You don't know what the special word, thought, action is to activate a wand (for example) unless it's on your class list, and thus you have to activate it blindly (same with all other spell completion items). And it only works 50% of the time to boot? This is pretty crappy for the return. I don't see how since you aren't going to be able to afford the time to prebuff this way NOR afford the cost to have items that have any meaningful duration. Also Dispell Magic while normally worthless against buffs, completely hoses the UMD using rogue because of the caster level disparity. You really can't do it at fifth level either with UMD (at least not efficiently), and using UMD the personal range spell is still....personal range. However, IIRC there is "touch spell" and other ways to change spells of this sort via the Archmage PrC (to name one) at high enough levels. Two things: 1. Cost. Given that the DCs for Ability Emulation and Reading Scrolls is so high, you almost have to use wands and wands cost 750xlevel of spellxminimum caster level of spell minimum means you can't afford to made use out of this huge investment in your character resources (which has made you a worse rogue). 2. Dispell Magic. This is a non-starter for normal casters using buffs at normal levels, but dispell magic will eat the UMD rogue for breakfast. -Polaris \Her is you saying buffs are a waste for UMD rogue because of dispell magic. Which most monsters don't have access to. And I haven't even got past the 2nd page here. No where in the skill entry does it says it takes two ronds and unlees you post a page # or link you are wrong. Sorry. As to the item counting to his total weath per level that table is meant to help DM keep player gold under control. IE: giving out gold and items. Items bought for the group to use doesn't count the full ammount for this. But so you will not whin any more will make it with only 25 charges. In the wand entry DMG it says to activ a wand you just have to hold it in your hand and point it toward your target or area. With a UMD rogue after while doing this he would roll UMD check DC 20 and then the wand would activ. As to the monsters. If you can post 10 monsters from CR 8-12 that have invis defense I'll give you this one point. |
| Nom07-01-07, 12:43 AM | What I am saying is that unless the rogue can somehow 'identify' a wand ahead of time and/or decipher a scroll ahead of time (and only the second can be done SOLELY with the UMD skill at an insane DC), then it doesn't help the rogue.Actually, the rogue is in better shape than anyone else here. Normally, you cannot activate an unknown wand. A rogue at least has the option of "activate blindly". At best the rogue needs to add at least 250gp (the cost of an ID Item scroll) to each item he uses without activating it blindly.125 gp. SL 1 * CL 1 * 25 gp, +100 gp material component. Or you can buy an identify for 110 gp (standard practice for most parties). There is nothing in the rules that says that ID from a wizard counts for anyone else (but fortunately it doesn't matter much as long as the spell is on your list except for the UMD using character).You're quite correct. The caster of identify is not mechanically obligated to tell anyone else what the spell is nor what the command word is. However, if I paid someone good money to identify a wand and then he told me "I cast the spell; I'm not telling you the results" he would be in a world of hurt. Also, it was earlier mentioned that a rogue would need to use "activate blindly" to trigger a scroll via UMD. Most rogues would instead use "decipher a written spell" (UMD DC 25 + SL). Slightly tougher than the same check via Spellcraft, but doable. Or one could just UMD a wand of read magic (375 gp for 50 successful attempts). |
| Ace_of_time07-01-07, 07:47 AM | Ok, I have revised my feat build for UMD rogue build. here it is. 1st: Magical Aptitude; human: Skill Knowledge (spellcraft) "UA" 3rd:Skill focus (UMD) 6th:Magical device attunement "CM" 9th:Wand strike "CAr" 12th:Appraise maical value "CAd" 15th: Meta Magic Spell Trigger "CM" 18th: Maxized spell I will also take 4 level in fighter for Spring attack. |
| penchant07-02-07, 11:10 AM | You are being misleading so I bolded the key word. The problem is that when you engage in multiple attacks from hiding or from standard invisibility, the target only loses his dex bonus from the first attack and first attack only. Thus one and only one attack would qualify. -Polaris Wow, you and Ace have really been getting into it. Shows me not to go on vacation. Specific to this, there are numerous ways to get full attack with sneak attack. 1. If you win initiative (not a surprise round) then you get sneak attack on every attack you make that round. The target is flat footed until their action. 2. You have constant concealment. This includes being in total darkness while you have darkvision and your target does not, using fog spells with arcane sight against spell casters, the aforementioned greater invis, your target is blinded, etheralness with ghost touch weapons, and on. 3. You are flanking. This can be difficult in the context of UMD as many item activations provoke an attack of opportunity. I do not recall if Wandstrike provokes on activation or not. And as to certain spells like the scorching ray example, even with invisibility it still works on both attacks since they occur at the same time with the same standard action. The single activation produces two rays which get two attack rolls. Both would hit at the same time then your invisibility would end. While you are correct about only getting SA on one attack from hiding or standard invisibility most times, that is not the whole picture. As far as me being misleading, that part about "qualifies" is quoted directly from the SRD/PHB so blame wizards for being misleading. Oh, and what is this about a rogue "somehow" identifying a wand or deciphering a scroll before hand? If he buys it (or has a friend make it) then the wand is already identified and he has the command word. You HAVE to decipher a scroll before hand, but you can take 10 (Skill Mastery) or you can retry many times. Once you have deciphered it then you just roll your "Use scroll" which is usually an easier roll to make. And the "Insane DC's" For a casual user UMD is hard. So are the Disable Device rolls for a casual Trap finder. Take the given example: A 9th level rogue who has focused on UMD. Rogue #1: C/G Half-Elf Rogue 9. I'm approximating their stats, the guys insisted on die roll, even though I would prefer point-buy, and since they keep their sheets (I've been known to misplace them) this is going off of memory. Str 13, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 9, Cha 15 (his two level up points went into Con, he has the Sorceror's old Cloak of Charisma +2, Gloves of Dexterity +2, and his Feats are Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Skill Focus: UMD, and Weapon Finesse). His current weapons of choice are a Wand of Scorching Ray (1 Ray), Wand of Extended Acid Arrow (CL 5, I think), and his +2 Shocking Short Sword. So with max ranks in UMD (12) and his Cha is 15 (+2) Skill focus (+3). This gives us a modifier of 17. So he activates a wand on a roll of 3 or more. He can decipher a scroll of Gate on a roll of 17 or greater but could only use it if he rolls a 20, but that's OK since he only wastes the scroll on a 1. Not bad for a 9th level spell that nobody else in the party can even think about for another 8 levels. A scroll of greater invisiblity is more in reach. He deciphers that on a roll of 12 or better and can cast it in combat with a roll of 10 which puts it in reach of skill mastery with no roll at all. And these numbers do not take into account that if he has just 5 ranks in decipher script then he gets another +2 synergy bonus with scrolls. Gate is that much closer now. It should also be pointed out that this is not a build dedicated to UMD but merely with a focus on it. Max skill ranks and one feat are all that has been used. A rogue can do this and not even break a sweat. What if he also had gotten 5 rank in spell craft giving another +2 synergy to scrolls, added his level boost to cha instead of con (+3 instead of +2) and spent more cash on skill appropriate items? |
| Polaris07-02-07, 12:55 PM | Wow, you and Ace have really been getting into it. Shows me not to go on vacation. Specific to this, there are numerous ways to get full attack with sneak attack. 1. If you win initiative (not a surprise round) then you get sneak attack on every attack you make that round. The target is flat footed until their action. How many times do you have a weapon ready and are either within 30' of an opponent (missile) or right next to them during that first round and there is no suprise?? If you are using the spot rules correctly, that answer should be virtually never. I'll give you this one one technicality, but it's only a technicality since it should almost never happen. 2. You have constant concealment. This includes being in total darkness while you have darkvision and your target does not, using fog spells with arcane sight against spell casters, the aforementioned greater invis, your target is blinded, etheralness with ghost touch weapons, and on. False. You only get sneak attack if you are flanking or if your opponent is denied his dexterity bonus. Concealment does not do that, not even constant concealment (although it does prevent you from being sneak-attacked). Total concealment is required and even that only works some of the time (never against any charcter with blindsight and/or uncanny dodge for example). 3. You are flanking. This can be difficult in the context of UMD as many item activations provoke an attack of opportunity. I do not recall if Wandstrike provokes on activation or not. We were specifically talking about double-wands and thus ranged attacks. And as to certain spells like the scorching ray example, even with invisibility it still works on both attacks since they occur at the same time with the same standard action. The single activation produces two rays which get two attack rolls. Both would hit at the same time then your invisibility would end. FALSE. Volleys including Multishot attack, darts, spells like scorching ray do sneak attacks once and once only. WOTC has specifically addressed this. While you are correct about only getting SA on one attack from hiding or standard invisibility most times, that is not the whole picture. As far as me being misleading, that part about "qualifies" is quoted directly from the SRD/PHB so blame wizards for being misleading. The rules on this are actually quite clear. Oh, and what is this about a rogue "somehow" identifying a wand or deciphering a scroll before hand? If he buys it (or has a friend make it) then the wand is already identified and he has the command word. You HAVE to decipher a scroll before hand, but you can take 10 (Skill Mastery) or you can retry many times. Once you have deciphered it then you just roll your "Use scroll" which is usually an easier roll to make. No. The rules aren't actually clear on this. What is clear is that the one who identified the item has the command word. It's not clear at all, that this knowledge is transferrable in a usable way. I admit (and have admitted) this is a hard-nosed interpretation of the rule, but the rule can be so interpreted. As for scrolls, it's true you can do the deciphering in your down-time which is why I don't generally add a time cost to this, but the roll does have to be made. Thus ultimately the rogue does have to made that DC 25+level UMD check to use scrolls (actually has to made two checks as you note) and that's if the rogue has the basic attribute to normally use the spell (which won't be generally the case for high level spells) and emulating an attribute is hard. And the "Insane DC's" For a casual user UMD is hard. So are the Disable Device rolls for a casual Trap finder. Take the given example: A 9th level rogue who has focused on UMD. Actually traps can have multiple DCs including ones less than 20. The serious traps do start at 20, I'll give you. However, it's worth noting that search is a great skill for more than just finding traps.... So with max ranks in UMD (12) and his Cha is 15 (+2) Skill focus (+3). This gives us a modifier of 17. So he activates a wand on a roll of 3 or more. He can decipher a scroll of Gate on a roll of 17 or greater but could only use it if he rolls a 20, but that's OK since he only wastes the scroll on a 1. Not bad for a 9th level spell that nobody else in the party can even think about for another 8 levels. A scroll of greater invisiblity is more in reach. He deciphers that on a roll of 12 or better and can cast it in combat with a roll of 10 which puts it in reach of skill mastery with no roll at all. And these numbers do not take into account that if he has just 5 ranks in decipher script then he gets another +2 synergy bonus with scrolls. Gate is that much closer now. It should also be pointed out that this is not a build dedicated to UMD but merely with a focus on it. Max skill ranks and one feat are all that has been used. A rogue can do this and not even break a sweat. What if he also had gotten 5 rank in spell craft giving another +2 synergy to scrolls, added his level boost to cha instead of con (+3 instead of +2) and spent more cash on skill appropriate items? This came at a price at him being rather sucky at everything else that comes with being a rogue. Even the OP admitted that rogue 1 was stretched a bit thin otherwise. In fact this is a rogue dedicated to UMD....just not very well optimized....and given he's already ninth level for this example the lower DCs should start looking more and more makeable. The fact he still struggles even optimized for UMD with the easiest type of check actually proves my initial point which was not that UMD was useless (and recall I did say that rogue 2 was overstated his case) but rather that UMD was overrated. -Polaris |
| tui07-02-07, 03:29 PM | False. You only get sneak attack if you are flanking or if your opponent is denied his dexterity bonus. Concealment does not do that, not even constant concealment (although it does prevent you from being sneak-attacked). Total concealment is required and even that only works some of the time (never against any charcter with blindsight and/or uncanny dodge for example). Oh, come on now. Sure, he didn't explicitly say "total" concealment, but ALL the examples he sighted were those of total concealment... (Although I don't think Arcane Sight works like that..) FALSE. Volleys including Multishot attack, darts, spells like scorching ray do sneak attacks once and once only. WOTC has specifically addressed this. This is correct. See this Rules of the Game (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040309a) article: Volley Type Attacks Sometimes, you make multiple attacks with the same attack roll, such as when you use the Manyshot feat, or you make multiple attack rolls as part of the same attack, such as with the scorching ray spell. When you do so, only the first attack in the volley can be a sneak attack. I do not recall if Wandstrike provokes on activation or not.You don't actually get SA damage with Wandstrike; it explicitly bans it. Which is good; getting SA damage at the cost of a charge from a 0 level spell wand would be too nasty, especially coming from a touch attack. Also, using Wandstrike is a standard action, so you wouldn't get multiple attacks with a high BAB or TWF.... so I don't think it has much use to a rogue (or anyone for that matter). That said, activating spell trigger items like wands does not provoke an AoO, and Wandstrike doesn't change this. |
| Nom07-02-07, 06:49 PM | The rules aren't actually clear on this. What is clear is that the one who identified the item has the command word. It's not clear at all, that this knowledge is transferrable in a usable way. I admit (and have admitted) this is a hard-nosed interpretation of the rule, but the rule can be so interpreted.Which means that no cleric without the magic domain can ever use a wand that they did not create, since they have no mechanism to learn the command word. :rolleyes: This argument isn't even a straw man, it's smoke and mirrors with rotten egg gas. |
| Polaris07-02-07, 08:18 PM | Which means that no cleric without the magic domain can ever use a wand that they did not create, since they have no mechanism to learn the command word. :rolleyes: This argument isn't even a straw man, it's smoke and mirrors with rotten egg gas. ...or identified with an identify spell (which a cleric with the magic domain can do). I am not saying that I play with that interpretation myself, but it is a valid interpretation if you read the UMD and identification rules in the narrowest possible way. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-02-07, 10:30 PM | Wow, you and Ace have really been getting into it. Shows me not to go on vacation. Specific to this, there are numerous ways to get full attack with sneak attack. 1. If you win initiative (not a surprise round) then you get sneak attack on every attack you make that round. The target is flat footed until their action. 2. You have constant concealment. This includes being in total darkness while you have darkvision and your target does not, using fog spells with arcane sight against spell casters, the aforementioned greater invis, your target is blinded, etheralness with ghost touch weapons, and on. 3. You are flanking. This can be difficult in the context of UMD as many item activations provoke an attack of opportunity. I do not recall if Wandstrike provokes on activation or not. And as to certain spells like the scorching ray example, even with invisibility it still works on both attacks since they occur at the same time with the same standard action. The single activation produces two rays which get two attack rolls. Both would hit at the same time then your invisibility would end. While you are correct about only getting SA on one attack from hiding or standard invisibility most times, that is not the whole picture. As far as me being misleading, that part about "qualifies" is quoted directly from the SRD/PHB so blame wizards for being misleading. Oh, and what is this about a rogue "somehow" identifying a wand or deciphering a scroll before hand? If he buys it (or has a friend make it) then the wand is already identified and he has the command word. You HAVE to decipher a scroll before hand, but you can take 10 (Skill Mastery) or you can retry many times. Once you have deciphered it then you just roll your "Use scroll" which is usually an easier roll to make. And the "Insane DC's" For a casual user UMD is hard. So are the Disable Device rolls for a casual Trap finder. Take the given example: A 9th level rogue who has focused on UMD. So with max ranks in UMD (12) and his Cha is 15 (+2) Skill focus (+3). This gives us a modifier of 17. So he activates a wand on a roll of 3 or more. He can decipher a scroll of Gate on a roll of 17 or greater but could only use it if he rolls a 20, but that's OK since he only wastes the scroll on a 1. Not bad for a 9th level spell that nobody else in the party can even think about for another 8 levels. A scroll of greater invisiblity is more in reach. He deciphers that on a roll of 12 or better and can cast it in combat with a roll of 10 which puts it in reach of skill mastery with no roll at all. And these numbers do not take into account that if he has just 5 ranks in decipher script then he gets another +2 synergy bonus with scrolls. Gate is that much closer now. It should also be pointed out that this is not a build dedicated to UMD but merely with a focus on it. Max skill ranks and one feat are all that has been used. A rogue can do this and not even break a sweat. What if he also had gotten 5 rank in spell craft giving another +2 synergy to scrolls, added his level boost to cha instead of con (+3 instead of +2) and spent more cash on skill appropriate items? Using wands don't get AoO, and since UMD is part of the use it wouldn't ether. Not that I'm on the other ones side but the DC for that spell is DC34 DS and DC 37 acti and that would be -15 to the check. it's beeter for him to stick with 6th orlower till higher levels. If that helps. |
| Ace_of_time07-02-07, 11:00 PM | How many times do you have a weapon ready and are either within 30' of an opponent (missile) or right next to them during that first round and there is no suprise?? If you are using the spot rules correctly, that answer should be virtually never. I'll give you this one one technicality, but it's only a technicality since it should almost never happen. False. You only get sneak attack if you are flanking or if your opponent is denied his dexterity bonus. Concealment does not do that, not even constant concealment (although it does prevent you from being sneak-attacked). Total concealment is required and even that only works some of the time (never against any charcter with blindsight and/or uncanny dodge for example). We were specifically talking about double-wands and thus ranged attacks. FALSE. Volleys including Multishot attack, darts, spells like scorching ray do sneak attacks once and once only. WOTC has specifically addressed this. The rules on this are actually quite clear. No. The rules aren't actually clear on this. What is clear is that the one who identified the item has the command word. It's not clear at all, that this knowledge is transferrable in a usable way. I admit (and have admitted) this is a hard-nosed interpretation of the rule, but the rule can be so interpreted. As for scrolls, it's true you can do the deciphering in your down-time which is why I don't generally add a time cost to this, but the roll does have to be made. Thus ultimately the rogue does have to made that DC 25+level UMD check to use scrolls (actually has to made two checks as you note) and that's if the rogue has the basic attribute to normally use the spell (which won't be generally the case for high level spells) and emulating an attribute is hard. Actually traps can have multiple DCs including ones less than 20. The serious traps do start at 20, I'll give you. However, it's worth noting that search is a great skill for more than just finding traps.... This came at a price at him being rather sucky at everything else that comes with being a rogue. Even the OP admitted that rogue 1 was stretched a bit thin otherwise. In fact this is a rogue dedicated to UMD....just not very well optimized....and given he's already ninth level for this example the lower DCs should start looking more and more makeable. The fact he still struggles even optimized for UMD with the easiest type of check actually proves my initial point which was not that UMD was useless (and recall I did say that rogue 2 was overstated his case) but rather that UMD was overrated. -PolarisOk first no one beleives you anymore so your going to have to post or link the rules your getting this stuff from. As to the Identify thing it is here in the rules. Page 212 DMG under trail and error under identifying items. in the last paragraph. The PC's may want to consult bards, sages, or high level spell casters who might be able to identify items either through their own spells, prior knowledge, and experience, or research. And again for the 100th time that info would be give to them when the had it made. Items found could easily be identify it for the party. With my new build at 12th level he could use Appraise magical value "CAd" to get the stuff he needed from the wands and the like. As to DD not every DM uses trap that often so that knid of build may not be needed. OL can easly be taken care of by a knock wand. |
| Ace_of_time07-02-07, 11:08 PM | ...or identified with an identify spell (which a cleric with the magic domain can do). I am not saying that I play with that interpretation myself, but it is a valid interpretation if you read the UMD and identification rules in the narrowest possible way. -PolarisNo you just want to argue with people online about rules that don't exist. What is the point of using this interpretation if you don't play with it? Why don't you just post the part of the UMD entry where you are getting this because in 3.5 it's not there? Oh and you where the one who said wand UMD dc was 20 first! I guess we are moving the goal post again, but to me there is only one player running in the wrong direction with his helmet on back wards. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 12:02 AM | No you just want to argue with people online about rules that don't exist. What is the point of using this interpretation if you don't play with it? Why don't you just post the part of the UMD entry where you are getting this because in 3.5 it's not there? Yes it is. The section of the SRD you quoted only applies for identifying items, i.e. finding out what they are. That section does not say you know the innate trigger words/gestures/etc needed to use the item. The identify item spell does specifically state this. Thus by the strictest interpretation of the rules, the DM is permitted to disallow the use of all wands unless you've made them and/or you've used an identify item scroll on them personally. I grant that's not the usual interpretation, but it is a valid reading of the rules. Oh and you where the one who said wand UMD dc was 20 first! I guess we are moving the goal post again, but to me there is only one player running in the wrong direction with his helmet on back wards. The wand UMD DC is 20....IF you know and can know the trigger for it. I have never said otherwise. -Polaris |
| Nom07-03-07, 12:16 AM | ...or identified with an identify spell (which a cleric with the magic domain can do).Which is why I specifically qualified that. Of course, this still leaves most clerics and all other (core) divine casters completely incapable of using any spell trigger item that they did not themselves create. Maybe they should get ranks in UMD so they can "activate blindly"? I am not saying that I play with that interpretation myself, but it is a valid interpretation if you read the UMD and identification rules in the narrowest possible way.Yes, yes, in much the same way that you are no longer incapable of acting if you reach -10 hit points. "Hey look! If I go out of my way to misapply the rules then this feature breaks (and I'll conveniently ignore that features I'm contrasting it with break in the same way)" is not a credible argument. |
| Ace_of_time07-03-07, 12:27 AM | Yes it is. The section of the SRD you quoted only applies for identifying items, i.e. finding out what they are. That section does not say you know the innate trigger words/gestures/etc needed to use the item. The identify item spell does specifically state this. Thus by the strictest interpretation of the rules, the DM is permitted to disallow the use of all wands unless you've made them and/or you've used an identify item scroll on them personally. I grant that's not the usual interpretation, but it is a valid reading of the rules. The wand UMD DC is 20....IF you know and can know the trigger for it. I have never said otherwise. -Polaris Your right and the DM could rule that no spell can be cast if the player doesn't stand before each one and do the hand signs and speak the spell aloud or that no monster can be attacked as long as your mini is holding the wrong weapon or the cleric can't heal your PC because cmw spells max is 26 and you only have a 25 total. Ok first no one beleives you anymore so your going to have to post or link the rules your getting this stuff from. As to the Identify thing it is here in the rules. With my new build at 12th level he could use Appraise magical value "CAd" to get the stuff he needed from the wands and the like. As to DD not every DM uses trap that often so that knid of build may not be needed. OL can easly be taken care of by a knock wand. With this feat he could use Appraise skill to get all the info him self. No problem at all. And on page 212 DMG under trail and error under identifying items. in the last paragraph. The PC's may want to consult bards, sages, or high level spell casters who might be able to identify items either through their own spells, prior knowledge, and experience, or research. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 12:27 AM | Which is why I specifically qualified that. Of course, this still leaves most clerics and all other (core) divine casters completely incapable of using any spell trigger item that they did not themselves create. Maybe they should get ranks in UMD so they can "activate blindly"? A better solution would be to get the "Appraise Magic Item" feat from CAdv. The DCs for the check are only 10+caster level of the item which means most (almost all) those DCs will be less than 20. For that matter Rogues should be using this feat as well instead of UMD for identifying items and deciphering scrolls. However, if you don't do one or the other than yes, that's what it means. It puts the wand firmly into the realm of the arcane caster and/or cleric of a magic diety which actually seems sensible. Yes, yes, in much the same way that you are no longer incapable of acting if you reach -10 hit points. "Hey look! If I go out of my way to misapply the rules then this feature breaks (and I'll conveniently ignore that features I'm contrasting it with break in the same way)" is not a credible argument. Not at all. A dead person doesn't move or act. That should be obvious to anyone that's seen a dead person. However, it's not obvious that magical trigger knowledge is transferrable. Thus it isn't as innane as you seem to think and it IS a valid reading of the rules. [And btw, WOTC needs to fix the 'dead' loophole.] -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-03-07, 12:32 AM | A better solution would be to get the "Appraise Magic Item" feat from CAdv. The DCs for the check are only 10+caster level of the item which means most (almost all) those DCs will be less than 20. For that matter Rogues should be using this feat as well instead of UMD for identifying items and deciphering scrolls. However, if you don't do one or the other than yes, that's what it means. It puts the wand firmly into the realm of the arcane caster and/or cleric of a magic diety which actually seems sensible. Not at all. A dead person doesn't move or act. That should be obvious to anyone that's seen a dead person. However, it's not obvious that magical trigger knowledge is transferrable. Thus it isn't as innane as you seem to think and it IS a valid reading of the rules. [And btw, WOTC needs to fix the 'dead' loophole.] -Polaris It doesn't work on deciphering scrolls because you have to decispher the magic writting before you can read it. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 12:32 AM | With this feat he could use Appraise skill to get all the info him self. No problem at all. And on page 212 DMG under trail and error under identifying items. in the last paragraph. The PC's may want to consult bards, sages, or high level spell casters who might be able to identify items either through their own spells, prior knowledge, and experience, or research. You might want to read that section of the DMG more carefully because it doesn't say what you think it does. It only says that you can find out what an item IS by consulting experts. It does not say that simply knowing what an item IS is sufficient to know how to USE an item. Even a five year old knows what an automobile is (unless they are hopelessly isolated). That does NOT mean a five year old knows how to drive. See the difference? I admit that I am stating a very hard nosed interpretation of the rules, and further admit that I don't use it in my own games (it's called houseruling), but that's the strictest interpretation of the rules as written, and it firmly puts all spell trigger items into the hands of arcane casters and priests of gods of magic (which isn't unreasonable). BTW, the feat does work because it explicitly refers back to the identify item spell. -Polaris |
| Polaris07-03-07, 12:37 AM | It doesn't work on deciphering scrolls because you have to decispher the magic writting before you can read it. Yes and no. The identify item scroll will certainly tell you what kind of scroll it is. However, you're right....you can't USE it until you've deciphered it. However, that's not a problem for clerics or wizards (both get spellcraft as a class skill) and both have access to read magic. Thus using scrolls is not a problem for any wizard or cleric (or IIRC Druid either). That's as it should be. It IS a problem for a rogue depending on the Appraise Item feat and UMD....but that's also reasonable. -Poalris |
| Ace_of_time07-03-07, 12:53 AM | A better solution would be to get the "Appraise Magic Item" feat from CAdv. The DCs for the check are only 10+caster level of the item which means most (almost all) those DCs will be less than 20. For that matter Rogues should be using this feat as well instead of UMD for identifying items and deciphering scrolls. However, if you don't do one or the other than yes, that's what it means. It puts the wand firmly into the realm of the arcane caster and/or cleric of a magic diety which actually seems sensible. Not at all. A dead person doesn't move or act. That should be obvious to anyone that's seen a dead person. However, it's not obvious that magical trigger knowledge is transferrable. Thus it isn't as innane as you seem to think and it IS a valid reading of the rules. [And btw, WOTC needs to fix the 'dead' loophole.] -Polaris From SRD: Command Word: If no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed. A command word can be a real word, but when this is the case, the holder of the item runs the risk of activating the item accidentally by speaking the word in normal conversation. More often, the command word is some seemingly nonsensical word, or a word or phrase from an ancient language no longer in common use. Activating a command word magic item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity. Sometimes the command word to activate an item is written right on the item. Occasionally, it might be hidden within a pattern or design engraved on, carved into, or built into the item, or the item might bear a clue to the command word. The Knowledge (arcana) and Knowledge (history) skills might be useful in helping to identify command words or deciphering clues regarding them. A successful check against DC 30 is needed to come up with the word itself. If that check is failed, succeeding on a second check (DC 25) might provide some insight into a clue. The spells identify and analyze dweomer both reveal command words. and WANDS A wand is a thin baton that contains a single spell of 4th level or lower. Each wand has 50 charges when created, and each charge expended allows the user to use the wand’s spell one time. A wand that runs out of charges is just a stick. Physical Description: A typical wand is 6 inches to 12 inches long and about 1/4 inch thick, and often weighs no more than 1 ounce. Most wands are wood, but some are bone. A rare few are metal, glass, or even ceramic, but these are quite exotic. Occasionally, a wand has a gem or some device at its tip, and most are decorated with carvings or runes. A typical wand has AC 7, 5 hit points, hardness 5, and a break DC of 16. Activation: Wands use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast, however, has a longer casting time than 1 action, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand.) To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the general direction of the target or area. A wand may be used while grappling or while swallowed whole. Special Qualities: Roll d%. A 01–30 result indicates that something (a design, inscription, or the like) provides some clue to the wand’s function, and 31–100 indicates no special qualities. and under UMD Use a Wand: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill also applies to other spell trigger magic items, such as staffs. It clearly says here "This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list." Oh and don't you need 15 ranks in spellcraft for that feat. How do you plan on that? |
| Ace_of_time07-03-07, 01:11 AM | I’m trying to find out if my rogue, wearing leather armor, can make a Use Magic Device check to trigger a wand containing an arcane spell. What is the DC for doing so? It appears from the rules that the armor will cause a 10% chance of arcane spell failure, if the spell being cast has a somatic (S) component (Player’s Handbook, page 122). Is it true that casting a spell from a spell-trigger item, such as a wand, removes the requirement for the somatic component, and thereby eliminates this 10% chance of failure? The Use Magic Device skill is for using magic items that you normally could not otherwise activate. Activating a wand has a DC of 20, as shown on the table in the Use Magic Device skill description. However, this assumes that you already know what spell the wand stores. If you don’t, you have to activate the wand blindly (DC 25). If you successfully activate a wand blindly, you know what spell it contains, and your subsequent attempts to activate that particular wand are at DC 20. There’s no arcane spell failure chance for activating a spell trigger item, for a command word item, or for a use-activated item. There is an arcane spell failure chance for activating a scroll (a spell completion item), provided the spell stored on the scroll has a somatic component. And here clearly stats that as long as you know what spell is on the wand it has a UMD DC 20 and only use activate the wand blindly (DC 25) if you don't know what spell is on it. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 01:42 AM | And here clearly stats that as long as you know what spell is on the wand it has a UMD DC 20 and only use activate the wand blindly (DC 25) if you don't know what spell is on it. FAQ is not errata. What I have stated is the strictest reading of the rules granted, but the FAQ can't override it. Obviously you have to know what the wand is to use it normally (that applies to any class), but there is nothing in the FAQ or the SRD that says that just because you know what the wand is you may activate it. It's a necessary not a sufficient condition. I grant you that this is the way most of us play it, but that's not strictly rules as written. Edit: Also the FAQ is incorrect even according to the rules as written. If you read the rules under activating blindly, just because you activate something blindly does NOT mean you get to activate it normally the next time. You just get a +2 to your next attempt. The FAQ put out by WOTC is really lousy btw.... Now as for the SRD, let me key in on one key phrase under command word: If no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Unfortunately for you, wands do have specific rules for that so it is suggested by the nature of the magic item. Furthermore command word says: No other special knowledge is needed. For wands we know that is false. In order to use a wand, you have to have basic knowledge of the spell, i.e. have it on your class list. That IS special knowledge. Ergo we know that wands can not be command-word activated items and thus the rules under command word activation simply don't apply. This is a 'rules by hoyle' approach, but that doesn't make me wrong. It merely means that in this thread I have exposed (and aggravated) an implicit houserule that most of you (including myself until I looked at this carefully) were using. Point in fact you can find NOTHING in the SRD that says I am wrong....and the FAQ can not override the rules as written since the FAQ is not errata (and even the FAQ doesn't actually say I am wrong although I admit that it too implies the looser interpretation is in play). -Polaris |
| Polaris07-03-07, 01:46 AM | Oh and don't you need 15 ranks in spellcraft for that feat. How do you plan on that? You might want to read CAdv page 103. It's five ranks of Spellcraft and that's not hard. -Polaris |
| Moont07-03-07, 02:23 AM | I personally believe that the players aren't truly looking at the fact of if they get seperated, or god forbids...they have a solo. It could come quite handy to them by themselves. Yes as a whole the group might be well diverse, but another most important thing....If the player is having fun, he is having fun. Let him waste, or skillfully place his skill points where-ever he chooses. One day the rest of the party might notice that they need his expertise. :-) |
| Schmendrick07-03-07, 03:02 AM | Why feed it? If the only way of activating a wand non-blindly were to have it on one's skill list, there would be no entry for doing so in the skill. I can't believe this is still being argued. What part of "Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment" is so difficult to understand? OP, Use Magic Device is a fine skill. Wands aside (if that weren't enough), UMD lets a character carry (or even use) very Evil (or Good...) items that would otherwise impose negative levels on their owner. It lets an elf use the Axe of Dwarvenkind. It even lets a rogue act like a cleric in some isolated instances. Yes, all of its DCs are high, and given that you can't take 10 on it, it's never a truly reliable skill. But it can become "reliable enough," and it increases the flexibility of your party member substantially -- which, in most campaigns, is a very good thing. (And it doesn't require cheesing your way into the Magic domain -- which, in many gaming groups, is a very bad thing.) |
| Polaris07-03-07, 03:09 AM | Why feed it? If the only way of activating a wand non-blindly were to have it on one's skill list, there would be no entry for doing so in the skill. We've been through this: You can. You just need to personally identify the wand. This can be done with UMD (via ID Item scroll) or it can be done via Appraise Magic Value. It's a hard nosed read of the rules (or as I like to say, "Rules According to Hoyle" that admittedly most of us don't seem to use....but the rules can be read this way. I can't believe this is still being argued. What part of "Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment" is so difficult to understand? I am not disputing this. I am saying that any character can't use a wand unless they've identified it themselves nor a scroll unless they've deciphered it themselves. This has nothing directly to do with UMD. OP, Use Magic Device is a fine skill. Wands aside (if that weren't enough), UMD lets a character carry (or even use) very Evil (or Good...) items that would otherwise impose negative levels on their owner. It lets an elf use the Axe of Dwarvenkind. It even lets a rogue act like a cleric in some isolated instances. And you are better off selling those items and making your own that actually are tailored to the strength of your group. Using UMD to use an Unholy Avenger is a horrible use of the skill. The group is far better off converting it to a Holy Avenger or other equivalent magic item or items. Yes, all of its DCs are high, and given that you can't take 10 on it, it's never a truly reliable skill. But it can become "reliable enough," and it increases the flexibility of your party member substantially -- which, in most campaigns, is a very good thing. (And it doesn't require cheesing your way into the Magic domain -- which, in many gaming groups, is a very bad thing.) What's cheesy about one level of cleric with the magic domain? The point is that UMD costs too much and returns too little and too late. It's not a useless skill, but a lot of you are grossly overrating it. -Polaris |
| penchant07-03-07, 07:39 AM | How many times do you have a weapon ready and are either within 30' of an opponent (missile) or right next to them during that first round and there is no suprise?? If you are using the spot rules correctly, that answer should be virtually never. I'll give you this one one technicality, but it's only a technicality since it should almost never happen. Adventurers typically traverse dungeons with weapons drawn and wands ready and areas where monsters pop out are routinely within 30 feet. While there is variance in everything, you are short changing your rogue and his total investment in initiative by making this an almost never event. Surface encounters might make this somewhat rarer, but it should be a common occurrence when the party takes the opposing side by surprise. Then after the party takes its surprise round the rogue can still win initiative and take his full attack within 30 feet. His surprise round action would likely be to move into position rather than take a single attack. False. You only get sneak attack if you are flanking or if your opponent is denied his dexterity bonus. Concealment does not do that, not even constant concealment (although it does prevent you from being sneak-attacked). Total concealment is required and even that only works some of the time (never against any charcter with blindsight and/or uncanny dodge for example). As stated I was referring to full concealment as my examples showed. While some creatures or races might be more difficult to affect, doesn't negate what I said. There are more creatures that are simply immune to sneak attack than with blindsight. We were specifically talking about double-wands and thus ranged attacks. No we are talking about UMD and wands that include touch spells like Inflict wounds are in this realm. They are still effective but are not ranged attacks. FALSE. Volleys including Multishot attack, darts, spells like scorching ray do sneak attacks once and once only. WOTC has specifically addressed this. I am wrong in this. I apologize. But to use your arguments the FAQ can't override the RAW and this allows you to continue in your strange interpretation of the rules but you have no problem quoting it to dispute my strict interpretaion of the rules? No. The rules aren't actually clear on this. What is clear is that the one who identified the item has the command word. It's not clear at all, that this knowledge is transferrable in a usable way. I admit (and have admitted) this is a hard-nosed interpretation of the rule, but the rule can be so interpreted. As otherwise stated (including by you) wands are not command word items (anymore, this is a 2nd ed idea). You simply have to know what spell the wand has. Your stict interprations of the rules are nonsense and you don't even use them. That means you are just being argumentative for its own sake. As for scrolls, it's true you can do the deciphering in your down-time which is why I don't generally add a time cost to this, but the roll does have to be made. Thus ultimately the rogue does have to made that DC 25+level UMD check to use scrolls (actually has to made two checks as you note) and that's if the rogue has the basic attribute to normally use the spell (which won't be generally the case for high level spells) and emulating an attribute is hard. but not that hard. Actually traps can have multiple DCs including ones less than 20. The serious traps do start at 20, I'll give you. However, it's worth noting that search is a great skill for more than just finding traps.... But only rogus can do this with DC's over 20. That is their trapfinding class feature. This came at a price at him being rather sucky at everything else that comes with being a rogue. Even the OP admitted that rogue 1 was stretched a bit thin otherwise. In fact this is a rogue dedicated to UMD....just not very well optimized....and given he's already ninth level for this example the lower DCs should start looking more and more makeable. The fact he still struggles even optimized for UMD with the easiest type of check actually proves my initial point which was not that UMD was useless (and recall I did say that rogue 2 was overstated his case) but rather that UMD was overrated. -Polaris He does not struggle with the easiest type of check. As I demonstrated he can use a wand with a roll of 3 or better. Even a low level rogue has a better than even chance to use a wand. Rogue level 5, Cha 14, max ranks, Skill focus = +14. Must roll a 6 or better to activate a wand. As to your more recent posts, you don't need to personally idenitfy any item to use it. Reading the items section in the DMG tells you what you need to use the items. Selling items is not always the best way to go since you lose half their value. And taking 1 level of any class for one ability is cheezy. Its called dipping. |
| tui07-03-07, 11:59 AM | I admit that I am stating a very hard nosed interpretation of the rules, and further admit that I don't use it in my own games (it's called houseruling), but that's the strictest interpretation of the rules as written, and it firmly puts all spell trigger items into the hands of arcane casters and priests of gods of magic (which isn't unreasonable). What would it take for you to concede this point? No, that's a serious question. WotC will not issue an errata on this point, because it is not a "mistake" -- that's all they issue errata for.. and even then, only if it is a major mistake and not fluff text, an example, or somesuch. So for just a confusing sentence, no errata will be issued. That's what WotC uses FAQs for. They're official interpretations of the RAW. If you dismiss the FAQ as worthless, you run the risk of totally misinterpreting the RAW. Here is a quote from the FAQ: The Use Magic Device skill is for using magic items that you normally could not otherwise activate. Activating a wand has a DC of 20, as shown on the table in the Use Magic Device skill description. However, this assumes that you already know what spell the wand stores. If you don’t, you have to activate the wand blindly (DC 25). If you successfully activate a wand blindly, you know what spell it contains, and your subsequent attempts to activate that particular wand are at DC 20. It doesn't say anything about having to personally cast identify on it or anything. You just have to know it's a Wand of Lightning Bolts or whatever. Edit: Also the FAQ is incorrect even according to the rules as written. If you read the rules under activating blindly, just because you activate something blindly does NOT mean you get to activate it normally the next time. You just get a +2 to your next attempt. The FAQ doesn't say that when you activate something blindly, you get to activate it normally the next time, it says when you activate a wand blindly. Big difference, because a wand only contains one spell. If you activated a Staff of Power and a lightning bolt pops out, you only get the +2 bonus next time. That's consistent with RAW.. unless you continue to interpret RAW the way you're doing. There's a Rules of the Game article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041116a) that sort of addresses activating items blindly: Blind Activation: You can use the "activate blindly" option with any kind of item. You can even use it to activate a command item when you don't know the command (or even what the device does). If you succeed, you activate the item somehow. Successful activation does not necessarily reveal the command to you, but you do get a +2 bonus on further attempts to activate the item blindly. As an unofficial rule, you might allow a character who has activated an item blindly an immediate Knowledge check (see the section on command activation) with a base DC of 25. Give the character a cumulative circumstance bonus of +2 for each for time the character has previously activated the item blindly. The character gets only one check for each blind activation. If the character doesn't have the appropriate Knowledge skill, the character makes an Intelligence check (with the previously noted circumstance bonus) instead. The skill description doesn't say so, but there's no reason why you could not use blind activation when you don't know a spell trigger item's function. To use this unofficial rule, you must aim the item somewhere. If you aim at the wrong place, you might simply waste a charge from the item, or you might have a disaster on your hands (depending on what the item's effect is and exactly where you aimed). If the spell trigger item produces a visible effect, you probably can surmise what the spell is. Otherwise make a DC 25 Spellcraft check to determine what the spell is. If the effect is visible and your DM decides you might not know what it is, the check DC is only 20. The implication of this, even if you don't allow the knowledge checks to figure it out, is if you KNOW what the spell is, you don't have to activate it blindly. The Rules of the Game articles don't have the official weight that the Errata and FAQ do, but it is a useful source for rules clarifications... It is worth noting that this RotG article was published on 11/16/2004, and thus may have been written before relevant FAQ entries.. Also, further down in the FAQ in a discussion about multiclass Fighter/Wizards, it's got a line about the balancing factor of allowing 1st level Wizards to use a Wand of Fireballs that says "Someone also has to make or pay for the wand." Granted the discussion is specifically about Wizards, which at least have the Identify spell on their spell list... but it doesn't say anything about that as a requirement for bought wands, nor do all Wizards even know Identify. From all this, I conclude that forcing a character to personally cast Identify on a wand before being able to use it -- whether Wizard, Cleric, UMD-er, or whomever, is a misinterpretation of RAW, and certainly not RAI (Rule As Intended). A DM could make that a House Rule, however. But a DM ruling the reverse would be well within RAW and RAI. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 12:52 PM | Adventurers typically traverse dungeons with weapons drawn and wands ready and areas where monsters pop out are routinely within 30 feet. While there is variance in everything, you are short changing your rogue and his total investment in initiative by making this an almost never event. Surface encounters might make this somewhat rarer, but it should be a common occurrence when the party takes the opposing side by surprise. Then after the party takes its surprise round the rogue can still win initiative and take his full attack within 30 feet. His surprise round action would likely be to move into position rather than take a single attack. Weapons? Yes. Wands?? I don't think so. Remember that melee weapons have threatened areas and thus there is a strong incentive to have them drawn and very little down-side to them not being drawn. Ranged weapons (bows and crossbows) can't realistically be kept in that sort of readied position (c0cked and locked) except for relatively short times because you wreck the weapon...but I concede that for a typical dungeon crawl you can probably get away with it (and most ranged people do). With a wand, you don't have a threatened area AND (in the case of the UMD rogue) you DON'T have an absolute assureance you will get your first attack off. Wands are typically pulled out at need. Even aside from this, in outdoor encounters if you read the spot/suprise rules, the scenario you mention should pretty much never happen. Even in a dugeon scenario, the 'noise' of the d20 is more important than the rogue's init modifier and a most of monsters have very good init modifiers too. The point is that while it's possible to get a full round sneak attack option, it's not something you can rely on and it sure isn't all that likely (even IF the opponent can even be caught flatfooted which Orcs (for example) typically won't be beyond the lowest CRs because of barbarian levels). As stated I was referring to full concealment as my examples showed. While some creatures or races might be more difficult to affect, doesn't negate what I said. There are more creatures that are simply immune to sneak attack than with blindsight. You didn't say full concealment. Full concealment is also hard to come buy especially for full attacks. Typically (hiding for example), only your first attack counts as a sneak attack. No we are talking about UMD and wands that include touch spells like Inflict wounds are in this realm. They are still effective but are not ranged attacks. No. Wands don't threaten areas. Therefor no flank for you and therefor no sneak attack. As otherwise stated (including by you) wands are not command word items (anymore, this is a 2nd ed idea). You simply have to know what spell the wand has. Your stict interprations of the rules are nonsense and you don't even use them. That means you are just being argumentative for its own sake. Actually wands do require a command word or some equivalent, but it also requires special knowledge and there is no rule in the game that says that this knowledge is transferrable. Can't find it anywhere. but not that hard. Emulating an ability score is your skill check -15. In order to use ANY scroll, you'd have to roll a 30. It gets worse for scrolls above zero level. That's seems pretty hard to me. But only rogus can do this with DC's over 20. That is their trapfinding class feature. Which means the search/disable device skills continue to be useful at high levels. It doesn't mean they are useless at low levels. See the difference? He does not struggle with the easiest type of check. As I demonstrated he can use a wand with a roll of 3 or better. Even a low level rogue has a better than even chance to use a wand. Rogue level 5, Cha 14, max ranks, Skill focus = +14. Must roll a 6 or better to activate a wand. 6 or better means he fails on a 5 or less or 25% of the time. For a COMBAT ABILITY, that's struggling. As to your more recent posts, you don't need to personally idenitfy any item to use it. Reading the items section in the DMG tells you what you need to use the items. Selling items is not always the best way to go since you lose half their value. And taking 1 level of any class for one ability is cheezy. Its called dipping. Can you quote me a rule that explicitly says that? I can't find one. Tui, 1. The FAQ entry doesn't say what you think it does. In order to activate the wand with a UMD DC of 20, you do indeed have to know what the wand is. Everyone agrees. The FAQ simply left out that you also have to know how to activate it (unless doing so blindly). That said, the last sentence is simply wrong. It's a house-rule that got snuck into an entry (and that's happened quite a bit with the FAQ). Not even Skip's article backs that up. 2. The first three words of the second paragraph by skip says: "As an unofficial rule..." Right away we can simply delete that entire paragraph from the discussion under the Oberani Fallacy. We aren't talking about unofficial rules here. The first seven words of the third paragraph by skip says: "The official skill description doesn't say so....." Again we can elminate this entire paragraph from the discussion as well as a Skip Houserule for the same reason. That leaves us with the first paragraph which completely backs my "Rules by Hoyle" approach. Just because you activate a wand blindly does NOT automatically mean you know how to use the wand (or anything else). -Polaris |
| Leilond07-03-07, 01:24 PM | No. Wands don't threaten areas. Therefor no flank for you and therefor no sneak attack. Sorry, you don't need to threaten for gain flanking. You gain flanking if your ally on the opposite site threaten your enemy So I can freely flank with a wand. I cannot provide the flanking to my ally, but he can provide flanking to me Actually wands do require a command word or some equivalent, but it also requires special knowledge and there is no rule in the game that says that this knowledge is transferrable. Can't find it anywhere. It isn't writte anywhere that this knowledge isn't trasferrable. Can't find anywhere Can you quote me a rule that explicitly says that? I can't find one. Can you quote me a rule that explicitly says that you can't? I can't find on |
| Polaris07-03-07, 01:37 PM | Sorry, you don't need to threaten for gain flanking. You gain flanking if your ally on the opposite site threaten your enemy So I can freely flank with a wand. I cannot provide the flanking to my ally, but he can provide flanking to me Yes you do. Flanking applies to melee attacks only. If you don't threaten, you don't get the flanking bonus (and don't make the melee attack). Otherwise a person with a bow could get a flanking sneak attack in this geometry...and he can not. Everyone, Ok, I was wrong about wands, but I am still critical of the rest of you. The key rule is on page 213 under spell trigger items. It is THIS key sentence: This means that if a wizard picks up a spell trigger activation item (such as a wand or staff) and that item stores a wizard spell, she shows how to use it. That's the key sentence which I finally found. It does go on to say that the character must KNOW which spell is in said trigger item to use it (but we all knew that). -Polaris |
| tui07-03-07, 01:38 PM | 2. The first three words of the second paragraph by skip says: "As an unofficial rule..." Right away we can simply delete that entire paragraph from the discussion under the Oberani Fallacy. We aren't talking about unofficial rules here. No kidding, that's why I said "even if you don't allow the knowledge checks to figure it out." That's what the "unofficial rule" was addressing. Skip still assumed that if you KNOW what the wand is, you don't have to use it blindly. It's pretty clear to me that he's assuming this because that's his understanding of RAW. Sure, he may be wrong (Skip is occasionally), but at least there's evidence of someone else in existence understanding RAW that way... 1. The FAQ entry doesn't say what you think it does. In order to activate the wand with a UMD DC of 20, you do indeed have to know what the wand is. Everyone agrees. The FAQ simply left out that you also have to know how to activate it (unless doing so blindly). Gah! That's the point! The FAQ left it out because with WANDS, you don't have to know how to activate them, you JUST need to have the spell on your spell list. UMD lets you pretend the spell is on your spell list. No need to activate blindly. Actually wands do require a command word or some equivalent, but it also requires special knowledge and there is no rule in the game that says that this knowledge is transferrable. Can't find it anywhere. "command word" is a very specific term in D&D: This is the default activation method for rings, rods, and wondrous items when the item description doesn't mention another activation method. Wands use Spell Trigger, which is very different. I get what you're saying though.. you still must "speak a word" to use the item. The only requirement I've seen anywhere for using a Spell Trigger item is: "To use a spell trigger item, you must have the spell that is stored in the item on your class spell list." What makes you think that you need special (non-transferable) knowledge beyond having the spell in your class spell list? I can't find it anywhere. |
| Ace_of_time07-03-07, 01:57 PM | Weapons? Yes. Wands?? I don't think so. Remember that melee weapons have threatened areas and thus there is a strong incentive to have them drawn and very little down-side to them not being drawn. Ranged weapons (bows and crossbows) can't realistically be kept in that sort of readied position (c0cked and locked) except for relatively short times because you wreck the weapon...but I concede that for a typical dungeon crawl you can probably get away with it (and most ranged people do). With a wand, you don't have a threatened area AND (in the case of the UMD rogue) you DON'T have an absolute assureance you will get your first attack off. Wands are typically pulled out at need. Even aside from this, in outdoor encounters if you read the spot/suprise rules, the scenario you mention should pretty much never happen. Even in a dugeon scenario, the 'noise' of the d20 is more important than the rogue's init modifier and a most of monsters have very good init modifiers too. The point is that while it's possible to get a full round sneak attack option, it's not something you can rely on and it sure isn't all that likely (even IF the opponent can even be caught flatfooted which Orcs (for example) typically won't be beyond the lowest CRs because of barbarian levels). You didn't say full concealment. Full concealment is also hard to come buy especially for full attacks. Typically (hiding for example), only your first attack counts as a sneak attack. No. Wands don't threaten areas. Therefor no flank for you and therefor no sneak attack. Actually wands do require a command word or some equivalent, but it also requires special knowledge and there is no rule in the game that says that this knowledge is transferrable. Can't find it anywhere. Emulating an ability score is your skill check -15. In order to use ANY scroll, you'd have to roll a 30. It gets worse for scrolls above zero level. That's seems pretty hard to me. Which means the search/disable device skills continue to be useful at high levels. It doesn't mean they are useless at low levels. See the difference? 6 or better means he fails on a 5 or less or 25% of the time. For a COMBAT ABILITY, that's struggling. Can you quote me a rule that explicitly says that? I can't find one. Tui, 1. The FAQ entry doesn't say what you think it does. In order to activate the wand with a UMD DC of 20, you do indeed have to know what the wand is. Everyone agrees. The FAQ simply left out that you also have to know how to activate it (unless doing so blindly). That said, the last sentence is simply wrong. It's a house-rule that got snuck into an entry (and that's happened quite a bit with the FAQ). Not even Skip's article backs that up. 2. The first three words of the second paragraph by skip says: "As an unofficial rule..." Right away we can simply delete that entire paragraph from the discussion under the Oberani Fallacy. We aren't talking about unofficial rules here. The first seven words of the third paragraph by skip says: "The official skill description doesn't say so....." Again we can elminate this entire paragraph from the discussion as well as a Skip Houserule for the same reason. That leaves us with the first paragraph which completely backs my "Rules by Hoyle" approach. Just because you activate a wand blindly does NOT automatically mean you know how to use the wand (or anything else). -Polaris So now your saying you know more about the rules then WOtC does. The FAQ is there to clear up miss under standings in the RAW. When replying to someones request they use most all rules including the erratas. Now having just checked the PHB and DMG erratas. None of the UMD, skills DC or other wise, or how the wands work have changed. The FAQ question clearly ask, I’m trying to find out if my rogue, wearing leather armor, can make a Use Magic Device check to trigger a wand containing an arcane spell. What is the DC for doing so? It appears from the rules that the armor will cause a 10% chance of arcane spell failure, if the spell being cast has a somatic (S) component (Player’s Handbook, page 122). Is it true that casting a spell from a spell-trigger item, such as a wand, removes the requirement for the somatic component, and thereby eliminates this 10% chance of failure? And they FAQ says, The Use Magic Device skill is for using magic items that you normally could not otherwise activate. Activating a wand has a DC of 20, as shown on the table in the Use Magic Device skill description. However, this assumes that you already know what spell the wand stores. If you don’t, you have to activate the wand blindly (DC 25). If you successfully activate a wand blindly, you know what spell it contains, and your subsequent attempts to activate that particular wand are at DC 20. There’s no arcane spell failure chance for activating a spell trigger item, for a command word item, or for a use-activated item. There is an arcane spell failure chance for activating a scroll (a spell completion item), provided the spell stored on the scroll has a somatic component. So yes the FAQ say that the RAW, which have not been change in the errata, so that as long as you know what spell is on the wand the DC is 20. If you don't your first check is DC25 and then DC 20 because after the activate blindly you will know what it is. A nice person would just say he/she was wrong and say they were sorry. That feat is knowledge (arcana) 5 ranks and and spellcraft 5 ranks. That's 20 points and you would need to be 7th level for cross class skills. How are you planning on that and keep your key 7 other key skill up to par? And before you post that this is wrong. It is RAW and the FAQ points this out and there is nothing anywhere that says different. So post where you are getting it or no one is going to believe you. To use a scroll you have to have the spell level plus 10 on the ability needed for the spell depending on arcana or cleric. the rogue in question has Str 13, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 9, Cha 15. Putting him being able to use 6th spell from arcana without - 15but any cleric spells and the like would be -15 to cast off scroll. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 02:06 PM | Ace_of_Time, Posting all of that after I just admitted I was wrong about wands was very small, mean, and downright low. You are also wrong: 1. The FAQ is not a reliable guide for rules and shouldn't be relied upon absolutely for rules support. In particular, there is no rules support ANYWHERE that says that you know what a wand is after you've activated it blindly. Zero. None. Zip. Now if the Rogue had spellcraft or some other way of absolutely knowing precisely what spell was just use, then yes, he'd get to use the DC 20 check. Not until (although he would get +2 to the next activate blindly check). 2. A rogue can take one level of cleric or wizard with ultimately no loss of rogue abilities. For that matter, there are plenty of other classes and PrCs that offer Spellcraft as a class skill. There is also a feat that lets you buy even cross-class skills 1:1 (Able Learner). In short, it's nowhere near as hard as you are trying to make out to get 5 ranks in spellcraft and especially not if you get to save all the ranks you would have spent on UMD (by taking a level of cleric with the magic domain for example). -Polaris |
| penchant07-03-07, 02:23 PM | Weapons? Yes. Wands?? I don't think so. Remember that melee weapons have threatened areas and thus there is a strong incentive to have them drawn and very little down-side to them not being drawn. Ranged weapons (bows and crossbows) can't realistically be kept in that sort of readied position (c0cked and locked) except for relatively short times because you wreck the weapon...but I concede that for a typical dungeon crawl you can probably get away with it (and most ranged people do). With a wand, you don't have a threatened area AND (in the case of the UMD rogue) you DON'T have an absolute assureance you will get your first attack off. Wands are typically pulled out at need. Quickdraw applies to wands as well if you must, but when in an area heavy with undead, plants or constructs a rogue will keep his wands handier than his bow. And for the record, nocking an arrow does not mean drawing the bow. An archer can carry his bow with an arrow at the ready without being "c0cked and locked" though I agree with you on the crossbow part. And you do not have to make an attack with the weapon you threaten with. A rogue can flank with a shortsword in one hand and activate the wand in the other. If it is a wand with a touch spell then as soon as he activates it then he does threaten per the touch spell rules. Even aside from this, in outdoor encounters if you read the spot/suprise rules, the scenario you mention should pretty much never happen. Even in a dugeon scenario, the 'noise' of the d20 is more important than the rogue's init modifier and a most of monsters have very good init modifiers too. The point is that while it's possible to get a full round sneak attack option, it's not something you can rely on and it sure isn't all that likely (even IF the opponent can even be caught flatfooted which Orcs (for example) typically won't be beyond the lowest CRs because of barbarian levels). So your point in this is that it can't be counted on to work every time? Nothing does. That's why rogues have so many options available to them. This is just one of many. We aren't arguing that UMD is better than Sneak Attack or Evasion, simply that it is one of the best skills he has. Like SA and Evasion it also does not work every time. You didn't say full concealment. Full concealment is also hard to come buy especially for full attacks. Typically (hiding for example), only your first attack counts as a sneak attack. Which I why I (and another poster on my behalf) clarified. Full concealment has nothing to do with whether or not you make a full attack, you either have it or not with the singular exception of invisibility. Halforc rogue fighting anything without darkvision in the dark gets full attack sneak attacks every round. Effects that blind opponents start coming at low levels especially with some of the new books out there. No. Wands don't threaten areas. Therefor no flank for you and therefor no sneak attack. **repeated** And you do not have to make an attack with the weapon you threaten with. A rogue can flank with a shortsword in one hand and activate the wand in the other. If it is a wand with a touch spell then as soon as he activates it then he does threaten per the touch spell rules. ** Actually wands do require a command word or some equivalent, but it also requires special knowledge and there is no rule in the game that says that this knowledge is transferrable. Can't find it anywhere. The special knowledge is having the spell on your class list. Since the UMD skill allows you to fake the class list, a successful 20 gives that to you for the activation. There is simply nothing else to it. Emulating an ability score is your skill check -15. In order to use ANY scroll, you'd have to roll a 30. It gets worse for scrolls above zero level. That's seems pretty hard to me. That's not true. If you have a 14 Intelligence OR charisma (since there is no differentiation between scrolls written by wizards and sorcerers) then you can read 4th level scrolls without having to emulate an ability score. Rogues usually have one of these stats much higher. A 16 Int for a skill focused rogue would not be unusual, so that opens the doors for 6th level scrolls with no penalty. Zero level scrolls? What ARE you talking about? A rogue with a 10 INT or CHA could activate a 0level scroll without having to emulate an ability score. Divine scrolls are pretty much WIS so the average rogue is screwed there. 6 or better means he fails on a 5 or less or 25% of the time. For a COMBAT ABILITY, that's struggling. Its not a combat ability. Its a do-anything skill. And that was for a 5th level rogue who did NOT make UMD his life. One feat, max ranks, no synergies. Can you quote me a rule that explicitly says that? I can't find one. I can't find anything that explicitly supports your assertions. The place where you get your "Special Knowledge" phrase is under the Spell Trigger Entry DMG on page 213 and in the SRD verbatim. SRD: No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. This means that if a wizard picks up a spell trigger activation item (such as a wand or a staff) and that item stores a wizard spell, she knows how to activate it...Snip... The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. "Hey! Henner! What spell is in this wand?" "Um, fireball." "Cool! Thanks!" The "one word" is the completion word for the fireball spell, as any spell completion item uses the final word just as any spell does. It is not a secret activation word like in 2nd ed. 1. The FAQ entry doesn't say what you think it does. In order to activate the wand with a UMD DC of 20, you do indeed have to know what the wand is. Everyone agrees. The FAQ simply left out that you also have to know how to activate it (unless doing so blindly). That said, the last sentence is simply wrong. It's a house-rule that got snuck into an entry (and that's happened quite a bit with the FAQ). Not even Skip's article backs that up. Being a class with the spell on the spell list OR making your 20 on UMD, per the SRD, DMG, RAW, GRU, KGB, XYZ means that you know how to activate it. And it is stated explicitly as quoted above. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 02:31 PM | Penchant, You might have done well to read my prior post. I admitted I was wrong about wands and transferring trigger knowledge and (finally) someone other than myself found the correct rule that clarified it (a post or two late). As for a half-Orc rogue always getting sneak attack in the dark? False. 1. You would need total darkness (anything less will not do) AND it can not be magical or deeper darkeness (which also voids darkvision). AND 2. The opponents can't have any darkvision (or other special sense themselves) AND 3. The opponents have to lose their dex bonuses due to total concealment. That's pretty restrictive. -Polaris |
| tui07-03-07, 02:37 PM | And you do not have to make an attack with the weapon you threaten with. A rogue can flank with a shortsword in one hand and activate the wand in the other. If it is a wand with a touch spell then as soon as he activates it then he does threaten per the touch spell rules. My understanding of this is that if you are HOLDING THE CHARGE from a touch spell, you can make an AoO. But you can't cast a spell as an AoO, nor can you do something that requires a Standard Action, such as activating a Spell Trigger item (i.e. Wands). |
| Polaris07-03-07, 02:42 PM | My understanding of this is that if you are HOLDING THE CHARGE from a touch spell, you can make an AoO. But you can't cast a spell as an AoO, nor can you do something that requires a Standard Action, such as activating a Spell Trigger item (i.e. Wands). That is my understanding as well. In fact in the XPH, it takes a special feat in order to use a power as an AoO in any way, shape, or form. Thus it's my understanding as well that it's not the wand that threatens (regardless of spell), but the held magical nimbus of a touch spell that's already been expended (but not yet discharged) that threatens. -Polaris |
| tui07-03-07, 02:57 PM | Posting all of that after I just admitted I was wrong about wands was very small, mean, and downright low. Oh, come on. He wrote a long message, citing several different sources, which probably took him more than the 20 minutes between when you posted your admission and when he finally hit Submit. Heck, I did the same thing, although mine happened to only come a minute after your post. To call him "very small, mean, and downright low" for not noticing the post in between is really uncalled for. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 03:02 PM | Oh, come on. He wrote a long message, citing several different sources, which probably took him more than the 20 minutes between when you posted your admission and when he finally hit Submit. Heck, I did the same thing, although mine happened to only come a minute after your post. To call him "very small, mean, and downright low" for not noticing the post in between is really uncalled for. No. It's perfectly called for. It's perfectly plausible that the initial posts crossed, but there is a wonderful tool called the EDIT feature. I note that he STILL hasn't modified that post to account for my post which means he takes and deserves my full criticism on this. -Polaris |
| tui07-03-07, 03:29 PM | No. It's perfectly called for. It's perfectly plausible that the initial posts crossed, but there is a wonderful tool called the EDIT feature. I note that he STILL hasn't modified that post to account for my post which means he takes and deserves my full criticism on this.-Polaris What is it that he said that irked you so bad? Reading through the post (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12948111&postcount=147), I only see him continuing on the rules discussions like everyone else. I just don't see anything in there that warrants a personal attack. Granted he DID edit his message 3 minutes after you posted your "very small, mean, and downright low" comment about him... |
| Leilond07-03-07, 03:35 PM | Something sounds very strange Once you see a wand firing a spell, you know wich spell is in it. DOT. It doesn't talk about arcane mistic knowledge, only about "what spell is stored in it". If you activate blidly the wand the spell in it fire out, you see it in action, if you pointed it on the right target. but if you see your enemy using a wand of magic missile, and you steal it (with a disarm action for instance) you don't need to activate it blind, because you prefectly know the spell is in the wand I remember that rules talk only about "knowing which spell is in the wand". The rules do not talk about any strange knowledge mechanics, only knowing which spell is in it. It's enought that someone tell you, and you can try to activate with DC20... if you fail you know that that someone lied and you'll try to activate blindly to know the spell in it |
| tui07-03-07, 03:50 PM | Something sounds very strange Once you see a wand firing a spell, you know wich spell is in it. DOT. Well, I think there is some gray area here... some spells don't have obvious physical effects.. what does a Cure Light Wounds wand look like when activated? How is that different than Cure Moderate Wounds? So it would be reasonable to require a Spellcraft check to recognize the spell being cast if it isn't obvious. And even figuring out what is "obvious" is hard to do, since we so often metagame without realizing it. But generally I think the advice given in the Rules of the Game article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041116a) are very helpful. |
| Leilond07-03-07, 04:29 PM | Well, I think there is some gray area here... some spells don't have obvious physical effects.. what does a Cure Light Wounds wand look like when activated? How is that different than Cure Moderate Wounds? So it would be reasonable to require a Spellcraft check to recognize the spell being cast if it isn't obvious. And even figuring out what is "obvious" is hard to do, since we so often metagame without realizing it. But generally I think the advice given in the Rules of the Game article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041116a) are very helpful. If a wizard say me there is a magic missile in the wand, I try to activate it with a DC20 check, if I fail I can think that the wizard lied and I try to activate it blindly. But if the wizard of my party say me there is a magic missile, there's no reason to not trust him Without knowing the spell in it I've tru to activate it blindly and to point the wand to someone/something, if the target is "valid" (an inflict wound against a creature that can be healed) I'll see the effect (wounds that close), if the target isn't valid I won't see the effect The rules only ask you to know the spell in it, it doesn't require any rule mechanical way to know it, simply know the spell. Seeing the magic missile wand firing his missiles is more than enought to know the spell in it |
| tui07-03-07, 04:40 PM | If a wizard say me there is a magic missile in the wand, I try to activate it with a DC20 check, if I fail I can think that the wizard lied and I try to activate it blindly. But if the wizard of my party say me there is a magic missile, there's no reason to not trust him. Yep, that seems reasonable to me. The DM probably should roll it as an "activate blindly" if you try to activate the wrong spell from a wand, with the usual chance of a mishap. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 08:21 PM | What is it that he said that irked you so bad? Reading through the post (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12948111&postcount=147), I only see him continuing on the rules discussions like everyone else. I just don't see anything in there that warrants a personal attack. Granted he DID edit his message 3 minutes after you posted your "very small, mean, and downright low" comment about him... I don't know where you are from, but where *I* am from it's generally considered to be obnoxious to continue harping on a point AFTER the other person agreed that you were right. Perhaps it's just my outlandish background.... -Polaris |
| Polaris07-03-07, 08:24 PM | The rules only ask you to know the spell in it, it doesn't require any rule mechanical way to know it, simply know the spell. Seeing the magic missile wand firing his missiles is more than enought to know the spell in it Without spellcraft, how could you possibly know magic missile from Issac's Lesser Missile storm, from Frank's Personal Force Cheese spell? RAW, you can't. Now, given what we've all now agreed on, if you were told what the spell was and if you made the appropriate UMD check (DC 20) and if you were told the truth then sure. However, RAW even obvious spells (like fireball) require a spellcraft check to identify. You can find this under the spellcraft skill and the counterspelling rules. FWIW, you can't identify Psionic Powers without the Psicraft skill. Same, same. -Poalris |
| NightBreeze07-03-07, 09:30 PM | UMD is an awesome skill, but it only starts to count when you are mid-high - high level. |
| Polaris07-03-07, 09:34 PM | UMD is an awesome skill, but it only starts to count when you are mid-high - high level. I agree with you mostly. I think that a lot of people here grossly overrate UMD. It's a useful skill, and it can come in handy in the right situation (and I did say that rogue 2 was overstating his case). However, you are certainly right that UMD really only starts to count at mid-high to high level...and by that time, there are usually lots of other ways the party can use various items. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-03-07, 10:11 PM | Ace_of_Time, Posting all of that after I just admitted I was wrong about wands was very small, mean, and downright low. You are also wrong: 1. The FAQ is not a reliable guide for rules and shouldn't be relied upon absolutely for rules support. In particular, there is no rules support ANYWHERE that says that you know what a wand is after you've activated it blindly. Zero. None. Zip. Now if the Rogue had spellcraft or some other way of absolutely knowing precisely what spell was just use, then yes, he'd get to use the DC 20 check. Not until (although he would get +2 to the next activate blindly check). 2. A rogue can take one level of cleric or wizard with ultimately no loss of rogue abilities. For that matter, there are plenty of other classes and PrCs that offer Spellcraft as a class skill. There is also a feat that lets you buy even cross-class skills 1:1 (Able Learner). In short, it's nowhere near as hard as you are trying to make out to get 5 ranks in spellcraft and especially not if you get to save all the ranks you would have spent on UMD (by taking a level of cleric with the magic domain for example). -PolarisI started post that one at 1:15 and didn't get done till then sorry. And the FAQ does say that "And they FAQ says, The Use Magic Device skill is for using magic items that you normally could not otherwise activate. Activating a wand has a DC of 20, as shown on the table in the Use Magic Device skill description. However, this assumes that you already know what spell the wand stores. If you don’t, you have to activate the wand blindly (DC 25). If you successfully activate a wand blindly, you know what spell it contains, and your subsequent attempts to activate that particular wand are at DC 20. As for your number 2 human: Skill Knowledge (spellcraft) "UA" This one lets you add spellcraft as a class skill and I also went human and I'm take the bonus skill point to get my ranks on knowledge Arcana which could also be used to tell what spell something is. It would only be harder. |
| Nom07-03-07, 11:19 PM | Ok, I was wrong about wands, but I am still critical of the rest of you. The key rule is on page 213 under spell trigger items. It is THIS key sentence: This means that if a wizard picks up a spell trigger activation item (such as a wand or staff) and that item stores a wizard spell, she shows how to use it. That's the key sentence which I finally found. It does go on to say that the character must KNOW which spell is in said trigger item to use it (but we all knew that).And the reason I didn't bother with that was because there's a whole 'nother debate on whether the "single word that must be spoken" is a command word or a generic word. Or, to put it another way, does "knows how to use it" apply to "special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know" or to that and the word? The list of requirements is obviously not in and of itself complete because two sentences later it adds the requirement that the caster must know what the spell is. Analogy: "I know how to log into this computer" could mean that I understand the login process or it could mean that I have the specific user name and password that will let me acess this specific computer. |
| Metafictional07-04-07, 01:10 AM | So here's my question, then. If UMD is a skill that only comes into it's own at higher levels, at about what level does it equal the Rogue's other features? And is there ever a point where it overshadows the other features? Because if not, if it's only a "sorta cool thing you can do at high level" then I'm definitely siding with Rogue #2 as a DM. It's not fair to dangle a cookie in front of someone for level after level, lure them into optimizing Charisma or taking Feats, only to give them a "marginal" ability. Not fair, and bad design. |
| Polaris07-04-07, 01:26 AM | So here's my question, then. If UMD is a skill that only comes into it's own at higher levels, at about what level does it equal the Rogue's other features? That depends on the specific character design, but my experience is that UMD only really starts to come into it's own between levels 7 and 12. And is there ever a point where it overshadows the other features? I've never seen it. Don't get me wrong; the skill has it's uses and it can get the party out of a jam, but I've never seen it overshadow any other rogue feature. Because if not, if it's only a "sorta cool thing you can do at high level" then I'm definitely siding with Rogue #2 as a DM. It's not fair to dangle a cookie in front of someone for level after level, lure them into optimizing Charisma or taking Feats, only to give them a "marginal" ability. Not fair, and bad design. I tend to agree. UMD is rather underwhelming. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-04-07, 03:31 AM | So here's my question, then. If UMD is a skill that only comes into it's own at higher levels, at about what level does it equal the Rogue's other features? And is there ever a point where it overshadows the other features? Because if not, if it's only a "sorta cool thing you can do at high level" then I'm definitely siding with Rogue #2 as a DM. It's not fair to dangle a cookie in front of someone for level after level, lure them into optimizing Charisma or taking Feats, only to give them a "marginal" ability. Not fair, and bad design. It also has to do with the power level you game at. Higher scores from high power game lets you use it sooner. At third level with that right build you could use it on a roll easily. 6 rank +2 cha +2 MA feat + 3 skill focus= 13 and makes wand that you know what spell is on it a roll of 7 or more. Some say that Cha on some builds will not be that high but thats still not but 8 or more and still on easy roll. And attack rolls with it are with touch AC which most of the time no higher then 10. |
| Polaris07-04-07, 04:30 AM | It also has to do with the power level you game at. Higher scores from high power game lets you use it sooner. At third level with that right build you could use it on a roll easily. It's certainly true that a higher level game will enable the skill to come into play sooner given that the rogue's CHA score is likely to be higher. As for using it easily, I dispute that at low level at least for a rogue. 6 rank +2 cha +2 MA feat + 3 skill focus= 13 and makes wand that you know what spell is on it a roll of 7 or more. Some say that Cha on some builds will not be that high but thats still not but 8 or more and still on easy roll. And attack rolls with it are with touch AC which most of the time no higher then 10. Which is another way of saying that you won't be able to make the easiest roll with a rogue essentially specialized towards UMD on a 6 or less or 30% of the time. In combat or critical situation, that stinks. Now, it's possible to use the skill in non-combat situations true (although you can never take 10), but as a general rule, if you've got the time to spare, there are usually better options (i.e. those that always work) including (but not limited to) simply hiring someone. Now, if we are talking about an Artificer or Warlock (i.e. those classes that can take 10 on UMD checks in critical situations) this analysis changes. For THOSE classes, UMD is a very worthwhile thing to invest in since you can use this skill at suprisingly low levels. In short, if you want to be a UMD specialist, there are better classes than rogue (or bard). -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-04-07, 10:25 AM | It would be any different then rolling for an attack roll. Are you saying a fighter shouldn't attack any one with a 15 or higher AC? |
| Metafictional07-04-07, 11:16 AM | Well in a word, yes. This is something I'm pretty strict about in my games, and it's how I balance out encounters. The full BAB classes are designed on a pretty interesting principle. They're supposed to hit their enemies. I'm not going into iterative attacks or anything so silly, I'm talking about their base 1 attack per melee. The Monster Manual talks about basing AC on the CR of a creature, something I take to heart. The principle is this; if the full BAB attack guy is in a 50% chance to hit situation with his primary attack, then the opponent is too strong. Why? Let's look at it from a 20th level perspective, where the differences in the numbers is easier to see. Mr. Full BAB has +20. Let's give him a +5 magic weapon. Without taking Feats, special abilities, or his primary attack stat into account, his attack routine looks like this: +25/20/15/10 Mr. Half BAB has +15. With the same +5 weapon, his attack routine looks like this: +20/+15/+10. Now, if the 3/4 BAB guy is actually meant to enter melee combat EVER (it's not his primary focus, but he's at least designed to occasionally need to hit stuff with weapons), he needs to be able to do so with a reasonable chance of success. IE, better than 50%. In any situation where you have equal odds for success or failure, you have to, as a DM, assume the worst-case scenario; ie, the coin flip comes up in the monster's favor, and the character just spent a turn doing nothing. A turn doing nothing should be the result of very bad luck, not slightly bad luck. That's why other options exist. If the spellcaster thinks his spell will fizzle against SR, or the enemy is very likely to save, he has other spells he can use with a better chance of success. So in the above situation, you must give the 3/4 guy a better than 50% chance to hit with his first attack, or he's very likely to realize he's wasting his time. You'll notice the AC's of most higher CR baddies are actually laughable compared to the attack bonuses of high level characters. This is intended. A Fighter 20 shouldn't even sweat missing his first two attacks, and he's very likely to use Power Attack or Combat Expertise so he's not wasting his attack bonuses! A Rogue 20 shouldn't even sweat missing his first attack. Ever. If you create an encounter where players cannot do something significant in each round of combat, save for, again, totally bad luck, it's like playing Magic against a Draw-Go deck. It's not fun. At all. The idea of the game is to let the players have fun. They should (and as they reach higher levels, often do) succeed at most tasks. It's only when they're trying to do difficult stunts, like Tumbling through a bunch of enemies without provoking AoO's, that they should have a chance to fail, and even then, at a certain level, they never will. Combat is balanced due to the 5% chance to fail on a 1 being absolute. There should never be a balanced situation where a character finds themselves needing a 20 to get something done in a combat. Because they are almost guaranteed to try and fail. So in the above group, the Full BAB guy, if +25 is his highest bonus, should never run into an enemy with an AC above 26 unless you intentionally want to make the fight harder than it needs to be. Because the 3/4 BAB guy with the +20 highest bonus starts off needing to roll a 6 to hit his opponent. His main action for the turn is already running at a 1-in-4 chance to fail, let alone any other attacks he wants to make. If the AC is higher, the Full BAB guy will almost assuredly still hit, but second-string warriors will quickly abdicate the field of battle to find something more interesting to do. This concept is fairly universal, hence the comment about UMD at low levels. If a Rogue is fiddling around with a 3-in-4 chance to do something a Wizard of his level should be able to just do by just snapping his fingers, then it's obvious the Rogue is setting himself up to take a fall. Maybe not this round, but soon. |
| tui07-04-07, 12:51 PM | That depends on the specific character design, but my experience is that UMD only really starts to come into it's own between levels 7 and 12. I agree. I've never seen it. Don't get me wrong; the skill has it's uses and it can get the party out of a jam, but I've never seen it overshadow any other rogue feature. I've never actually seen a dedicated UMD-er (of any class) in actual play (perhaps for good reason), but I have seen it used by a general Rogue to great effect. I think of it as a very useful tool in the toolbox. Think of it a bit like a fighter/barbarian that focuses all his feats and skills optimizing Leap Attack with Shock Trooper and Combat Brute. In certain circumstances it can lead to a totally devastating attack, but such concentration on a single maneuver can make you a bit weak in circumstances where you can't use the maneuver. Is it not worth the investment? That depends a lot on the player's preferences and how the DM handles things. Same with UMD; it CAN be very good with access to the right items, synergy with the party's tactics, and the right sort of challenges. Take away any of those things, and UMD probably won't shine. If this Rogue is already in a party with a more traditional Rogue, why should he invest his skill points in Search, Disable Device, and Open Locks? Seems like a waste, so long as he can easily Aid Another. Doing those things because they are normally "optimal" might be somewhat silly for this character in these circumstances. Metafictional, I'm not sure what you mean by "overshadows the other features".. There often does get to be a point where Sneak Attack becomes less useful, since so many of the bad guys are immune to it for whatever reason, and since SA is one of the Rogue's key class features, this can be pretty frustrating. If your campaign goes this way, then yes, UMD may very well overshadow SA. Other class features, like evasion and improved evasion are just plain awsome all the time. Trapfinding if you've got another Rogue dedicated to it won't be so useful. For skills, it doesn't replace the need for other skills like Spot and Listen.. or Diplomacy if there isn't a better party face. Move Silently and Hide are usually critical skills for a Rogue, but even those might not be so essential for this one, if Rogue #2 takes point. I guess what I'm getting at is UMD, under normal circumstances, is a good skill that can be very useful.... and the particular circumstances of this party actually could make it more feasible since the Rogue doesn't have to be stretched so thin as to cover all the Rogue roles. So I think it would be OK if you offered to allow the player to rebuild his character without the focus on UMD... although that may mean changing some/all of his feats, too (since he might have taken PBS and Precise Shot for his wand use), but I don't think you should force him to, or railroad the decision. |
| tui07-04-07, 01:07 PM | It would be any different then rolling for an attack roll. Are you saying a fighter shouldn't attack any one with a 15 or higher AC? What I think would be a better comparison is whether the Rogue should make a melee attack if he needs a 15 to hit, or if he should try activating a magic item that has a 30% chance of working? That's a pretty common scenario... 3/4 BAB, perhaps less enhancements on a magic weapon than the Full BAB guys, less likely to have Weapon Focus, and so on.. Taking a swing with a sword doesn't use consumable resources like many UMD checks do, but if fighting a tough enemy (especially one that you can't sneak attack), it could certainly be better for the party if the Rogue tried to do something like use a Wand of Enlarge on the Cleric, who just cast Divine Power on himself. Sure, it probably won't work (30%), and thus would waste a charge of the wand, but if it DOES work, it would probably be MUCH more useful than the 1d6+1 damage he'd do with his successful sword hit. |
| Metafictional07-04-07, 02:57 PM | I wouldn't take UMD away from anyone, but it does appear that optimizing the Skill's use is a considerable sacrifice, and the payoff can be fleeting sometimes. I wonder why UMD is a skill at all, and not some automatically granted Class Feature.... Anyways, I'm really thinking that my group should have another discussion about this; it's apparent that changing the way I run the game to support Rogue #1's UMD habit is chafing some of my players, and he's paying a lot personally for the privilege. UMD needs to change, but I'm not sure how to houserule that change. |
| Ace_of_time07-04-07, 04:04 PM | I wouldn't take UMD away from anyone, but it does appear that optimizing the Skill's use is a considerable sacrifice, and the payoff can be fleeting sometimes. I wonder why UMD is a skill at all, and not some automatically granted Class Feature.... Anyways, I'm really thinking that my group should have another discussion about this; it's apparent that changing the way I run the game to support Rogue #1's UMD habit is chafing some of my players, and he's paying a lot personally for the privilege. UMD needs to change, but I'm not sure how to houserule that change. I think that would be better to. just say every four levels they could use 1st spells from wand or nothing over so much caster levels. And still have them DS on magic that has to be read to cast items. |
| angryscrub07-04-07, 05:08 PM | Anyways, I'm really thinking that my group should have another discussion about this; it's apparent that changing the way I run the game to support Rogue #1's UMD habit is chafing some of my players, and he's paying a lot personally for the privilege. UMD needs to change, but I'm not sure how to houserule that change. hmmm, are you saying you're normally in the habit of tailoring all treasure to fit the party? occasionally doing it i can see, but honestly, were all dungeons stocked with treasure by groups of EXACTLY the same makeup as your players? i don't think i've ever played in a game where we didn't find crap we couldn't use. at least with UMD, you have a chance to actually get use out of almost anything you find, at least until you can get somewhere to convert it to more generally useful stuff. i mean, every magical treasure you find is spot on for someone in the group? i don't see it unless you have a very large party made up of every class. the other thing i'm wondering about too, there are two rogues in this group, both selflessly devoted to the party as a whole? i don't advocate specializing (taking feats) in UMD, personally, but maxing out your ranks only makes sense. i don't think i've ever played a rogue that didn't hold SOMETHING back from the rest of the party, sometime. i mean, jeesh, i actually liked it better when the class name was thief. having max ranks in UMD and some wand that maybe the rest of the party would want to sell, that you grabbed while they weren't looking, could save your bacon when things turn sour. two totally selfless rogues, always looking out for everyone else, concerned about everybody else. i dunno what the world's coming to. i don't think it really needs to be fixed, but basing a character around a single skill is probably a bit suboptimal under any circumstance. i mean, my jump specialist monk is hella sweet for me to play. max ranks, skill focus, leap of the sky, acrobatic, at 9th level i've got a +35 jump check (+12 ranks, +3 skill focus, +2 acrobatic, +2 tumble synergy, +4 strength, +12 from speed), and from a standing start (leap of the sky) can bridge a 36' chasm, or leap 9' straight up in the air! and that's if i roll a 1! talk about fun! of course, by the time i've devoted 3 feats to this, the rest of the party is probably getting a little tired of my kangaroo style monk jumping around like an idiot and not doing much else. doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the jump skill, or that it needs to be fixed. just means i'm not particularly good at optimizing for effectiveness, and should rethink my strategy. (it really is fun for ME to play though) |
| Nom07-04-07, 06:12 PM | Note that in a low-level game, it's quite common to have hit chances lower than 50%. Consider a 1st level fighter. Give him Str 16, for an attack bonus of +4. That's a 50% for AC 15. Several CR 1/2 and CR 1 monsters are higher than that. A selection: * Small air elemental: CR 1, AC 17 * Darkmantle: CR 1, AC 17 * Formian worker: CR 1/2, AC 17 * Giant fire beetle: CR 1/3, AC 16 * Stirge: CR 1/2, AC 16 * Spider swarm: CR 1/2, AC 17 * Trog zombie: CR 1, AC 16 Plus, several of the LA +0 races (orc, kobold, goblin) can easily have another level of warrior and some better armour added and get ACs around 18. A typical goblin warrior in a chain shirt and heavy steel shield is AC 18. Second line warriors have it tougher, since they likely have BAB +0 and Str 14 at level 1, and thus only a +2. |
| penchant07-04-07, 08:01 PM | Ok, Metafictional. Here is my recommendation. First rather than tailoring your party treasure to the group, go with random treasure. This will do two things. One it will let the group know that you aren't favoring one player over the others, and two it will actually give the UMD player MORE material to work with. Wands and scrolls actually come up in random treasure quite often as well as potions. These three make up 77% of the minor item selections chance with potions being about half of that. For medium items getting a scroll or wand is about 8% more likely than getting weapons or armor, and is more likely to come up over anything except wondrous items. So this will benefit rogue 1 and make everyone happy. Next, if rogue 2 is taking (and fully capable of taking) on the role of dungeon delver rogue, then offer rogue 1 some class feature alternatives. You can replace the trapfinding feature with the warlock's deceive item ability as a fair trade. Keep the trapfinding bonuses but apply them to UMD instead of search and Disable Device. If you feel that UMD is underpowered, then the +3 that he is getting at 9th level on trapfinding will even the rolls out a bit more as well as the ability to take 10 without resorting to Skill mastery (which can be had next level). Also point the player in the direction of some of the wand feats that were mentioned like wand strike or dual wand wielder and see exactly how far his interest goes. Let us know what happens, K? |
| TheCobra07-04-07, 08:43 PM | I think ye olde wand of alter self alone makes UMD worthwhile. Yeah, 4.5k isn't cheap, but it gives you +6-8 natural armor for 30 minutes. Or ridiculous bonuses to hide and move silently if you turn into a skulk. Or whatever moment type you need (except for fly, probably). In my opinion, it's the personal spells that make UMD worthwhile. |
| Metafictional07-04-07, 11:30 PM | That's a very good suggestion, and I'll see what they think about it. To be honest, Rogue #1 originally wanted to take Skill Focus-UMD, but in another post I found that doesn't work by RAW. I may just allow it to do so once he hits level 10 and see what happens. And as for the treasure, I don't like random treasure tables, I use random rolls as guidelines. I don't ever want my party to sell magical treasures, so I tend to avoid Exotic Weapons for example, but I made an extra effort to place more consumables like unusable Scrolls or Wands to make UMD a more rewarding experience. I thought the skill was pretty darned awesome myself until I got to thinking about it, with the help of all of you on this thread. I'll try to randomize treasure a bit more. It's better to find magical items you can use than not, but you do have a point. If they see there's less of a trend towards treasure intended for their characters to use, maybe UMD will shine more. And while you're right about low levels. Actually throughout all the CR's there are monsters a melee character has a hard time facing; but these creatures tend to be easily felled by magic. The flipside of this are golems, neither of which I use often, I'd rather see the group work as a team to defeat challenges, not let some characters steal the spotlight while the others feel rather nerfed. Rogues that work together and don't hoard treasure is bad, you say? The CR system works only because it assumes the party is working as a team. I've played in many games where the players don't do this, and constantly put themselves above the group. It's sad when a group of 10th level characters gets pwned by a group of CR 6 zombies, that's all I have to say about that last time... |
| Ace_of_time07-05-07, 01:53 AM | That's why I love the MIC. It has a list in it of items that should be given to each level. All I do is roll on the table and it tells you which levels to pick from. Most have the same value so all you do is pick one that matches your party. I was talking about a 15AC. A 3rd level fighter at could easily have +6 to attack give him a nine or more and thats with out feats. If any PC, no matter what class, had a +13 to attack and was attacking a 20 AC. How many do you think would roll? Or Would they just wait till their level allowed them to just miss on a one? |
| tui07-05-07, 10:31 AM | That's a very good suggestion, and I'll see what they think about it. To be honest, Rogue #1 originally wanted to take Skill Focus-UMD, but in another post I found that doesn't work by RAW. I may just allow it to do so once he hits level 10 and see what happens. I'm assuming this is a typo, but just thought I'd clarify that you mean Skill Mastery-UMD. If you think UMD needs a kick up, this would probably be a good way to do it. If he could take 10 on UMD, he'd be able to pretty much use it without risk of failure for most things. His check would be: 10+2(Cha)+13(ranks)+3(skill focus)=28 That would allow him to activate any item blindly, decipher scrolls up to 3rd level (might be worth scrolls/wand of Read Magic to boost this), use a scroll up to 8th* level, use any wand, emulate a class feature, and emulate a race. If he wants to emulate an alignment, he'll need to roll for another couple levels. *Except his 16 Int will probably limit him to 6th level arcane scrolls, and his 15 Cha (thanks to Favored Souls) will limit him to 5th level divine spells. His can currently only emulate a 13 Wis, meaning that for now he can only cast 3rd level Druid/Ranger/Paladin-only spells. [I'm a bit rusty on this aspect of UMD, but I think that's how it works.] |
| angryscrub07-05-07, 11:17 AM | Rogues that work together and don't hoard treasure is bad, you say? The CR system works only because it assumes the party is working as a team. I've played in many games where the players don't do this, and constantly put themselves above the group. It's sad when a group of 10th level characters gets pwned by a group of CR 6 zombies, that's all I have to say about that last time... hah, no, i didn't say it was bad. just that i'm a bit amazed. i mean, skimming some of the choicest bits off the top here and there is just good form for most rogues, and not really harmful to the party as a whole as long as you keep it small (ie a wand or two that is more beneficial to you personally than to the party). most characters are going to have their own goals that don't mess 100% with the party's as a whole. |
| Metafictional07-05-07, 12:18 PM | Ah yes...Skill Mastery. Let's take another look at that 3rd-level Fighter scenario. +3 BAB, +2 Str, Weapon Focus, Masterwork Weapon. So ok, +7 Attack Bonus. Quite honestly, I don't think this guy should be going up an AC above 15, because again, that would imply that any Rogue or Monk equally set up would have an attack bonus of +6. At low levels, yes, some enemies do have high AC's compared to attack bonuses, and if you use monsters from the book with high AC, that can be a problem. Of course, again, at these levels, most monsters can be taken out with a single spell... But definitely by higher level, I'm very careful with what AC's I use, because that's one thing that makes playing a Monk downright suckful, when they can't hit anything with a normal attack, let alone Flurry. What's the point of playing a Class whose main method of doing anything in combat has a 50% or lower chance to succeed? I guess before I continue, I should ask if you see my point or not... |
| Ace_of_time07-05-07, 06:34 PM | I'm assuming this is a typo, but just thought I'd clarify that you mean Skill Mastery-UMD. If you think UMD needs a kick up, this would probably be a good way to do it. If he could take 10 on UMD, he'd be able to pretty much use it without risk of failure for most things. His check would be: 10+2(Cha)+13(ranks)+3(skill focus)=28 That would allow him to activate any item blindly, decipher scrolls up to 3rd level (might be worth scrolls/wand of Read Magic to boost this), use a scroll up to 8th* level, use any wand, emulate a class feature, and emulate a race. If he wants to emulate an alignment, he'll need to roll for another couple levels. *Except his 16 Int will probably limit him to 6th level arcane scrolls, and his 15 Cha (thanks to Favored Souls) will limit him to 5th level divine spells. His can currently only emulate a 13 Wis, meaning that for now he can only cast 3rd level Druid/Ranger/Paladin-only spells. [I'm a bit rusty on this aspect of UMD, but I think that's how it works.] I would like to point out that using a spell on a scroll is 20+caster level. DS is 25 + spell level. |
| tui07-06-07, 09:54 AM | I would like to point out that using a spell on a scroll is 20+caster level. DS is 25 + spell level. Right, did I get my math wrong somewhere? (It's quite possible.) |
| Leilond07-06-07, 10:26 AM | I would like to point out that using a spell on a scroll is 20+caster level. DS is 25 + spell level. That's not what is writte on the rules HEre on the SRD http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/useMagicDevice.htm And page 185 of the PHB 20+caster level So it's "20" and not "25" and it's "caster level" and not "spell level" I don't know where did you took your information, but 3.5 manuals say that |
| tui07-06-07, 11:20 AM | That's not what is writte on the rules HEre on the SRD http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/useMagicDevice.htm And page 185 of the PHB 20+caster level So it's "20" and not "25" and it's "caster level" and not "spell level" I don't know where did you took your information, but 3.5 manuals say that I'm confused now, but I think you and Ace_Of_Time both have it the same way, and I had it wrong in my original post a couple up; I missed the "caster level" part. The "DS is 25 + spell level" part is referring to Decipher Spell, not Use a Scroll; maybe that's where your confusion with his post is. |
| Leilond07-06-07, 11:38 AM | I'm confused now, but I think you and Ace_Of_Time both have it the same way, and I had it wrong in my original post a couple up; I missed the "caster level" part. The "DS is 25 + spell level" part is referring to Decipher Spell, not Use a Scroll; maybe that's where your confusion with his post is. Pheraps, but "using a spell in a scroll" and decipher a spell are really two different issues |
| Ace_of_time07-06-07, 12:25 PM | That's not what is writte on the rules HEre on the SRD http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/useMagicDevice.htm And page 185 of the PHB 20+caster level So it's "20" and not "25" and it's "caster level" and not "spell level" I don't know where did you took your information, but 3.5 manuals say that Decipher a written spell DC is 25 plus spell level. Use a scroll DC is 20 +caster level. As I posted and as on the table on your link. Using a scroll is to rolls. One to DS and the other to cast. And to the fighter point. Give up on a battle just because of a high AC is quitting to early. Touch AC are most of the time 8-12 so your spell casters could take these out while your tank takes the hits. Just because something is hard to hit doesn't mean run and doesn't mean the DM shouldn't use it. If your rogue had to hit a AC20 would it be better to use wand of MM 7 or better or 14 or more with a weapon. Which would you use? Also your not giving anything up. It's just one skill and you will have alot of SP to spend on other things. There is a magic set of rogue tool that give a +5 to checks. There is a circlet that gives a plus 3 to all cha checks. These are cheap. Picking the right races could net you a +2 to listen, spot, and search. And that's not including using UMD to use Buffing spells. |
| Metafictional07-06-07, 05:02 PM | I never said you should give up, I just said that in a battle where you want the characters to feel like they're actually good at the things they're supposed to be good at, you shouldn't give them a 50% chance of success. Sure, they can flank and aid another, or use wands, trip attempts (even with AoO's), but you can't write an encounter assuming that's what's going to happen. Because if it doesn't, and you get a TPK or dead characters, and the players look at you and your only defense is "um, but I thought you would do X!"... Prepare for a table flip! LOL. So in a good game, these sorts of encounters should be rare, and used carefully, if at all. |
| Ace_of_time07-06-07, 08:43 PM | I think the point here was missed some where?:confused: :confused: If a PC needed a 7 or more to attack some it would be ok to roll the attack but if a pc needs a 7 or more on a skill check like UMD we would rather not use it. To me that doesn't make sense. That was the point. How high would you say the AC for 3rd level PCs monster encounters be to high for the list? I was just wondering. |
| Metafictional07-06-07, 11:20 PM | Ok, all I'm saying is, if your big special action for the turn has a better than 55% chance to fail, you're running a big risk of doing nothing, and that's a killer in some games. Or at the very least, you feel pretty lame because you're not doing much. What makes UMD bad is that you have to sacrifice Feats and skill points, not to mention make Charisma a higher priority, to use a Wand that any 1st level Sorcerer can use just by pointing it and saying a word, no roll required. So right there, it's _worse_ than just tossing an attack out there, even if it has the same chance to succeed (and your attack should be likely to succeed). Basically, in any encounter, I try to set AC's based on the worst attack bonus of anyone who has any reason to use a weapon, and add 8 to it. Because I feel full BAB guys with Power Attack and Combat Expertise should naturally get the benefit of their Feats without having to sweat much, and that 3/4 BAB guys should never feel like they're wasting their time. This is a bit more generous than the MM, which suggests an AC no higher than 10+CR (I think) for monsters; if the AC is higher, the CR should rise. I just don't ever want to say to someone "because your Monk isn't optimized for attack bonus, your chance to hit without shenanigans or circumstance bonuses is only 50% or worse". Doesn't strike me as fair. The reason I went into this, is again, the statement before that "well needing a 15 or higher to use a wand isn't bad", and I think it is. Actually, needing a 10 to use a wand is pretty bad when a Wizard doesn't need to roll anything by comparism. |
| Ace_of_time07-06-07, 11:54 PM | Ok, all I'm saying is, if your big special action for the turn has a better than 55% chance to fail, you're running a big risk of doing nothing, and that's a killer in some games. Or at the very least, you feel pretty lame because you're not doing much. What makes UMD bad is that you have to sacrifice Feats and skill points, not to mention make Charisma a higher priority, to use a Wand that any 1st level Sorcerer can use just by pointing it and saying a word, no roll required. So right there, it's _worse_ than just tossing an attack out there, even if it has the same chance to succeed (and your attack should be likely to succeed). Basically, in any encounter, I try to set AC's based on the worst attack bonus of anyone who has any reason to use a weapon, and add 8 to it. Because I feel full BAB guys with Power Attack and Combat Expertise should naturally get the benefit of their Feats without having to sweat much, and that 3/4 BAB guys should never feel like they're wasting their time. This is a bit more generous than the MM, which suggests an AC no higher than 10+CR (I think) for monsters; if the AC is higher, the CR should rise. I just don't ever want to say to someone "because your Monk isn't optimized for attack bonus, your chance to hit without shenanigans or circumstance bonuses is only 50% or worse". Doesn't strike me as fair. The reason I went into this, is again, the statement before that "well needing a 15 or higher to use a wand isn't bad", and I think it is. Actually, needing a 10 to use a wand is pretty bad when a Wizard doesn't need to roll anything by comparism. Kobolds and gobolds both have AC 15. This means that they are to powerful because of there AC. so What CR would a Kobold wearing full plate. It is 4 points to start and 1 point a level. Being human only could cover this one skill and still leave you with the rest of your points. As for the feats there are pleaty of items that increase a rogues other skills but none for this. (the gogoles are just for scrolls not UMD skill) You could just not use the feats. or go multi class fighter to buy battle feats with. |
| Cariyaga07-07-07, 12:09 AM | Also, I wanted to point out that you can't take 10 or 20 with UMD. |
| Metafictional07-07-07, 12:44 AM | Well yes, their AC is higher than it should be, but this is balanced by the damage potential of the Kobold and the Goblin...pretty low. I'm not saying it's a good balance, or the way I'd balance it in my games, but that's what WotC thinks. Personally, enemies that are hard to hit are going to be problematic without the use of magic. Some people think that's good design, so that everyone has a chance to shine. I disagree, since, sure, a Wizard can use Sleep and end a Kobold encounter in one action. But if you lack that option, what then? The weapon users can't sit there turn after turn and miss. But low levels are hard to judge. A first level character could easily get an AC of 21 with starting money and the right build. Making them damn near invincible to most enemies of their CR. It's at higher levels when raising AC gets harder, but attack bonuses rise automatically that you have to take more care to make sure monster AC's don't outstrip what the PC's can do. I take that level of care starting at first level, other people don't. If it works for their games, fine, but I don't think small chances of success in critical encounters where ever action matters is a good thing. |
| Polaris07-07-07, 01:06 AM | Just to add to metafictional's point, bear in mind that a typical adventuring party will go through scores if not hundreds of different encounters during the lifetime of a campaign, while each individual monster/trap/etc is only going to encounter the monster once (unless special such as a BBEG). That means going by the law of large numbers, that each individual encounter and each individual action in that encounter needs to have a very high probability of individual success. Indeed the party needs to have nearly a 100% chance of success (but that can mean one or more members die) per encounter or you discover that over the course of a campaign, you are very likely to have a TPK somewhere. That's one reason why UMD has problems: It's not reliable enough in combat and combat is where things like this really matter. -Polaris |
| Dazzer07-07-07, 01:25 AM | Kobold in full plate at level 1 eh? Well I can handle this. Assuming the party initiative order goes something like this... Rogue Fighter Kobold Cleric Wizard Round 1: Rogue and Fighter move to flank said kobold, take total defense to avoid damage (since they have a bare chance of hitting, it isn't worth attacking unless they think they'll succeed) Kobold does something...likely an attack, say he crits and deals 3-5 damage to the rogue. Cleric Blesses, Wizard Aids the fighter (or rogue whichever has higher attack bonus). Fighter now has: +2 flank, +4 aid, +5 bless, to hit ontop of his +1 base attack, and I assume 15 strength (15, 14, 13, 12, 10 8). +8 to hit. Kobold has... AC: 10 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 8 = 21 Fighter is hitting on a 13...not bad eh? An encounter is only difficult if the party doesn't literally work together to maximize the best strategy of winning. If this kobold for some reason can't be magic missiled to death, or slept, or suprise round murdered or something. The party has to mesh and think a little to say to themselves "ok...he has high AC, and you don't have spells wizard...what do we do..." I know this goes off topic but it points out the difficulty in CR adjustments due to increased gear or effectiveness that really is only minor. As for the two rogues... Level 1: 15 charisma rogue, (socialite type..diplomacy, gather info etc...) +2 from cha, +4 from ranks, +3 from skill focus. At level 1, he has +10 to UMD. He has a 50/50 chance of using a wand from ANY SPELL LIST at level 1. At level 2, assuming he puts some ranks in decipher script. He'll have +11 and +13 using scrolls. Meaning he succeeds on an 8 for 1st level scrolls, and a 9 for wands. By level 5, I can see +15 to use wands, and + 17 to use scrolls. Lets monkey this up, he goes exemplar, and chooses UMD as a skill artistry.... You can see where this is going. Yes, his charisma is his highest statistic, but being a rogue, if he has 14 dex, and 13 con, and 12 int, and 10 str, and 8 wisdom....he isn't that bad is he? He's got Diplomacy, Gather Info, Decipher script, Search, DD, UMD, and 3 more of his choice maxed (or mix and matched) and 1 additional skill maxed if human.... (bluff, sleight of hand, sense motive...intimidate?) he has 3/4 base, sneak attack, low AC, and looks like any other rogue really...except he is a socialite. He has 5 skills based on charisma noted above. Why shouldn't he concentrate on cha? As a side note...by level 5, he has a good chance of picking up any wand he knows about, and using it on the fly...ANY WAND...paladin rhino rush wand? cleric healing wand? Magic missile for when he fights incorporeals...Mage armour, SoF, Cats Grace to boost his armour class...all are available. I realize it very much counts on what gear he can get his hands on, but a good DM will provide SOMETHING he can use the skill for, even if it is a simple scroll or two of clairaudience or voyance. As he progresses in level, he'll be able to find almost any wand realistically. With gather info maxed, diplomacy and the socialite charisma he has...he'll be able to find out who sells what, for how much and how to reduce the price. So...tell me he's useless? Edit: Lets not get into the part where the spellcasters of the party decide the rogue is worth Craft Wand, and Scribe Scroll and begin handing him stuff..... |
| Polaris07-07-07, 03:06 AM | As for the two rogues... [SNIPPING Armoured Kobold Section] Level 1: 15 charisma rogue, (socialite type..diplomacy, gather info etc...) +2 from cha, +4 from ranks, +3 from skill focus. At level 1, he has +10 to UMD. He has a 50/50 chance of using a wand from ANY SPELL LIST at level 1. Sure. First level wands also cost 750 gold, which is vastly more than any first level character (or even second level character) should have. In addition, the rogue has just blown his only feat in a skill that simply by cost-per-level analsysis won't even be used until third level AND he's invested all this for an ability the party spellcasters get for free. Saying "all spell lists" sounds cool, but honestly if someone can handle wizard spells and someone else (or even the same person) can handle cleric spells, then you have the vast majority of the spells you'll ever need for item usage. At level 2, assuming he puts some ranks in decipher script. He'll have +11 and +13 using scrolls. Meaning he succeeds on an 8 for 1st level scrolls, and a 9 for wands. You've done this for the cost of five ranks in a skill that is nearly worthless (at least IMX) in most campaigns. In addition to that, you have to DECIPHER the scroll first, and that adds about five to the DC for the scroll...unless you've got spellcraft which is cross-class for a rogue (but there are ways that magical rogues get around this). BTW, this is assuming you don't have the emulate the underlying ability for the scroll. By level 5, I can see +15 to use wands, and + 17 to use scrolls. Which means by level five you will FAIL 20% of the time when using wands. Wizards won't tolerate a 20% ASF for their spells; neither should you yet this is effectively what the skill implies at this level and this is for a rogue build around Cha/UMD. It's worse for a standard rogue. As for scrolls, the DC to use a scroll is 20+caster level and the DC to decipher them is 25+spell level. That means you fail 15% of the time even on first level scrolls *if* you've deciphered them in advance (and will fail your decipher check a whopping 40% of the time). This stinks. Lets monkey this up, he goes exemplar, and chooses UMD as a skill artistry.... At which point you aren't talking about a rogue. Rogue's can't take UMD with skill mastery. You can't take 10 or 20 with UMD unless the class description explicitly says otherwise. You can see where this is going. Yes, his charisma is his highest statistic, but being a rogue, if he has 14 dex, and 13 con, and 12 int, and 10 str, and 8 wisdom....he isn't that bad is he? He's got Yes, he is that bad. In fact he's terrible. Diplomacy, Gather Info, Decipher script, Search, DD, UMD, and 3 more of his choice maxed (or mix and matched) and 1 additional skill maxed if human.... (bluff, sleight of hand, sense motive...intimidate?) What about SPOT, LISTEN, Move-Silently, HIDE, etc? You've already assured that your rogue is going to be gimped in either perception (low wisdom and not enough skill points), stealth (low Dex for a rogue and not enough skill points) or more likely both if you want Bluff (which a Cha based rogue certainly does). Worse, his Dex modifier is only +2 and his Int modifier is +1 which means he is bad at his core rogue responsibilities and has fewer skill points to make up the difference (and at least one less feat to make up the difference). he has 3/4 base, sneak attack, low AC, and looks like any other rogue really...except he is a socialite. He has 5 skills based on charisma noted above. Why shouldn't he concentrate on cha? As a side note...by level 5, he has a good chance of picking up any wand he knows about, and using it on the fly...ANY WAND...paladin rhino rush wand? cleric healing wand? Magic missile for when he fights incorporeals...Mage armour, SoF, Cats Grace to boost his armour class...all are available. No. He stinks at perception and stealth which is costly for pretty much any rogue given their lowish AC and reliance on sneak attack (coupled with a fairly low HD). He lacks the skill points and attribute modifiers in Dex and Int that a solid rogue depends on, he has a NEGATIVE wisdom modifier which hurts his perception even more.....in short he stinks. I realize it very much counts on what gear he can get his hands on, but a good DM will provide SOMETHING he can use the skill for, even if it is a simple scroll or two of clairaudience or voyance. If an ability depends on a kind DM throwing you bones, then the ability is questionable at best. As he progresses in level, he'll be able to find almost any wand realistically. With gather info maxed, diplomacy and the socialite charisma he has...he'll be able to find out who sells what, for how much and how to reduce the price. So...tell me he's useless? Pretty much actually. The social arena is just not enough to support a class...and a character such as this is done better as a bard anyway. Edit: Lets not get into the part where the spellcasters of the party decide the rogue is worth Craft Wand, and Scribe Scroll and begin handing him stuff..... Why would they since spellcasters (which are most classes btw) can use their wands for FREE at any level? -Polaris |
| penchant07-07-07, 07:50 AM | Sure. First level wands also cost 750 gold, which is vastly more than any first level character (or even second level character) should have. In addition, the rogue has just blown his only feat in a skill that simply by cost-per-level analsysis won't even be used until third level AND he's invested all this for an ability the party spellcasters get for free. Saying "all spell lists" sounds cool, but honestly if someone can handle wizard spells and someone else (or even the same person) can handle cleric spells, then you have the vast majority of the spells you'll ever need for item usage. A wand with 50 charges costs 750gp, but you can buy a wand on the used market for significantly less. A 1st level wand with 5 charges would only cost 75 gold and is conceiveable that a character could start play with one. The money begins to increase after that. The "all spell lists" IS cool since it also includes Wu-jen, Shugenja, assassin, bard, and other spell lists that won't appear in a two caster party. For 1st to third level, the UMD is best used out of combat since it does have such a small chance to succeed relative to survivability, but out of combat skills are not useless. A rogue scouts alone, but magical traps are incredibly difficult to detect. But a UMD roll at this level to activate a detect magic is easier than search for magical traps at even higher levels. You've done this for the cost of five ranks in a skill that is nearly worthless (at least IMX) in most campaigns. In addition to that, you have to DECIPHER the scroll first, and that adds about five to the DC for the scroll...unless you've got spellcraft which is cross-class for a rogue (but there are ways that magical rogues get around this). Its obvious that the campaigns you have been in make this a worthless skill. That doesn't make it so in most campaigns that other people play in. Deciphering is out of combat and retriable, so the DC is not so much of a hinderance, especially since the rogue does not have to spend an hour each day preparing spells like a magical rogue does. BTW, this is assuming you don't have the emulate the underlying ability for the scroll. This is true, but not very likey with the wands and scrolls you can afford at most levels. Its only the highest level spells that become difficult and since you can use Cha as your spell casting stat to qualify this should carry you through 6th level spells without too much difficulty. Which means by level five you will FAIL 20% of the time when using wands. Wizards won't tolerate a 20% ASF for their spells; neither should you yet this is effectively what the skill implies at this level and this is for a rogue build around Cha/UMD. It's worse for a standard rogue. As for scrolls, the DC to use a scroll is 20+caster level and the DC to decipher them is 25+spell level. That means you fail 15% of the time even on first level scrolls *if* you've deciphered them in advance (and will fail your decipher check a whopping 40% of the time). This stinks. Still remember that a limited charge wand costs much less that a 50 charge wand does. Failing your roll does not expend a charge and a rogue at 5th level can have several wands with just a few charges each for essential use. Cure spells (for when the cleric goes down), silence (for creatures with certain blindsight abilities or just not having to roll for MS), Knock (for when you can't make your Open Locks roll), Invisibility (for when you don't want to roll for hide), and so on. You'll say that other characters can cast those spells for the rogue, but a rogue is usually not going to want to be standing next to the clearly visible spell casters. Even if you have to try twice to activate a wand, it can be done from cover while hidden and you just can't do that while standing next to a caster who can't hide. You keep thinking that its not as good as being an actual spell caster. You are correct about that. The difference is that you don't have the limitations of a spell caster either. You didn't have to take the crappy HD, the BAB, the low skill points and the otherwise dead level for someone who doesn't care about going further. At which point you aren't talking about a rogue. Rogue's can't take UMD with skill mastery. You can't take 10 or 20 with UMD unless the class description explicitly says otherwise. This is true, but the gist of the discussion has revolved around UMD and he is offering the upper ends of the idea. Be kind. What about SPOT, LISTEN, Move-Silently, HIDE, etc? You've already assured that your rogue is going to be gimped in either perception (low wisdom and not enough skill points), stealth (low Dex for a rogue and not enough skill points) or more likely both if you want Bluff (which a Cha based rogue certainly does). Worse, his Dex modifier is only +2 and his Int modifier is +1 which means he is bad at his core rogue responsibilities and has fewer skill points to make up the difference (and at least one less feat to make up the difference). You make the assumption that he will be gimped in various different areas for focusing on one skill. A rogue gets 8 +INT per level. The typical method for a rogue is to pick 8+INT skills (+1 for human) to choose to keep at max. This allows you to even pick a crossclass skill or two to max out (half at double cost). So a 14 Int human rogue can pick 11 skills to max out. Spot, Listen, Search, MS, Hide, UMD, Bluff, Spellcraft (cc), Decipher Script, Disable Device and Open Lock all at max ranks sounds like a decent rogue. What's gimped about that? No. He stinks at perception and stealth which is costly for pretty much any rogue given their lowish AC and reliance on sneak attack (coupled with a fairly low HD). He lacks the skill points and attribute modifiers in Dex and Int that a solid rogue depends on, he has a NEGATIVE wisdom modifier which hurts his perception even more.....in short he stinks. What rogue puts his high stat in Wisdom? Really? I just showed that all the basics can be covered while still maxing 3 UMD related skills. If an ability depends on a kind DM throwing you bones, then the ability is questionable at best. A fighter who specializes in specific weapons or even takes exotic WP must either depend on the DM to "throw himsome bones" or go out and pay for one to be made... just like UMD. Are exotic weapons questionable then? UMD is alot more likely to get something useful than a figher who specialized in Jovar. Why would they since spellcasters (which are most classes btw) can use their wands for FREE at any level? -Polaris A cleric can use a cure wand free at any level. Does that mean that he can't see the wisdom of letting the rogue have one? And if you are playing a rarer spell caster (like WuJen) then most of the standard wands will be useless to you. And a rogue will really like to get his hands on some assassin spells since they synergize well with his sneak attack. If a spell caster in the party claims to be able to use those then you have a different problem. Serously, have you never had a cleric go down? Has the rogue never gone off on his own? Do your rogues never scout ahead? Is there a rogue that has not ever failed his open lock (or run into a wizad locked door) and wish he could just wave a magic wand and open it anyway? There is no lock DC that knock does not work on. |
| Metafictional07-07-07, 12:00 PM | Well I agree, a 20% chance to fail when you have 50 charges isn't that bad, but again, most combat situations I've seen, it's really bad if you're trying to use those 50 charges in combat. See, it's like this, a Wizard could burn up that wand in 50 actions. It would take that particular UMD Rogue 60 actions to do the same thing. 10 actions he had available just went *POOF*, into thin air. And this is for a guy who's REALLY GOOD at UMD. Don't get me wrong, I like the concept behind UMD, but the mechanics seem to be punishing you a lot for something, as I said, most 1st-level spellcasters get for free, with no chance of failure. Oh and Kobold with Full Plate? Sure he's beatable. By a group that knows exactly how to fight tough opponents, and use all the tricks available to them AT FIRST LEVEL. Have to stress that. Fighting that Kobold has nothing to do with your character's abilities, it has everything to do with player experience. And you can't base CR's on what a player might/could do. Because what if, for some reason, he doesn't? Because he doesn't think of it, the risks are too great, or he's having an off day? One dead party. Each challenge should be prepared so that the character's can defeat it using normal tactics, not on what they could theoretically do. "Well let's see, my Barbarian could Rage, Charge on an enemy that is flanked, and attack with an additional +6 to her normal attack, so let's up that AC so she doesn't use Power Attack..." "Well obviously, fighting a Kobold in full plate, the Monk will just elect to grapple or trip the kobold, so let's up the AC so that the melee touch is at least a challenge..." "It's only got 5 hp, that means the Wizard could True Strike and one shot this enemy with a crossbow, better up Con..." The list goes on an on. You _can_ make little tweaks to make monsters more challenging. But they ARE more challenging. More challenging than they probably should be, since again, unless your group knows exactly what they are doing, they will fail. Plus, making some of these actions implies metagame thinking. You might know the AC of your opponent. But does your character? For all you know, that Kobold has a Dex of 4, and in that, full plate or no full plate, his AC is only slightly better than Joe Average Kobold! Heck, you can't even see him clearly under that armor, maybe he's a Kobold Zombie! Now as to the comment that you should toss items the UMD user's way. This is exactly what I was doing! Only a couple of pages ago, someone pointed out to me that was probably the very reason my group was grumbling about the UMD using Rogue. Because they saw that items were being placed into treasure just so he could use them. The Cleric ~rightly~ surmised that if we didn't have a UMD Rogue, the party would have had a Scroll of Raise Dead instead of a Scroll of Reincarnate. So right there, evidence that UMD is only as useful as you let it be in your games. If all treasure is rolled randomly, the UMD user may be as useful, but he's probably not going to see a Wu Jen scroll... |
| Polaris07-07-07, 01:04 PM | A wand with 50 charges costs 750gp, but you can buy a wand on the used market for significantly less. A 1st level wand with 5 charges would only cost 75 gold and is conceiveable that a character could start play with one. The money begins to increase after that. Find me anywhere in the DMG that says that. You sell wands for a fraction of their value based on how many charges are left, but there is nothing in the DMG that lists the price of wands with less than 50 charges. This is a no-starter because you are trying to introduce non-standard items. The "all spell lists" IS cool since it also includes Wu-jen, Shugenja, assassin, bard, and other spell lists that won't appear in a two caster party. For 1st to third level, the UMD is best used out of combat since it does have such a small chance to succeed relative to survivability, but out of combat skills are not useless. A rogue scouts alone, but magical traps are incredibly difficult to detect. But a UMD roll at this level to activate a detect magic is easier than search for magical traps at even higher levels. "Kewl" is not the same as "Necessary" and that's the point you persistantly miss. In a non-Oriental Adventures game, just how often are you going to run into Shukenja or Wu-Jen spells? I'd guess virtually never unless the DM is deliberately throwing the UMD rogue a bone (which is bad). Same with the other spell lists. The trapfinding ability is it's own discussion (and I think it's flawed as well), but at least the underlyng skills for trapfinding (Search and DD) are useful even at first level. Pretty much any magical trap is beyond the CR that a first level party should face. OTOH, since you just admit that UMD is best used out of combat, there are better ways to get the same result (including but not limited simply hiring someone to cast the spell). Its obvious that the campaigns you have been in make this a worthless skill. That doesn't make it so in most campaigns that other people play in. Deciphering is out of combat and retriable, so the DC is not so much of a hinderance, especially since the rogue does not have to spend an hour each day preparing spells like a magical rogue does. With comprehend languages in the game, and especially if you have/can hire bards (or loremasters or both), it's not a terribly useful skill. It's a prerequisit for some great PrCs for a reason...... This is true, but not very likey with the wands and scrolls you can afford at most levels. Its only the highest level spells that become difficult and since you can use Cha as your spell casting stat to qualify this should carry you through 6th level spells without too much difficulty. Oh really? You sample rogue had a wisdom of eight which means that for every divine spell, he'd have to emulate the stat. Even for a more typical rogue, you'd be looking at emulating stats for scrolls much above 2nd caster level or so. Charisma doesn't carrry you all that far..... Still remember that a limited charge wand costs much less that a 50 charge wand does. Failing your roll does not expend a charge and a rogue at 5th level can have several wands with just a few charges each for essential use. Nothing in the books says you can buy a wand with less than 50 charges. You are using non-standard items. Cure spells (for when the cleric goes down), silence (for creatures with certain blindsight abilities or just not having to roll for MS), Knock (for when you can't make your Open Locks roll), Invisibility (for when you don't want to roll for hide), and so on. You'll say that other characters can cast those spells for the rogue, but a rogue is usually not going to want to be standing next to the clearly visible spell casters. Even if you have to try twice to activate a wand, it can be done from cover while hidden and you just can't do that while standing next to a caster who can't hide. Some of these are rolls (like the silence one) you DON'T want to fail, and for the most part these will be very short duration, low DC spells which generally aren't worth the cost. Even in the cases where it doesn't matter much (Wands of CLW frex), other classes can do this so much better. You keep thinking that its not as good as being an actual spell caster. You are correct about that. The difference is that you don't have the limitations of a spell caster either. You didn't have to take the crappy HD, the BAB, the low skill points and the otherwise dead level for someone who doesn't care about going further. Cleric doesn't have a crappy HD or Bab....and skill points can be spread around the party except for certain rogue-essential skills. Basically if you have a wizard + cleric you can cover your bases. That's ESPECIALLY true if your warrior type(s) have multiclassed (which will be the usual case esp with fighters). This is true, but the gist of the discussion has revolved around UMD and he is offering the upper ends of the idea. Be kind. We were talking abut UMD rogues. I already said the analysis differed for other classes. You make the assumption that he will be gimped in various different areas for focusing on one skill. A rogue gets 8 +INT per level. The typical method for a rogue is to pick 8+INT skills (+1 for human) to choose to keep at max. This allows you to even pick a crossclass skill or two to max out (half at double cost). So a 14 Int human rogue can pick 11 skills to max out. Spot, Listen, Search, MS, Hide, UMD, Bluff, Spellcraft (cc), Decipher Script, Disable Device and Open Lock all at max ranks sounds like a decent rogue. What's gimped about that? It's not bad, but there are holes. However, you weren't talking about a 14 Int rogue. You were talking about a rogue with no (explicit anyway) ranks in stealth/perception skills AND you were talking about a 12 Int rogue. The point is that Intelligence is either the most important (my experience) or second most important skill for the rogue and not just for the skill points. The reason is that the party depends on the rogue for skills that it's otherwise difficult for other party members to take or have. What rogue puts his high stat in Wisdom? Really? I just showed that all the basics can be covered while still maxing 3 UMD related skills. Who said anything about a high wisdom. I said that putting less than a 10 in wisdom stinks. It does because it kills an already weak save (will) AND it hurts your perception skills which form a cornerstone of the class. A fighter who specializes in specific weapons or even takes exotic WP must either depend on the DM to "throw himsome bones" or go out and pay for one to be made... just like UMD. Are exotic weapons questionable then? UMD is alot more likely to get something useful than a figher who specialized in Jovar. False. A fighter that gets an exotic weapon can have that weapon starting at first level. Given the fighter's starting money, it's hard to find a normal, non-masterwork/non-special material weapon that a fighter can't outright buy at first level. Past that, he can buy a MW weapon of the same type, and then have it enchanted either by the party or by outside contract. It's not a problem. By contrast, for the rogue it IS a problem because each item he wants for UMD is wealth that is not being used by the party by members that are better at it than he is. Furthermore, you can't guarantee you can buy exotic wants (like Wu-Jen wands) whereas you can be reasonably assured in all but the smallest thorpes that you can (at worst!) custom order a weapon. A cleric can use a cure wand free at any level. Does that mean that he can't see the wisdom of letting the rogue have one? And if you are playing a rarer spell caster (like WuJen) then most of the standard wands will be useless to you. And a rogue will really like to get his hands on some assassin spells since they synergize well with his sneak attack. If a spell caster in the party claims to be able to use those then you have a different problem. There are generally better choices (i.e. ones without a failure chance) including potions. Serously, have you never had a cleric go down? Has the rogue never gone off on his own? Do your rogues never scout ahead? Is there a rogue that has not ever failed his open lock (or run into a wizad locked door) and wish he could just wave a magic wand and open it anyway? There is no lock DC that knock does not work on. Seriously dude, if the cleric goes down, then the entire party is in trouble....and if the rogue is alone and needs to use a wand, then that failure chance is a real.........killer. Now there is a certain wisdom to having more than one character carry cure wands. More often than not (IMX), you will have two clerics. This forms the backbone of an extemely effective four person party btw. Failing that, you need to understand that Bards, Rangers, Paladins, Druids, and possibly (with a feat) even sorcerers and wizards can all use cure-light wounds wands. Seriously....and it only takes a level of these classes to qualify...and many warrior types will take a couple levels of ranger (for example) if they want to be archers (for example). In short, there are generally much better options for the backup wand user at least for curing than the Rogue with UMD...especially if a party member is bleeding out and time is critical. Also if you read page 86 PHB 3.5, unlike all other skills, there is an autofailure chance for UMD (natural one) which means your failure chance is always at least that. What's worse, it's a five percent chance that you can't use the wand (or other item) for 24 hours. That means over 50 charges, not only will it take 60 actions (average) making ten actions go up in smoke (bad), but on 2 or 3 tries, you will LOCK UP the wand and make it unusable for a day (at least for you) [and that's hideous]. -Polaris |
| Votan07-07-07, 01:16 PM | The best use for UMD, so far, seems to be for wands. DC 20 (with +0 CHA) requires 19 ranks or 16 character levels for automatic success with a 4th level or lower level spell. Some of these can matter a lot but, at 16th level, they are lagging. Focus of various kinds can drop this by a few levels -- Charisma or items, mostly. I am skeptical about feats unless the focus of the character is around this skill. In that case, Warlock levels appear essential as the taking 10 option is far superior. A rogue/warlock can be an amazingly nice combination and this skill is one reason as is combining eldritch blasts and sneak attack. But, generally, you are investing focus (especially if they are feats) in an option that clerics and wizards better and earlier access to. It's not that good tactics can't make use of these options (they sure as heck can) but that this is pushing a weak mechanic. Now, amazing things are possible with pushing weak mechanics [see all of 3rd edition archery] but it takes cunning and effort. Can a carefully planned rogue make good use of UMD? Of course. Is UMD is a good skill "out of the box"? I would tend to think the answer is "no". |
| Polaris07-07-07, 01:33 PM | Votan, I agree with you, but a nitpick. On page 86 PHB 3.5 under "Try Again" for the UMD skill, it is made clear that unlike all other skills, UMD autofails if you roll a natural one locking up the item for 24 hours. Thus unlike all other skills, there is never a point where you reach autosuccess. Otherwise I agree with you, but it's a nitpick that acually makes UMD even less attractive out of the box. -Polaris |
| penchant07-07-07, 02:01 PM | Find me anywhere in the DMG that says that. You sell wands for a fraction of their value based on how many charges are left, but there is nothing in the DMG that lists the price of wands with less than 50 charges. This is a no-starter because you are trying to introduce non-standard items. -Polaris I don't have alot of time right now, but I'll just say DMG page 214: Charges, Doses and Multiple uses. Partial quote, "A wand with 20 charges, for example, is worth 40% of the value of a fully charged wand (50 charges)." It is not only RAW but core rules. You can only CREATE a wand that has 50 charges, but you can find or buy a wand with much less. With enough shopping you can get pretty much what you want. So please respond to this part of my argument instead of dismissing it. I've been polite and fair in this discussion. |
| Polaris07-07-07, 02:49 PM | I don't have alot of time right now, but I'll just say DMG page 214: Charges, Doses and Multiple uses. Partial quote, "A wand with 20 charges, for example, is worth 40% of the value of a fully charged wand (50 charges)." It is not only RAW but core rules. You can only CREATE a wand that has 50 charges, but you can find or buy a wand with much less. With enough shopping you can get pretty much what you want. So please respond to this part of my argument instead of dismissing it. I've been polite and fair in this discussion. As I expected, you failed to read the whole entry. The first paragraphs states that in random treasure, you will find items with charges and/or uses expended. It goes on to tell you how to determine the value of such items which is critical for wealth-level guidelines and for selling. However, there is nothing in this section that says that you will automatically find partially used items for sale. In fact it goes on to say that the listed price for all items is that item when it is fully charged. Ergo, only the fully charged item is a listed, core DMG item that a character can reasonable expect to have access to (to buy). The other rules just cover how much a partially used item is valued (generally for sale). That is RAW, and 'Rules According to Hoyle' Partially used wands are not core items (to buy anyway), are NOT listed in the DMG item listings or as an option to buy under the wands section. -Polaris |
| Cariyaga07-07-07, 04:00 PM | You have got to be kidding me. You can't tell me that there isn't some guy out there who no longer wants his wand of knock, or wand of detect magic. So, he sells it, it has 35 charges left. There you go. This debate has degenerated into strict judgements on what the rules say, when that isn't all that the rules can say. |
| JolanthusTrel07-07-07, 09:01 PM | Only those who have had their charactes brought back by the party rogue know the value of those UMD points. |
| Ace_of_time07-07-07, 09:13 PM | Well yes, their AC is higher than it should be, but this is balanced by the damage potential of the Kobold and the Goblin...pretty low. I'm not saying it's a good balance, or the way I'd balance it in my games, but that's what WotC thinks. Personally, enemies that are hard to hit are going to be problematic without the use of magic. Some people think that's good design, so that everyone has a chance to shine. I disagree, since, sure, a Wizard can use Sleep and end a Kobold encounter in one action. But if you lack that option, what then? The weapon users can't sit there turn after turn and miss. But low levels are hard to judge. A first level character could easily get an AC of 21 with starting money and the right build. Making them damn near invincible to most enemies of their CR. It's at higher levels when raising AC gets harder, but attack bonuses rise automatically that you have to take more care to make sure monster AC's don't outstrip what the PC's can do. I take that level of care starting at first level, other people don't. If it works for their games, fine, but I don't think small chances of success in critical encounters where ever action matters is a good thing. Melee attacks are no the only thing PCs can do. Splash weapons, trips, grapples, and disarm are a few things they can do to help other players and not roll against Reg AC. There are tons of options they could do for. With that line of thinking you wouldn't even be able to fight a worker ant till 5th level. (AC17) |
| Ace_of_time07-07-07, 09:26 PM | To the wand point. It does have to be made with 50 charges. (page287) But a Player could try to find a used one for cheaper and this would have less charges and cost less. Note some DMs rule that you can make a wand at half price and only cast the spell 25 times instead of 50 times, giving it 25 charges. But that is a house rule. |
| Polaris07-08-07, 12:21 AM | You have got to be kidding me. You can't tell me that there isn't some guy out there who no longer wants his wand of knock, or wand of detect magic. So, he sells it, it has 35 charges left. There you go. Not so fast. There is the matter of availability. A party (or rogue) can't go shopping and be guaranteed to get a partially used wand of his choice. OTOH, he can be reasonably sure of getting or at least ordering a fully charged one....because all wands must be made fully charged. It's also worth pointing out that partially used wands are well....partially used which means that there would certainly be an availability surcharge and possibly more because the previous owner obviously got use out of it. The upshot is this: In a discussion about the rules, we need to stick with magic items and magic item availability within the rules, i.e no custom items and no items that aren't strictly speaking available from the allowed books as written. Partially used wands don't fit in that category...and the DM is within his rights to exclude them for reasons listed above (or even for any other reason). This debate has degenerated into strict judgements on what the rules say, when that isn't all that the rules can say. A discussion about mechanical skill balance (or any other balance) needs to stay strictly RAW. Otherwise, there is no point in having the discussion at all. -Polaris |
| Nom07-08-07, 02:20 AM | I agree with you, but a nitpick. On page 86 PHB 3.5 under "Try Again" for the UMD skill, it is made clear that unlike all other skills, UMD autofails if you roll a natural one locking up the item for 24 hours. Thus unlike all other skills, there is never a point where you reach autosuccess.Nitpick on your nitpick. UMD doesn't autofail on a natural 1. If the roll is both a natural 1 and a failure then it locks up for that item for 24 hours. A wand of CLW or two is affordable for most parties from level 3. At this level, a rogue with +0 Cha and no other specials could have a UMD of +7, enough to activate the wand one time in 3. Not good for combat; plenty good enough for out-of-combat. And at low levels, losing (unconscious) your cleric or other healer is a definite possibility. UMD starts to come into its own around level 10. At this stage, you have a +13 from ranks alone. That's enough to trigger any wand or staff 75% of the time, and enough to have a chance to activate almost anything. You'll never be as effective as a proper user, but UMD is supposed to be a "fudge" skill, not a skill to render other classes redundant. It allows a rogue or bard to say "I'll have a go", when everyone else is either "yes" or "no". |
| Polaris07-08-07, 02:32 AM | Nitpick on your nitpick. UMD doesn't autofail on a natural 1. If the roll is both a natural 1 and a failure then it locks up for that item for 24 hours. Looking it up and reading carefully......yes, I stand corrected. Nevertheless, rolling a '1' on UMD is generally a bad thing which is why the take 10 option (not available to rogues) is such a potent one for UMD. A wand of CLW or two is affordable for most parties from level 3. At this level, a rogue with +0 Cha and no other specials could have a UMD of +7, enough to activate the wand one time in 3. Not good for combat; plenty good enough for out-of-combat. And at low levels, losing (unconscious) your cleric or other healer is a definite possibility. Actually a wand of lesser vigor is better because it automatically heals 11 hps (over 11 rounds, but that's not an issue since healing wands are generally not used in combat) automatically per charge. A wand of CLW only heals d8+1 or an average of 5.5 per charge. Here's the problem, however. Having the cleric or other healer go down might be a possibility, but that doesn't mean the UMD user can save the day. When you get below 0 hits, you have at most nine rounds before you die and probably a lot less. Having the wand check be anything less than automatic in this situation is a real killer....... As for out-of-combat, I think you're missing the point. Can a party make use of a UMD based rogue? Sure. Is it a strong mechanic? No, not really. There are generally much better alternatives. UMD starts to come into its own around level 10. At this stage, you have a +13 from ranks alone. That's enough to trigger any wand or staff 75% of the time, and enough to have a chance to activate almost anything. You'll never be as effective as a proper user, but UMD is supposed to be a "fudge" skill, not a skill to render other classes redundant. It allows a rogue or bard to say "I'll have a go", when everyone else is either "yes" or "no". And that's why UMD is a weak mechanic, and honestly by level 10, between your primary casters and party members that multiclass (which is common-to-routine for non-casters), you should have most of the essential spells covered at least for item use. -Polaris |
| Votan07-08-07, 02:52 AM | Looking it up and reading carefully......yes, I stand corrected. Nevertheless, rolling a '1' on UMD is generally a bad thing which is why the take 10 option (not available to rogues) is such a potent one for UMD. Yeah, I did not get this completely right either (as you noted above); but I think the general point stands that UMD has a failure rate for rogues. A warlock does not have this issue and thus seems to do much better with items. I think you have it clearly with the strength of the ability overall -- it's possible to be great as a rogue UMD user but it's hard. Nom points out that this works well after level 10 or so but, before then, it's a lot of cost for something that most classes do for free (1 level of ranger solves the CLW issues, for example). So it can be useful (especially in a Charisma rogue and such do exist). I'd never make it a focus without seriously considering 4 levels of warlock (for EB, Beguiling Influence, Decieve Item, Dark One's Own Luck, See the Unseen and DR). The lost skill points are worth it for the powers and focus. |
| Metafictional07-08-07, 04:19 AM | Back to the melee point (which merely stands as an example for why a limited chance to succeed, especially when compared to an ability, ie, Clerics using Cure Wands, that has no chance of failure, is bad), I never said splash weapons, trip attacks, or any other options didn't exist. In fact, I pointed out that they DO exist, but, allow me to reiterate, you cannot expect every party to have access to these, or make use of them. Again, that's Player experience, not character experience. Upon just playing the game for the first time, most people won't understand such special options exist. DnD HAS TO BE a game where you can expect to win without such tactics. No one has full comprehension of the rules before they play the game. (Well, someone might, but I've never met anyone like that.) Now, as you learn more about the game, you begin to understand these things, and your ability to handle challenges increases. But it is a fallacy to assume that because these options exist, that the CR system automatically assumes you will use them. The CR system isn't based on ideas like "Well of course the Rogue will throw a flask of alchemist's fire on the Mummy, while the Fighter will Charge and Power Attack it, with a Flanking bonus granted by the Monk". The game designers don't know what your party will consist of, or what abilities they will have. They only know what every character has. An attack bonus, and the ability to use weapons. Those classes that have other options, tend to have a lower attack bonus, and less reason to use weapons; this is inherent in the design philosophy. If your special abilities tend to be more useful than melee attacks (or ranged), then you don't have the best attack bonus. However, a challenge must be one that can be dealt with by melee attacks of Default-Array, moderately optimized characters of the appropriate level. This means better than 50% chances for such characters to attack successfully. You can argue that point, but it's a very simple one. The CR system doesn't change because you, the player, learns more about the game. The DM may, at their discretion, reduce xp for less challenging encounters, but by default, a CR 1 should be something ANY group of level 1 characters can defeat using normal tactics. If it isn't, it's not a good challenge. UMD has the same problem. If you compare it to the ability of a spellcasting class to use a Wand automatically, then realize that you must optimize to use UMD to get a percentage chance to do the same, you should come to the conclusion that UMD is an inferior action until higher levels, when it's use is trivial compared to the powers of spellcasting classes. Any time an ability that requires an action in combat is used, it must have significant impact upon the combat. That means a reasonable chance of success WITHOUT optimization, and a reasonable effect for a character of your level. If it lacks either of these, it is not a good action to take, but rather, a desperate action. The game is not built on the idea that players will make desperate actions in order to succeed. If you gamble, and it works, that's great, I cheer for you. But if you gamble and fail, when the odds were stacked against you, then it's time to pay the piper, and hope your friends can make up for the slack of your wasted turn. |
| Ace_of_time07-08-07, 10:16 AM | Back to the melee point (which merely stands as an example for why a limited chance to succeed, especially when compared to an ability, ie, Clerics using Cure Wands, that has no chance of failure, is bad), I never said splash weapons, trip attacks, or any other options didn't exist. In fact, I pointed out that they DO exist, but, allow me to reiterate, you cannot expect every party to have access to these, or make use of them. Again, that's Player experience, not character experience. Upon just playing the game for the first time, most people won't understand such special options exist. DnD HAS TO BE a game where you can expect to win without such tactics. No one has full comprehension of the rules before they play the game. (Well, someone might, but I've never met anyone like that.) Now, as you learn more about the game, you begin to understand these things, and your ability to handle challenges increases. But it is a fallacy to assume that because these options exist, that the CR system automatically assumes you will use them. The CR system isn't based on ideas like "Well of course the Rogue will throw a flask of alchemist's fire on the Mummy, while the Fighter will Charge and Power Attack it, with a Flanking bonus granted by the Monk". The game designers don't know what your party will consist of, or what abilities they will have. They only know what every character has. An attack bonus, and the ability to use weapons. Those classes that have other options, tend to have a lower attack bonus, and less reason to use weapons; this is inherent in the design philosophy. If your special abilities tend to be more useful than melee attacks (or ranged), then you don't have the best attack bonus. However, a challenge must be one that can be dealt with by melee attacks of Default-Array, moderately optimized characters of the appropriate level. This means better than 50% chances for such characters to attack successfully. You can argue that point, but it's a very simple one. The CR system doesn't change because you, the player, learns more about the game. The DM may, at their discretion, reduce xp for less challenging encounters, but by default, a CR 1 should be something ANY group of level 1 characters can defeat using normal tactics. If it isn't, it's not a good challenge. UMD has the same problem. If you compare it to the ability of a spellcasting class to use a Wand automatically, then realize that you must optimize to use UMD to get a percentage chance to do the same, you should come to the conclusion that UMD is an inferior action until higher levels, when it's use is trivial compared to the powers of spellcasting classes. Any time an ability that requires an action in combat is used, it must have significant impact upon the combat. That means a reasonable chance of success WITHOUT optimization, and a reasonable effect for a character of your level. If it lacks either of these, it is not a good action to take, but rather, a desperate action. The game is not built on the idea that players will make desperate actions in order to succeed. If you gamble, and it works, that's great, I cheer for you. But if you gamble and fail, when the odds were stacked against you, then it's time to pay the piper, and hope your friends can make up for the slack of your wasted turn. Now I'm confused. The MM says the CR system was for a group of four people with full HP and full spells. I don't see where it says don't put your players up against some that they can't hit in mêlée combat. Your supposed to go 4 encounters before having to rest. What spell caster with crappy AB is going to go up for mêlée? If a rogue goes into a battle with high AC monster what is wrong with him rolling to use his wand he found/bought. It is his wand. Not putting a party up again something that has a high AC once in a while just because it has a high AC is wrong. If WotC didn't think a CR1 monster could be beat by a level one party they would have made it a higher CR. Spell casters are half the party in most cases and not putting them up against high AC just because they would hit with a Mêlée attack when most wouldn't get close enough for mêlée willingly is wrong. (to me) You say why let the rogue use the wands when the spellcasters can and I have already said that most parties, in tough fights, would rather have there spellcasters casting their own spell then use a wand. Wands cast at min caster level and a wizard even at high levels would be better off casting the spell at their caster level then min. A natural 1 just locks it up for 24 hours and there is no harmful side effect for it. Just because most rogues are trap finding doesn't mean all have to be. Not letting a player play a PC on these terms is wrong. It is his PC and if he is not hurting the group, Meaning help with UMD most of the time, then there is nothing wrong with it. Rogue 2 is wrong because he thinks that rogue 1 should play the rogue the way everyone else plays it and rogue 1 only wants to play it his way. |
| Polaris07-08-07, 11:46 AM | Now I'm confused. The MM says the CR system was for a group of four people with full HP and full spells. I don't see where it says don't put your players up against some that they can't hit in mêlée combat. Your supposed to go 4 encounters before having to rest. What spell caster with crappy AB is going to go up for mêlée? If a rogue goes into a battle with high AC monster what is wrong with him rolling to use his wand he found/bought. It is his wand. Not putting a party up again something that has a high AC once in a while just because it has a high AC is wrong. If WotC didn't think a CR1 monster could be beat by a level one party they would have made it a higher CR. You are missing metafictional's point. There is nothing with the rogue using the wand, but the party can't count on it. OTOH, (as a general rule), you can count on a fighter hitting an opponent of the correct CR on his first attack (not iteratives), and you can count on a spellcaster casting a spell and/or using a magic item. It's the law of large numbers. Given the number of encounters, the odds for each encounter and each action simply have to be stacked heavily in favor of the players without resorting (or assuming) special tactics or attacks. Otherwise, probability says you will likely have a TPK sometime during the campaign. As for WOTC and CR, WOTC screws up the CR system quite a lot (mummies for example), but it's still a decent first approximation. Spell casters are half the party in most cases and not putting them up against high AC just because they would hit with a Mêlée attack when most wouldn't get close enough for mêlée willingly is wrong. (to me) You say why let the rogue use the wands when the spellcasters can and I have already said that most parties, in tough fights, would rather have there spellcasters casting their own spell then use a wand. Wands cast at min caster level and a wizard even at high levels would be better off casting the spell at their caster level then min. Even casters should have a chance to hit them (beyond the automatic 20) especially at low levels. The game is (supposedly) balanced around the notion that even spellcasters will have to resort to physical attacks late in the day (3rd or 4th encounter). As for tough fights, most parties I've seen would rather you didn't use consumables at all during a fight unless you had to (prior or after is a completely different situation). That's for any class. A natural 1 just locks it up for 24 hours and there is no harmful side effect for it. Locking up your healing wand for a day sounds like a pretty harmful side-effect to me..... Just because most rogues are trap finding doesn't mean all have to be. Not letting a player play a PC on these terms is wrong. It is his PC and if he is not hurting the group, Meaning help with UMD most of the time, then there is nothing wrong with it. Rogue 2 is wrong because he thinks that rogue 1 should play the rogue the way everyone else plays it and rogue 1 only wants to play it his way. Um, using core, the Rogue is the only one that has trapfinding. If the rogue isn't being used for trapfinding/stealth, then why are you playing a rogue (rather than a bard, warlock, etc)? -Polaris |
| penchant07-08-07, 12:04 PM | As I expected, you failed to read the whole entry. The first paragraphs states that in random treasure, you will find items with charges and/or uses expended. It goes on to tell you how to determine the value of such items which is critical for wealth-level guidelines and for selling. However, there is nothing in this section that says that you will automatically find partially used items for sale. In fact it goes on to say that the listed price for all items is that item when it is fully charged. Ergo, only the fully charged item is a listed, core DMG item that a character can reasonable expect to have access to (to buy). The other rules just cover how much a partially used item is valued (generally for sale). That is RAW, and 'Rules According to Hoyle' Partially used wands are not core items (to buy anyway), are NOT listed in the DMG item listings or as an option to buy under the wands section. -Polaris CHARGES, DOSES, AND MULTIPLE USES Many items, particularly wands and staffs, are limited in power by the number of charges they hold. Normally, charged items have 50 charges at most. If such an item is found as a random part of a treasure, roll d% and divide by 2 to determine the number of charges left (round down, minimum 1). If the item has a maximum number of charges other than 50, roll randomly to determine how many charges are left. Prices listed are always for fully charged items. (When an item is created, it is fully charged.) For an item that’s worthless when its charges run out (which is the case for almost all charged items), the value of the partially used item is proportional to the number of charges left. For an item that has usefulness in addition to its charges, only part of the item’s value is based on the number of charges left. This is the whole entry in the SRD. It clearly states that a charged item that is part of random treasure that it has a random number of charges. Now, as afar as buying it does not say that ANY item is availiable for sale. There are no guidelines for magic items and their use as a commodtiy aside from the fact that there IS a market price. So under your strict "hoyle" guidelines you can't buy any magic items. The reason this is written this way inthe book is that such things are up to the DM to determine. A DM will decide what items are available for sale and in what fashion. If a DM says that Items can not be bought but only found, then the rules support this. If a DM says there is a vast network of magic retailers that sell both new and used magic items providing any combination of magic that a customer could want, then the rules support this as well. Most DM's have something in between. Not so fast. There is the matter of availability. A party (or rogue) can't go shopping and be guaranteed to get a partially used wand of his choice. OTOH, he can be reasonably sure of getting or at least ordering a fully charged one....because all wands must be made fully charged. It's also worth pointing out that partially used wands are well....partially used which means that there would certainly be an availability surcharge and possibly more because the previous owner obviously got use out of it. The upshot is this: In a discussion about the rules, we need to stick with magic items and magic item availability within the rules, i.e no custom items and no items that aren't strictly speaking available from the allowed books as written. Partially used wands don't fit in that category...and the DM is within his rights to exclude them for reasons listed above (or even for any other reason). A discussion about mechanical skill balance (or any other balance) needs to stay strictly RAW. Otherwise, there is no point in having the discussion at all. -Polaris You have gone beyond the discussion of balance because the DMG is designed to be played with the input of a DM who has to make crititcal decisions. Even by your discussion standards, a 1st level character can wind up with such a wand the first adventure out. As such balance is determined by what can happen. A DM can determine many things that affect the balance of the game, including that since the book does not say so no magic items are available for sale. How powerful are PC's who have to find or personally make every magic item? Your minimalist interpretations only assume that nobody is running the game but the DMG. In short, the things I have presented are RAW legal but like anything else allowable or disallowable by the DM. It depends on his campaign setting and how he chooses to make magic available to his players. |
| Polaris07-08-07, 12:10 PM | Penchant, It's a fact that wands have to be made fully charged. It's a fact that the listed wands in the DMG are fully charged and that a price formula for wands for sale is given fully charged. Show me anywhere in the DMG or any other book that lists the price for partially used wands. You can't, ergo partially used wands are not standard items for sale. That section in the DMG details rules for selling partially used wands and finding them in treasure only. Rules According to Hoyle. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-08-07, 12:35 PM | You are missing metafictional's point. There is nothing with the rogue using the wand, but the party can't count on it. OTOH, (as a general rule), you can count on a fighter hitting an opponent of the correct CR on his first attack (not iteratives), and you can count on a spellcaster casting a spell and/or using a magic item. It's the law of large numbers. Given the number of encounters, the odds for each encounter and each action simply have to be stacked heavily in favor of the players without resorting (or assuming) special tactics or attacks. Otherwise, probability says you will likely have a TPK sometime during the campaign. As for WOTC and CR, WOTC screws up the CR system quite a lot (mummies for example), but it's still a decent first approximation. Even casters should have a chance to hit them (beyond the automatic 20) especially at low levels. The game is (supposedly) balanced around the notion that even spellcasters will have to resort to physical attacks late in the day (3rd or 4th encounter). As for tough fights, most parties I've seen would rather you didn't use consumables at all during a fight unless you had to (prior or after is a completely different situation). That's for any class. Locking up your healing wand for a day sounds like a pretty harmful side-effect to me..... Um, using core, the Rogue is the only one that has trapfinding. If the rogue isn't being used for trapfinding/stealth, then why are you playing a rogue (rather than a bard, warlock, etc)? -Polaris Again so you don't miss this one. Not all DMs use traps enough that need a rogue trap disarming type. And for that matter most traps will take just as long to get enough of a DD bonus on as UMD. If he runs in to the trap with a DD DC of 20 with that line of thinking the rogue should wait to Disable it till he doesn't need to even roll for it. 4 encounter before running out of spells is the average. Even if the spellcaster runs out he will never get close up willing stinking to range attacks with the high dex mod. Use a wand once per day would still give him 50 days of use. 13 encounters to level up puts him gaining 3 levels before running out of charges. The point is that wizards are not going to use the reg AC enough to decide if the reg AC is to high. They will be using touch AC and most of the time it wouldn't matter if the reg AC is. We weren't talking about mummies we were talking about worker ants. And with his line of thinking 1st level PCs no matter what class wouldn't be able to fight a worker ant. Although there are guideline in place to help decide what monsters should be used they are just guidelines. a 4 person party should be more than fine fighting CRs of there levels no matter the AC. ( in most cases) With that line of thinking a 2nd level party should be able to handle a owlbear skeleton, AC13. |
| penchant07-08-07, 02:13 PM | Penchant, It's a fact that wands have to be made fully charged. It's a fact that the listed wands in the DMG are fully charged and that a price formula for wands for sale is given fully charged. Show me anywhere in the DMG or any other book that lists the price for partially used wands. You can't, ergo partially used wands are not standard items for sale. That section in the DMG details rules for selling partially used wands and finding them in treasure only. Rules According to Hoyle. -Polaris Prices listed are always for fully charged items. (When an item is created, it is fully charged.) For an item that’s worthless when its charges run out (which is the case for almost all charged items), the value of the partially used item is proportional to the number of charges left. For an item that has usefulness in addition to its charges, only part of the item’s value is based on the number of charges left. This is giving the MARKET VALUE of these items. A PC's sale price is half of this. You ask, I quote and you just say that it doesn't mean that or I haven't read everything and so you don't have to respond to it. I have seen you take this approach on multiple threads and it is not fair discourse. Rules According to Hoyle, its a fact that it the DMG does not provide for the sale of new magic items, it only lists prices for magic items IF they were to be sold to PC's as well as the fact that PC's can only sell items for half price. The section that I quoted does not give the formula for used items that the PC's are trying to sell, but the market value of items with less charges than full. It does not speak to either buying or selling, simply market value. As such there ARE no standard items for sale, per your Hoyle standard. The discussion has been about UMD and its worth. We pretty much have argued down to whether or not UMD is worth anything at low levels, and I have presented RAW evidence that a low level rogue, even by random treasure can end up with some powerful limited charge items by methods presented in the book. If a DM has a campaign setting and runs a game then it is not unreasonable that it not only shows up in random treasure (which it does by RAW) but should also be available with enough shopping. That does not guarantee finding exactly what you want, but it does seem likely that you can find something useful at bargain prices. We are not speaking of Hoyle theory, but actually playing a game and originally about a real game. Hoyle does not work for WotC and died in 1769. Again, with the RAW in the DMG, a DM can allow players to get limited charge items that are not worth the full price of 50 charge items. This works in favor of spellcasters as well and not just a rogue with UMD, since they can get wands with spells that they don't have access to yet. But a DM allows or Disallows ANY items to be bought. Ye olde magicke shoppe does not exist anywhere in core. You play how you want to, but the rules are there to be used. My points have been made and everyone has likely made their decisions on how they will run this, so I'm done with it. |
| angryscrub07-08-07, 06:44 PM | ...Oh really? You sample rogue had a wisdom of eight which means that for every divine spell, he'd have to emulate the stat. Even for a more typical rogue, you'd be looking at emulating stats for scrolls much above 2nd caster level or so. Charisma doesn't carrry you all that far..... -Polaris... are sorcerers allowed to use to use arcane scrolls in your games? what about favored souls and divine scrolls? if so, then UMD charisma rogues are able to use charisma as their casting stat, at least for anything you'd allow favored souls or sorcerers to cast (very nice for bards). i believe this has already been pointed out in this thread, but it seems that people keep ignoring it. quite frankly, the way the rules on using scrolls are worded, i'm not so sure that rogues can't use any stat to satisfy the "requisite ability score" requirement for using a scroll, but i won't get into that now. it definitely works for charisma and sorcerer/wizard spells and cleric/favored soul spells. Penchant, It's a fact that wands have to be made fully charged. It's a fact that the listed wands in the DMG are fully charged and that a price formula for wands for sale is given fully charged. Show me anywhere in the DMG or any other book that lists the price for partially used wands. You can't, ergo partially used wands are not standard items for sale. That section in the DMG details rules for selling partially used wands and finding them in treasure only. Rules According to Hoyle. -Polaris hmmm, are you being serious here? it gives tables for prices for fully charged wands. then, as penchant has directly quoted, it gives you a formula to calculate prices for partially charged wands, based on the prices of fully charged ones. you are seriously claiming that unless they also reproduce the entire wand tables for every single charge level it's not valid? we should have fifty freakin wand charts, instead of just doing the math, like it tells us to? that's a very bizarre way to look at it, to put it mildly. |
| Polaris07-08-07, 08:39 PM | This is giving the MARKET VALUE of these items. A PC's sale price is half of this. You ask, I quote and you just say that it doesn't mean that or I haven't read everything and so you don't have to respond to it. I have seen you take this approach on multiple threads and it is not fair discourse. Market Value does NOT mean it's available for sale as a standard item. Market Value is used to determine how much treasure each PC should have for level-wealth guidelines. You are deliberately reading more into the rule than is there. Rules According to Hoyle, its a fact that it the DMG does not provide for the sale of new magic items, it only lists prices for magic items IF they were to be sold to PC's as well as the fact that PC's can only sell items for half price. The section that I quoted does not give the formula for used items that the PC's are trying to sell, but the market value of items with less charges than full. It does not speak to either buying or selling, simply market value. As such there ARE no standard items for sale, per your Hoyle standard. The discussion has been about UMD and its worth. We pretty much have argued down to whether or not UMD is worth anything at low levels, and I have presented RAW evidence that a low level rogue, even by random treasure can end up with some powerful limited charge items by methods presented in the book. If a DM has a campaign setting and runs a game then it is not unreasonable that it not only shows up in random treasure (which it does by RAW) but should also be available with enough shopping. That does not guarantee finding exactly what you want, but it does seem likely that you can find something useful at bargain prices. We are not speaking of Hoyle theory, but actually playing a game and originally about a real game. Hoyle does not work for WotC and died in 1769. "Rules According to Hoyle" is a standard phrase in card games esp poker. Deal with it. As for the rest, the DMG does say that wands can only be created with full charges and it DOES give a listing for the prices. OTOH, even under the wands section it does NOT give the option of buying a wand with less than full charges. Ergo, a wand with less than full charges (or anything less than full charges) is not a standard book item with regard to availability for sale. Again, with the RAW in the DMG, a DM can allow players to get limited charge items that are not worth the full price of 50 charge items. This works in favor of spellcasters as well and not just a rogue with UMD, since they can get wands with spells that they don't have access to yet. But a DM allows or Disallows ANY items to be bought. Ye olde magicke shoppe does not exist anywhere in core. No it's not. The DMG doesn't say that anywhere. It only gives the DM a way to evaluate the price/value of wands with less than full charges (for sale for example). You can't create a wand with less than full charges. As for what the DM may allow, under rule zero the DM may allow anything. Your point? You play how you want to, but the rules are there to be used. My points have been made and everyone has likely made their decisions on how they will run this, so I'm done with it. No. You are willfully and deliberately trying to read more into a section than is there in order to make UMD (and items) look better than they are. -Polaris |
| Polaris07-08-07, 08:46 PM | are sorcerers allowed to use to use arcane scrolls in your games? what about favored souls and divine scrolls? if so, then UMD charisma rogues are able to use charisma as their casting stat, at least for anything you'd allow favored souls or sorcerers to cast (very nice for bards). i believe this has already been pointed out in this thread, but it seems that people keep ignoring it. quite frankly, the way the rules on using scrolls are worded, i'm not so sure that rogues can't use any stat to satisfy the "requisite ability score" requirement for using a scroll, but i won't get into that now. it definitely works for charisma and sorcerer/wizard spells and cleric/favored soul spells. Doesn't help much. Yes, Charisma can be used to a point for sorcerer/wizard spells, but the UMD skill says explicitly that only wisdom can be used to power divine spells (regardless of class). I point to page 85 of the PHB under emulate ability score: Emulate An Ability Score: To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard spells, Wisdom for divine spells, Charisma for sorcerer or bard spells). There it is in black and white (look it up yourself). To use a divine scroll, you have to have the appropriate wisdom when using UMD or emulate it. To my knowledge this section has never been errataed even after the Favored Soul was published. Thus it doesn't matter whether or not favored souls use charisma to read scrolls, RAW and 'Rules According to Hoyle', you need a minimum wisdom (or need to emulate it) to use a divine scroll regardless of class. hmmm, are you being serious here? it gives tables for prices for fully charged wands. then, as penchant has directly quoted, it gives you a formula to calculate prices for partially charged wands, based on the prices of fully charged ones. you are seriously claiming that unless they also reproduce the entire wand tables for every single charge level it's not valid? we should have fifty freakin wand charts, instead of just doing the math, like it tells us to? that's a very bizarre way to look at it, to put it mildly. No. 1. There are explicit rules that state that wands can only be created fully charged. That means if you custom order a wand (which the listed prices in the DMG assume) you get it fully charged. 2. It says NOTHING in the wands item section, that partially charged items are for sale. The only rule Penchant has quoted gives the DM a valuation so such wands can be balanced against party wealth and sold. Nothing more. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-08-07, 09:16 PM | So the wands in the MIC book that only have 10 charge are fake and wizards just made a misstake making the book? |
| Metafictional07-08-07, 10:12 PM | Ok ok, enough about the wands. C'mon guys, debating about whether or not you can buy a Wand on the open market is a bit much. You can't really say it will never happen in a game, or it won't. Item Creation states that Wands are created with 50 charges unless your DM says otherwise. Wands found as treasure have less charges than this. People are perfectly entitled to sell Wands with less than 50 charges at whatever price the market will bear. Theoretically, based on the campaign, Wands with less charges may be bought on the open market. Of course, in other campaigns, Wands may never be sold at all, or if they are (like in my campaigns), they are usually commissioned from NPC Crafters who sell 50-charge Wands. Selling a Wand with less than 50 charges could happen, but you can't guarantee that you will have access to it. Since you can't guarantee that in any game, it's pointless to continue this discussion. Seriously. You can't guarantee that, no matter what the books say. The PHB doesn't list Wands as purchaseable items, does it? It does, however, list Scrolls, I think. Keep the DMG out of the discussion, that's DM territory, and nothing in there pertains to whether or not UMD is a useful skill, other than what magic items MAY be available in a campaign. You really can't bring up the MIC either, that's not a core book, so obviously, not every campaign will even have access to it. I'm not trying to establish rules for the debate, just want to point out that arguing about magic item availability will get us nowhere. As for the Armor Class/UMD success chance argument, if you don't see my argument, I can't really say much more about it. I've heard arguments about touch spells, when I was the one who pointed out you can't guarantee your party will have any touch spells available when you face a high AC opponent. I've heard arguments about special items or tactics not every party will have access to or even use. This is another "theoretical" dispute. And it's not helping. I was pointing out that even optimized, having a chance to fail at using a Wand when you only have one action to use it each turn is like having chance to fail hitting a high AC. If you say "well, a high AC is hittable due to X, Y, and Z, and you're silly to think you shouldn't use very high AC encounters", that doesn't help, and here's why. The options you presented to hit a high AC through special actions, spells, or equipment DO NOT MATTER. Why? Because even though you can pad your odds of defeating a high AC opponent, there's nothing you can do, outside of synergy bonuses, Feats, or a high attribute score (and a few magical items) to pad your odds of succeeding at a UMD check. You defeated yourself with this train of logic. Sure, a Fighter can Charge to up his attack bonus, or a Rogue can flank. But you can't "Charge" to get a +2 to your UMD check. It's flat and static. So if someone says "oh so I suppose you wouldn't attack someone if you needed a 15 or higher", the answer is still probably not, because you can do things to make yourself hit on a lower number. You can't do any of that with a UMD check. There is no Trip, Grapple, Flank, Aid Another, or Charge bonus to use UMD. Now if you needed a 15 to hit AFTER all those bonuses, btw, you're heading towards TPKsville. If an attack roll is never static, and you can make actions to bypass a high AC, great...if your party can use that. But, as I have said, those types of bonuses don't apply to a UMD check, so in a fair game, an AC of 21 at 1st-level is still far easier to deal with than activating a Wand at first level. |
| Ace_of_time07-08-07, 10:44 PM | Ok 1. we have been using non core books all the way through this thread. 2. Again I said 15AC not a 15 a the 20 sided. 3. First you said it a waste of skill points. Then I point out that you could go human to make up the difference in SP. Now your saying it a waste of a action because ranks in skills are not the same as Attack bonuses. So that would be the same as any skill in combat. Heck why allow tumble in battle when a fighter can just kill it with his high melee bonuses. Why doesn't everyone just charge every creature they come acrossed and not use any thing else. 4. All the actions I posted could be used by any class. 5. Your party should be going 4 encounters befor using up all their spells, so if your party is using up their spells before then the CRs are to high. 6. I just saw this 1st level one. Fighter, no we'll go rogue this time to be fair, on melee is going to have +3 at most with a master work weapon would be +4 give him with a ,charge action of course, +6. A 20 DC on UMD could get 4+1 or 2 + 2MA + and with human skill focus 3=10 or 11depending on Cha mod. So to you it would be better for him to roll a 15 on a charge to hit AC21 then to roll 10 UMD and the getting to roll touch AC10 put him hitting on a 7 to hit the same guy. Since UMD is part of the wand use it doesn't count as an action. So no i don't see your point. One roll to hit at a hard roll of 15 is not better then 2 at low easy ones. to me it is 50/50 chance to hit with wand and 75% with an attack. I'll take the wand on high ACs any day of the week and twice on sunday. It is funny how I started on 3rd level and now we are on 1st level. Still easy roll to use a wand. Rolling once is not always better then rolling twice for an action. I like how one rogue using one wand on one rare encounter is killing the whole party by rolling twice for a lower AC and better chance of hitting. |
| Polaris07-08-07, 11:55 PM | MIC? All the books I've seen have wands SOLD with 50 charges. Of course found treasure is another matter. Ace-of-Time, you consistantly and persistantly miss the point. The rogue UMD user has a very high failure chance with UMD even for the easist use (wands) even if he is specialized around that skill. Other classes that use wands or magic items have no failure chance. Any failure chance above 5% (or even 0%) is too high for combat...and out of combat there are almost always better ways. In short it's a weak mechanic. Can UMD be made useful? I guess. That doesn't make it a solid option for the rogue. If you really want to shine at UMD, you should be a Warlock who can take 10 with the skill. -Polaris |
| Metafictional07-09-07, 01:29 AM | ~looks over my last post~ Funny, that made sense to me when I wrote it. Still, you should admit, saying that a character who spends two Feats and gives himself a good Cha stat "has a good chance" to use a Wand is a bit odd. I could just as easily give a Rogue a high Dex, Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot and give him a "good chance" to use an arrow on someone. Just sayin'. |
| Leilond07-09-07, 03:56 AM | MIC? All the books I've seen have wands SOLD with 50 charges. Of course found treasure is another matter. Ace-of-Time, you consistantly and persistantly miss the point. The rogue UMD user has a very high failure chance with UMD even for the easist use (wands) even if he is specialized around that skill. Other classes that use wands or magic items have no failure chance. Any failure chance above 5% (or even 0%) is too high for combat...and out of combat there are almost always better ways. In short it's a weak mechanic. Can UMD be made useful? I guess. That doesn't make it a solid option for the rogue. If you really want to shine at UMD, you should be a Warlock who can take 10 with the skill. -Polaris It's clear you never had a "UMD rogue" with whip and a wand of true strike. It's really hard to make your evil fighter stay with their weapon in hand when a rogue can disarm from 15' with a +20 on the hit roll, while the fighter keep you occupied There are so many option available for a rogue, only using 1st level spell (750 gold for a wand and 25 gold for a scroll) for so many advantages, that make a 1/20 chance mistake completely irrilevant |
| Polaris07-09-07, 04:44 AM | It's clear you never had a "UMD rogue" with whip and a wand of true strike. Wands of true-strike stink. You are costing yourself at least a standard action for a +20 to hit on the next round....and that's assuming the wand works at all. It's really hard to make your evil fighter stay with their weapon in hand when a rogue can disarm from 15' with a +20 on the hit roll, while the fighter keep you occupied In the two rounds it takes to pull this off, the fighter will be: 1. Out of range. 2. Probably well on his way to killing the rogue. Also it's not as though the fighter is exactly bad with other weapons, NOR does the fighter have to give up much to draw a backup (move action at worst, and many fighters will have the quickdraw feat), and it's not exactly like fighters don't have the strength or money to have a backup weapon (since nonmagical backup weapons...even MW ones...are dirt cheap). In short, this approach stinks. There are so many option available for a rogue, only using 1st level spell (750 gold for a wand and 25 gold for a scroll) for so many advantages, that make a 1/20 chance mistake completely irrilevant Which are better duplicated by other means (including but not limited to being a warlock or artificer). Wizards and other spellcasters don't tolerate a 20% ASF for their spells or items. Neither should you. -Polaris |
| Leilond07-09-07, 04:59 AM | Which are better duplicated by other means (including but not limited to being a warlock or artificer). Wizards and other spellcasters don't tolerate a 20% ASF for their spells or items. Neither should you. -Polaris 1. Out of range. A rogue that make a fighter flee from melee with a 25 gold scroll. That's great! 2. Probably well on his way to killing the rogue. Probably taking some AoO from the party fighter, because the rogue cannot be the "front line". And the rogue will "tumble" 3 square and still disarm him from his primary weapon Which are better duplicated by other means (including but not limited to being a warlock or artificer). Wizards and other spellcasters don't tolerate a 20% ASF for their spells or items. Neither should you. 5%, not 20%. What's the issue with other classes? It is obvious that a warlock is better than a rogue with UMD, but if I'm playing a rogue and I don't want to multiclass because it doesn't fit the character concept I will go for UMD. For sure Suggesting things like "take one level in a cleric with magic domain or in warlock" is a pure metagaming issue that some players can dislike So, let's stay in topic and talk if a rogue have to spend some of his points to UMD or not. And wizard live on their spells, it is obvious that they don't tollerate any failure chance, but we are talking about rogue, a rogue that cannot cast spell at all, they can tollerate without problem a 5% failure chance for doing things like using a wand - Expeditious Retreat - Grease (if the enemy doesn't have 5 rank in balance he's "flat-footed" while on a slippery surface - Inflict Light Wounds (overcome all DR and can be used with sneak attack) - Ray of Enfeeblement (as clarified by the wizard can be used to sneak attack to deliver negative energy damage to HP in addition to the Strenght penalty) - Remove Fear (one scroll to use when the cleric is the feared one) - Shocking Grasp - True Strike And these are only some 1st level spell that can be incredibly usefull for a rogue The second level spell are even more awesome |
| Polaris07-09-07, 05:47 AM | A rogue that make a fighter flee from melee with a 25 gold scroll. That's great! Who said retreat? I said out of range. A fighter could easily have a ranged weapon himself or even have a reach of 20' (which is possible with a bit of magical support). Point in fact, a fighter with a 50 gp potion of enlarge person will beat the snot out of a rogue with a wand of true-strike and a whip. I leave the proof as an excercise to the reader (but it involves the spiked chain). Probably taking some AoO from the party fighter, because the rogue cannot be the "front line". And the rogue will "tumble" 3 square and still disarm him from his primary weapon That's only if the rogue makes DC 15 on the tumble check which is nearly automatic at mid-levels but certainly not at low. Also a whip doesn't threaten any areas. Oh....and BECAUSE the whip doesn't threaten any squares, the fighter can SUNDER the whip with impunity (and will). 5%, not 20%. At least 20% at least until fairly reasonable levels. The best bonus you can get for a wand is +5 and that's if you sink two precious feats into it. The best even a Cha based rogue will have is +2 modifier for Cha for +7. Thus at first level, it's +11 or a 45% chance of failure. It doesn't go down to 5% chance of failure until 9th level. In short, I know wherefor I speak on this. What's the issue with other classes? It is obvious that a warlock is better than a rogue with UMD, but if I'm playing a rogue and I don't want to multiclass because it doesn't fit the character concept I will go for UMD. For sure Suggesting things like "take one level in a cleric with magic domain or in warlock" is a pure metagaming issue that some players can dislike It means that it's a very weak mechanic for the rogue. Already the defenders of UMD are costing the rogue two precious first level feats for a skill that doesn't come into it's own until 7-12th level or so. If you really want to be a UMD master, pick a different class. It's as simple as that. If you really want to use items, take a level of cleric with the magic domain. That's not metagaming. That's character design. So, let's stay in topic and talk if a rogue have to spend some of his points to UMD or not. I have. IF you stay as a rogue, the skill doesn't pay off soon enough and well enough to compare favorably with the alternatives...and that is very much topical. And wizard live on their spells, it is obvious that they don't tollerate any failure chance, but we are talking about rogue, a rogue that cannot cast spell at all, they can tollerate without problem a 5% failure chance for doing things like using a wand Generally much more than that as I just showed (try at least 20% for most low levels)....and if you are sinking two feats into UMD, then you are living on your ability to make items, and that means you are paying too much for too little. - Expeditious Retreat Situational. Situational enough that you are probably better off with the potion (which anyone can use). - Grease (if the enemy doesn't have 5 rank in balance he's "flat-footed" while on a slippery surface Um, not quite. It's a DC11 spell....that's AWFUL!! Furthermore, if the save is made (which even first level characters generally will more than half the time), you can easily get out of the area of effect even at half move. Heck, even if you fall down, you can crawl out of the area of effect with a double move. Furthermore, this spell is completely negated by flight type magic or even 5 ranks of balance. If you are using wands for save or be hosed spells, you should have your head examined. - Inflict Light Wounds (overcome all DR and can be used with sneak attack) For what? d8+1 points of negative energy damage if it works at all? The rogue can do better (and will) with his normal attacks. Much better ways to penetrate DR than this! - Ray of Enfeeblement (as clarified by the wizard can be used to sneak attack to deliver negative energy damage to HP in addition to the Strenght penalty) Um no. Ray of Enfeeblement does not do damage. It inflicts a strength penalty. Not the same thing. - Remove Fear (one scroll to use when the cleric is the feared one) Sure....IF it works. Scrolls are even harder for the UMD rogue than wands. Not a good bet. However, the cleric can cast this spell before battle (and will if there is any chance there will be fear effects). The cleric will get the entire party, and the spell will last for 10 mins. - Shocking Grasp d6 electricity damage WHOO-Hooo!!!!!! (Sarc) - True Strike Already debunked. And these are only some 1st level spell that can be incredibly usefull for a rogue The second level spell are even more awesome No, they really aren't when you actually look at the investment in feats, and other resources (including skill points and attribute distribution) in addition to the cost of the items AND the action cost (and including the failure chance) in all of this. Can the rogue make UMD useful? I suppose. No one is really questioning that. However, does that make it a good deal compared with the alternatives either for using items in general or other classes using UMD or both? I think not. -Polaris |
| Leilond07-09-07, 07:21 AM | Who said retreat? I said out of range. A fighter could easily have a ranged weapon himself or even have a reach of 20' (which is possible with a bit of magical support). Point in fact, a fighter with a 50 gp potion of enlarge person will beat the snot out of a rogue with a wand of true-strike and a whip. I leave the proof as an excercise to the reader (but it involves the spiked chain). The whip have 15' reach, and the "reach" weapon will be lost in the first turn That's only if the rogue makes DC 15 on the tumble check which is nearly automatic at mid-levels but certainly not at low. Also a whip doesn't threaten any areas. Oh....and BECAUSE the whip doesn't threaten any squares, the fighter can SUNDER the whip with impunity (and will). UMD becomes usefull only at mid/high level so the tumble isn't a problem at all Sundering the whip isn't a problem at all. Probably you never seen a whip rogue. A whip rougue tend to use the whip for sundering and tripping, so they tend to lose them because the opposite cheks and usually bring 4 or more with them. Not a problem in losing one... It's very interesting that a fighter have to pay so much attention to a 15' away rogue while a big fighter is probably hitting him every round... because a rogue surely doesn't go alone against the fighter At least 20% at least until fairly reasonable levels. The best bonus you can get for a wand is +5 and that's if you sink two precious feats into it. The best even a Cha based rogue will have is +2 modifier for Cha for +7. Thus at first level, it's +11 or a 45% chance of failure. It doesn't go down to 5% chance of failure until 9th level. In short, I know wherefor I speak on this. I'm talking about 12th level and you forgot the "skill focus (UMD)" that a UMD based rogue will surely take A rogue can easly use all his 11th level skill point and part of his 12th level skill point and a feat on UMD. This means that the rogue can concentrate into other things until 12th level, playing a standard rogue. With two leveling up he can specialize in UMD gaining 15 skill points +3 for the feat and a single charisma bonus to have only 5% failing chance It means that it's a very weak mechanic for the rogue No, it doesn't mean that. It means that the rogue, that still have all his powers, can sacrify some 15 skill points to have a new power, that do not keep away any of his other powers. It's a "plus", a very valuable plus. Already the defenders of UMD are costing the rogue two precious first level feats for a skill that doesn't come into it's own until 7-12th level or so. Why have you to take the feat so early? You'll take the feat at 12th level. Until then you'll play a standard rogue That's not metagaming. That's character design. Not if I want to play a rogue. I have. IF you stay as a rogue, the skill doesn't pay off soon enough and well enough to compare favorably with the alternatives...and that is very much topical. For this reason you'll use those skill points all toghether at the right moment. You've not to take them from the first level. Um, not quite. It's a DC11 spell....that's AWFUL!! Furthermore, if the save is made (which even first level characters generally will more than half the time), you can easily get out of the area of effect even at half move. Heck, even if you fall down, you can crawl out of the area of effect with a double move. Furthermore, this spell is completely negated by flight type magic or even 5 ranks of balance. You've to read the rules better. Being on a slippery surface make you flat-footed, no matter if you win the Save or not. It's a wonderful way to help your allies to fight against a lower AC enemy For what? d8+1 points of negative energy damage if it works at all? The rogue can do better (and will) with his normal attacks. Much better ways to penetrate DR than this! 6d6 sneak attack damage, you forgot it Touch sneak attack damage is greate against high armored enemies Um no. Ray of Enfeeblement does not do damage. It inflicts a strength penalty. Not the same thing. You've to re-read the clarification. Sure....IF it works. Scrolls are even harder for the UMD rogue than wands. Not a good bet. However, the cleric can cast this spell before battle (and will if there is any chance there will be fear effects). The cleric will get the entire party, and the spell will last for 10 mins. DC21 instead 20... so big difference d6 electricity damage WHOO-Hooo!!!!!! (Sarc) And sneak attack... you always forgot that sometimes there is a DR to win Already debunked. Never done. With a simple scroll of true strike I will disarm nearly everyone in the next turn, a fighter too, with easy No, they really aren't when you actually look at the investment in feats, and other resources (including skill points and attribute distribution) in addition to the cost of the items AND the action cost (and including the failure chance) in all of this. One feat and 15 skill points, that's not so much for a 12th level rogue Can the rogue make UMD useful? I suppose. No one is really questioning that. However, does that make it a good deal compared with the alternatives either for using items in general or other classes using UMD or both? I think not. But if you're playing a rogue, and you want to play a rogue, would you do it? If you don't want your character have any magical power (warlock) nor being under any church or superior goal (cleric with magic domain) would you do it? It is obvious that if you concentrate on "disarming" a fighter will be the best, but I want to play a rogue and I like disarming. Then I will buy some whips, I will put 8 skill points into UMD at 11th level, another 7 skill points ant 12th, a single feat and I will be a very very good disarmer, without losing my "sneak ability", nor losing my "listen, spot, hide, move silently ecc" ability, my evasion, and so on. I will simply have more option than a not-UMD rougue have I will be better than other rogues |
| Votan07-09-07, 09:04 AM | For what? d8+1 points of negative energy damage if it works at all? The rogue can do better (and will) with his normal attacks. Much better ways to penetrate DR than this! I am generally more optimistic about the use of wands (especially coupled with sneak attack) but I agree that Inflict Light Wounds has to be one of the weakest possible choices. The touch attack is nice but other touch attack options exist (like Alchemist's fire or acid flasks). No matter how bad the DR is, this is a tough option to justify buying an expensive wand, carrying it around and risking UMD failure. I have some sympathy for Grease which at least restricts the battlefield terrain and makes maneaver more difficult (and can get the wizard out of a grapple) or Ray of Enfeeblement where I don't have a good idea of how to duplicate the effect without a wand. |
| Leilond07-09-07, 09:13 AM | I am generally more optimistic about the use of wands (especially coupled with sneak attack) but I agree that Inflict Light Wounds has to be one of the weakest possible choices. The touch attack is nice but other touch attack options exist (like Alchemist's fire or acid flasks). No matter how bad the DR is, this is a tough option to justify buying an expensive wand, carrying it around and risking UMD failure. You cannot flank, and thus sneak, with flasks. The issue of using a touch spell wand is all in the "touch sneak attack". 750 gold for 50 "touch sneak attack" aren't so much at all for a 12th level character |
| tui07-09-07, 12:40 PM | Metafictional: I think your AC/CR rules are fine... as others have pointed out, there are many MM exceptions that don't have an appropriate CR rating based on your rules, but if you don't think it's a problem in your world, then it's not. One of the real problems Rogues have, however, is their problems dealing with things immune to sneak attacks: Undead and constructs, mostly. How do you deal with these in your campaign? The reason I ask this is to understand what you mean when you say that you want 3/4 BAB characters to always be able to "contribute" in melee... because in my experiences playing Rogues, stepping up for a chance to do 1d6+1 damage feels pretty worthless (especially when the return attack either does a lot of damage or has a nasty side effect [energy drain, paralysis]) when the fighter-types are routinely dishing out 20+ damage. In those situations, I'd MUCH rather have a chance to do something else useful with UMD than do a piddly amount of damage. You might say it is "suboptimal" since it won't work all the time, but from my perspective it actually contributes more (a mechanical benefit), and is more fun (a non-mechanical benefit). On the comparison front: How do you feel about Tumble as a skill? One of its primary uses is to avoid AoO during movement. That's a DC 15+ check... which with a 16 Dex, +2 synergy from ranks in Jump, means that you can't do it without a chance of failure until 6th level. In your opinion, is putting ranks in Tumble before then a waste? How do you feel about using Bluff to Feint in combat? As a special opposed role, it can be pretty easy to optimize since monster BABs often don't scale so quickly... although it is harder against non-humanoids. Of course it works best if you have a feat to invest for Improved Feint, so that you can feint and attack every round. But even for someone focused on this, it isn't guaranteed to work... but when it does, you get a sneak attack you wouldn't normally be able to get. Do you think it's ever worthwhile for a Rogue to spend a feat and focus on Bluff as a skill to use this tactic? Those are the two most common combat oriented skills I could think of.. and both are common for Rogues. I'm curious to hear what you think of them. But I guess what that leads me to, is a question I've posed a few times previously in this thread... if Rogue #1 doesn't invest ranks in UMD, what SHOULD he invest in? It sounds like Rogue #2 has the classic Rogue skills (Search, Disable Device, Open Locks) covered. Wouldn't it be a waste for Rogue #1 to also max those skills out? So is the problem with the Skill Focus feat he used? Or with the consumables he's using? Is he actually falling behind the power-curve of the party? It may be pretty hard to measure... certainly you're helping him out by purposefully putting in items he can use, but you're also helping everyone else out by not randomizing the treasure to begin with. So it's hard to measure whether the consumables he's using are hurting this particular party. So MY conclusion, is that UMD can be a very useful ability generally, and can allow a Rogue to do something useful even when faced with challenges when a Rogue might otherwise have no good options. But in a normal well-rounded party without two Rogues, he may well not be able to afford ranks in UMD. On the other hand, in a small party without both arcane and divine spellcasters, a Rogue could do some light double-duty with UMD. |
| Polaris07-09-07, 12:45 PM | You cannot flank, and thus sneak, with flasks. The issue of using a touch spell wand is all in the "touch sneak attack". 750 gold for 50 "touch sneak attack" aren't so much at all for a 12th level character False. You can sneak attack with flasks, the same as any other ranged weapon. If it requires an attack roll, and does damage, you can sneak with it. -Polaris |
| Polaris07-09-07, 01:12 PM | The whip have 15' reach, and the "reach" weapon will be lost in the first turn The fighter can have a reach of 20' even at first level. If you are talking higher than this, the fighter (if supported or even large) will EASILY have a reach of 20' or even more. UMD becomes usefull only at mid/high level so the tumble isn't a problem at all Sundering the whip isn't a problem at all. Probably you never seen a whip rogue. A whip rougue tend to use the whip for sundering and tripping, so they tend to lose them because the opposite cheks and usually bring 4 or more with them. Not a problem in losing one... Yes, but you have to survive to see Mid-Levels. Also at mid levels, the casters are using spells of 5-6th level or so with DCs ranging from 20-25 or so. That doesn't leave much for items. Don't get me wrong; items definately have their place, but there are so many better ways to use lots of items than UMD. It's very interesting that a fighter have to pay so much attention to a 15' away rogue while a big fighter is probably hitting him every round... because a rogue surely doesn't go alone against the fighter Well, then, the enemy fighter probably isn't alone either. The point is that the whip option is grossly overrated by you. I'm talking about 12th level and you forgot the "skill focus (UMD)" that a UMD based rogue will surely take A rogue can easly use all his 11th level skill point and part of his 12th level skill point and a feat on UMD. This means that the rogue can concentrate into other things until 12th level, playing a standard rogue. With two leveling up he can specialize in UMD gaining 15 skill points +3 for the feat and a single charisma bonus to have only 5% failing chance Ah So. NOW when I pin you down, do you suddenly give a level. Sure UMD if maxxed out starts to come into it's own at 12th level. When you compare with all the other options for using items/UMD outside the rogue, there are much better options. No, it doesn't mean that. It means that the rogue, that still have all his powers, can sacrify some 15 skill points to have a new power, that do not keep away any of his other powers. It's a "plus", a very valuable plus. No, it's really not. 15 skill points is likely to be at least a full level's worth of skill points....points that could have been used to improve critical sensory, stealth, and trapfinding skills. More to the point, while something is better than nothing, how much of a "plus" at 12th level is it? Really? Wands (your best bet) top out at 4th level spells, and you never get to add any attribute modifier to the DC and they are always assumed to be at minimum possibly caster level. Potions can be used by anyone. Scrolls can be hard to use because of attribute emulation and the need to decipher them. Rods and Staffs will be SO expensive that they will either be sold and/or left in the hands of the characters that use them best (i.e. the primary casters). In short, you're grossly overrating the skill. Why have you to take the feat so early? You'll take the feat at 12th level. Until then you'll play a standard rogue You are moving the goalposts. We were talking about a rogue that specialized in UMD from the beginning. Even so, you have to pay the cost sometime (see above). If UMD is not worth investing at the beginning, then you are consigning an ability to essential uselessless, for about half a typical character's career. Not if I want to play a rogue. If you have at least one level of rogue, then you are a rogue. Now, if you want to play a PURE rogue, then you have to accept that UMD is a sub-optimal choice. Can you get use from it? Sure. But there are generally better ways/choices. For this reason you'll use those skill points all toghether at the right moment. You've not to take them from the first level. Which puts you behind the proverbial eight-ball for all the OTHER skills that are opposed (generally) and you need to keep up in. Skill points even for a rogue aren't free. Such skills include spot, listen, hide, move-silent, bluff, sense-motive, etc. You've to read the rules better. Being on a slippery surface make you flat-footed, no matter if you win the Save or not. It's a wonderful way to help your allies to fight against a lower AC enemy Not if you are flying (at 12th level reasonably common) or levitating. Also not if you've got 5 ranks in balance (not unsual at 12th level). I also point out, that you are NOT flatfooted in a grease spell. At best you are denied your Dex (not the same thing) which means on your turn (AFTER the rogue used the wand) you can get out at half-speed. Grease has it's place because it (can) exclude a 10x10 area from the battlemap, but as a save or 'be hosed' spell, it sucks for the item user. 6d6 sneak attack damage, you forgot it Touch sneak attack damage is greate against high armored enemies IF you get the sneak attack. You also get touch sneak attack from Alchemist fire and from many other sources. Even some weapons can provide it (almost). You've to re-read the clarification. I have; I'm right. Complete Arcane, page 85 under "Weapon Like Spells": A successful sneak attack with a weaponlike spell deals extra damage of the same type as the spell normally deals. For example a 10th level rogue/3rd level wizard who makes a successful sneak attack with Melf's Acid Arrow deals 2d4 points of acid damage plus 5d6 points of acid damage for the sneak attack (with the spell continuing to deal acid damage as normal for the subsequent rounds). The exception is spells that deal energy drain or ability damage which deal negative energy damage on the sneak attack, not extra levels or ability damage/ Ray of Enfeeblement does NOT do energy drain and it does NOT do ability damage. Ray of Enfeeblement does NOT damage the target at all. Ergo, RAW it is not entitled to sneak attack damage. DC21 instead 20... so big difference Try DC26. You have to decipher the scroll first (admittedly not in combat, but it has to be done sometime). You also need to have an 11+ wisdom or be forced to emulate it (and don't tell me that your charisma based rogue will likely have a Wisdom above 10). And sneak attack... you always forgot that sometimes there is a DR to win You forget that: 1. You don't have to penetrate DR to get your sneak attack. You just have to hit with a qualifying attack. 2. THere are lots of ways to penetrate DR conventially. Never done. With a simple scroll of true strike I will disarm nearly everyone in the next turn, a fighter too, with easy Sunder-Is-The-Fighter's-Friend. A fighter with a wisdom score above that of a stone should sunder the whip ASAP because a whip user is hideously vunerable to it (since the whip doesn't threaten anything). ANY fighter (feat or no feat) will be able to do this fairly easily. One feat and 15 skill points, that's not so much for a 12th level rogue Actually it is given the rogue only gets 7 feats (before special abilities are counted which are more than feats), and isn't likely to have 15 skill points per level. -Polaris |
| Metafictional07-09-07, 04:37 PM | Well, tui, what I generally do when I plan on using enemies that are difficult to fight (and undead or constructs are difficult for most people to fight, not just Rogues), is I let the players get some warning about it. Knowledge or Gather Information checks would let the players find out in advance, and they do have scouting options. Only if the players deliberately avoid getting information would they run into a construct or undead by surprise. If they know about these problems, they can be sure to have the resources to use them. But that's my game. Personally, I try to use such things sparingly, because I know some spells and combat abilities are useless against certain monsters. I want the players to succeed, but I do require them to use their heads. Like I said, I prefer that opponents be defeatable by normal means, and that monsters that require unusual tactics be rare, and almost never a surprise. Tumble and Bluff. Well, to be honest, I never saw much of a problem with UMD until this thread; the UMD Rogue seemed to use his skill quite well, so I didn't think much of it. Tumble, as you've pointed out, has a similar problem, although the DC's are lower than UMD. I guess it's because I never see Tumble as a necessary skill, just a very nice one. You don't need to use Tumble in a fight, just to maneuver. You do, however, need UMD to use a Wand. Most of the time, by the time I notice Tumble, my Rogues have their bonus so high they almost never fail. And of course, you can get Skill Mastery for Tumble at higher levels. Bluff, well, to be honest, I've actually never seen Feint used much. Most of my players in the past think giving up an action to get a Sneak Attack next turn is a pain, and Improved Feint takes a Feat to let them make ONE Sneak Attack every turn. They'd much rather flank for full sneak attacks every turn. I'm not saying Feint is bad, that's just my experience with it. So again, you don't need Bluff to use Sneak Attack either. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like Bluff and Tumble are nice options, but not necessary for combat. Not that UMD is necessary either, but I've seen more use out of Bluff and Tumble out of most Rogues, than UMD, so it's hard to say. As a DM, I don't like how hard UMD is to use, or how much of an investment it is. I realize getting mileage out of any useful skill requires an investment, especially at low levels, but the DC's for UMD are simply too high. Especially when it's big feature is to give you something other classes get for free, without a chance of failure, at first level. *(Yes, I know, there is a chance to fail with high level scrolls for even spellcasters, but there isn't for Wands or Staves). I guess that's it. Bluff and Tumble give you benefits that other Classes who lack the skills don't have. UMD, at it's best, only mimics benefits that other Classes who don't have the skill already enjoy. |
| tui07-09-07, 06:05 PM | I really appreciate your DMing style; I think it would be a vast improvement over some of the adversarial DMs I've had in the past. I think your reluctance to put players into surprise situations makes UMD somewhat of a less useful skill compared to other campaigns, where being able to adapt in an instant can be critical to survival (or at least usefulness). My experience with Tumble is that players fall into two camps with it when they put ranks there at early levels.. some are just putting ranks there until they can have enough to use it without a chance of failing.. in the mean time they don't want to risk failing a die roll and drawing an AoO, so they don't use Tumble and instead try to move normally without incurring the AoO. Others think that the risk is fine; they roll the dice and if they fail and they suffer the AoO, then oh well. There are also a few instances where using Tumble if you have it is a no-brainer, such as when moving through the threat-area of a Large creature with reach. But generally, at low levels, I find people either use Tumble a lot, or they hardly ever use it. -- Player preference. My guess is that you'd fall more into the 1st category, and Rogue #1 into the second. And Feint is one of those tactics that it seems people either build their character around and use a lot, or ignore completely. Usually it's just useful for allowing someone to sneak attack when a flanker isn't handy, or against something that has Uncanny Dodge and IUD (which normally wouldn't be possible). But it can also be handy if your opponent 5' steps a lot to avoid flanking; in these situations, you don't have to choose between providing a flanking bonus or getting a sneak attack. Feinting is one of those situational benefits that a lot of people (myself included) don't really like to use.. because it doesn't work all the time, and usually isn't necessary because there are other tactics that will work ok. But that doesn't mean the whole mechanic doesn't have any value. Additionally, both Bluff and Tumble have nice out of combat value -- Bluff for the fast-talking and Tumble for falling. UMD also has some out of combat value, although in a large party, that is probably less of a draw. Really I'm just trying to find something to compare UMD to besides attacking, since I don't think that's a good comparison. Also, people have mentioned the alternate class spell lists; I'm of the opinion that the Ranger spell list has some of the best synergy with Rogue abilities, especially if the Spell Compendium is allowed... (which, as I recall, is not the case with this particular campaign.) |
| Metafictional07-09-07, 06:28 PM | Oh yes, if you could guarantee access to certain spell lists your party doesn't have, UMD would look a bit better. Those Ranger spells are very nice, and having a Wand or Scroll of them would be amazing; by himself, the Ranger can't use those spells very often. The problem is, you can't guarantee access. To buy a Scroll of a Ranger spell, you have to imagine one of two things; 1) some bored Ranger with Scribe Scroll trying to make money by selling spells to other Rangers and the occasional UMD user. 2) Artificers in your campaign. : ) Of course, if you had an Artificer in your party, chances are he'd get the lion's share of items useful with UMD, and he'd just turn "unusable" items like Unholy Swords into bonus xp for his Crafting. Sure, having a Rogue with a high UMD check would be useful to a party with an Artificer, but he'd be getting less use out of it than he'd like. A second Artificer, on the other hand, would be vastly more useful (and amusing)... I don't think we can properly compare UMD to attacking either, in retrospect. I did so because the attack is something everyone can do, and several classes are expected to do, in combat, if they have no better option. UMD unfortunately doesn't compare to spellcasting in any way shape or form, nor does it properly compare to most other skill checks. If I wanted to compare UMD to anything, I'd pick Diplomacy, which is another skill with high DC's that's benefit is hit or miss with your campaign. But even then, all you need with Diplomacy is someone to talk to. UMD requires you have a magical item to play with. The Artificer and the Warlock get better uses out of UMD, and they (along with, potentially, the Bard..or Spellthief?), can make their own magic items to play with. The Rogue is left to rely on the whims of fate (and local economics) to get maximum use out of UMD. Or at the very least, fellow party members who don't mind making (or tossing) the Rogue a bone, to help them with their own schemes. Personally, before this thread, I thought UMD was an awesome skill, and I could not imagine an argument like Rogue #2's. Now unfortunately, I've realized his argument is very valid, our UMD Rogue gave up a lot to use his skill, and he'd have had a blast as an Artificer. As a Rogue, he's coming up second-best, unless I deliberately try to help him. Which I don't mind, but when the other party members point out that his character choices only work because I try to make them work... It makes my credibility as a neutral arbiter of consequence in the game questionable. So I think UMD needs to be made more useful. For now, I've allowed Skill Mastery to cover UMD. In my next game, in addition to my already more liberal Trapfinding house rules (as seen in the Unearthed Arcana forum), I'm debating making UMD the skill required to disarm magical traps, to make the skill more useful overall. At least that way, there's a point to investing in UMD at low levels, and the fact that it can do a lot more than Disable Device at high levels will make it a very choice skill. I'm sure there are problems with that approach as well, of course, and I welcome everyone's input on that potential house ruling. |
| Ace_of_time07-09-07, 08:41 PM | ~looks over my last post~ Funny, that made sense to me when I wrote it. Still, you should admit, saying that a character who spends two Feats and gives himself a good Cha stat "has a good chance" to use a Wand is a bit odd. I could just as easily give a Rogue a high Dex, Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot and give him a "good chance" to use an arrow on someone. Just sayin'. That wouldn't be a bad thing. Never said high score on cha a +1 is only a 12. The two feats you said would work great with UMD since most are ranged and since you wouldn't want to use wand every encounter having something to fell back on wouldn't be a bad thing and still keeps with the UMD rogue theme. You could even go a few levels in fighter to get them faster. Polaris, MIC is a book that only has magic items in it. wand with 10 charges are give in there and do have a price listed. It would be up to the DM to allow it or not. Seems like it would be easier to just ask the OP if the DM allows it in his game. As to the point yes I understand that it would be easier for a spell caster to use the wand. My point is that rogue 1 should be free to play him any way he wants to. The reason it doesn't make sense to me is even if it is higher then 5%, that's the way he wants to play his PC. As for UMD, I already said I was not going to fight about whether a rogue could cast better then a wizard. There is no way he could do that. Any other move that requires a roll, if you had to roll a 7 or better to use it it would be acceptable to go for it. To say that UMD is a waste because even a 7 or higher is to much because a wizard doesn't have roll to use one, just doesn't make sense. There is no build that lets you use any magic item without UMD. Period. Even dragons use UMD to use items. We are not talking about spell casters here. We are talking about how useful UMD is. And for a skill that lets a rogue use any magic item there is I'd say that a useful skill. |
| Metafictional07-09-07, 08:46 PM | Well, lol, I am the OP, and the DM for the game. I don't own MIC yet, and generally, partially charged wands aren't available for sale (but yes, they do exist). Ability to use any magic items without UMD...the closest I can come up with is Cleric with the Magic Domain, and yes, there's still a lot they can't use. |
| Ace_of_time07-09-07, 08:55 PM | Oh yes, if you could guarantee access to certain spell lists your party doesn't have, UMD would look a bit better. Those Ranger spells are very nice, and having a Wand or Scroll of them would be amazing; by himself, the Ranger can't use those spells very often. The problem is, you can't guarantee access. To buy a Scroll of a Ranger spell, you have to imagine one of two things; 1) some bored Ranger with Scribe Scroll trying to make money by selling spells to other Rangers and the occasional UMD user. 2) Artificers in your campaign. : ) Of course, if you had an Artificer in your party, chances are he'd get the lion's share of items useful with UMD, and he'd just turn "unusable" items like Unholy Swords into bonus xp for his Crafting. Sure, having a Rogue with a high UMD check would be useful to a party with an Artificer, but he'd be getting less use out of it than he'd like. A second Artificer, on the other hand, would be vastly more useful (and amusing)... I don't think we can properly compare UMD to attacking either, in retrospect. I did so because the attack is something everyone can do, and several classes are expected to do, in combat, if they have no better option. UMD unfortunately doesn't compare to spellcasting in any way shape or form, nor does it properly compare to most other skill checks. If I wanted to compare UMD to anything, I'd pick Diplomacy, which is another skill with high DC's that's benefit is hit or miss with your campaign. But even then, all you need with Diplomacy is someone to talk to. UMD requires you have a magical item to play with. The Artificer and the Warlock get better uses out of UMD, and they (along with, potentially, the Bard..or Spellthief?), can make their own magic items to play with. The Rogue is left to rely on the whims of fate (and local economics) to get maximum use out of UMD. Or at the very least, fellow party members who don't mind making (or tossing) the Rogue a bone, to help them with their own schemes. Personally, before this thread, I thought UMD was an awesome skill, and I could not imagine an argument like Rogue #2's. Now unfortunately, I've realized his argument is very valid, our UMD Rogue gave up a lot to use his skill, and he'd have had a blast as an Artificer. As a Rogue, he's coming up second-best, unless I deliberately try to help him. Which I don't mind, but when the other party members point out that his character choices only work because I try to make them work... It makes my credibility as a neutral arbiter of consequence in the game questionable. So I think UMD needs to be made more useful. For now, I've allowed Skill Mastery to cover UMD. In my next game, in addition to my already more liberal Trapfinding house rules (as seen in the Unearthed Arcana forum), I'm debating making UMD the skill required to disarm magical traps, to make the skill more useful overall. At least that way, there's a point to investing in UMD at low levels, and the fact that it can do a lot more than Disable Device at high levels will make it a very choice skill. I'm sure there are problems with that approach as well, of course, and I welcome everyone's input on that potential house ruling. I think we need to get on the right path here. Why do your players feel that way? Are you playing favs, or giving out treasure and letting them decide who gets it? Do you go out of your way to let him use his UMD skill? Is he hurting the group (in game) by use UMD instead of the other rogue choices? Why do the other players have a problem with him using UMd and is it all the rest of the group or just a few? Oh and I knew that already. (That you were DM) Just trying to get them to stop fighting about it. |
| angryscrub07-09-07, 09:21 PM | Doesn't help much. Yes, Charisma can be used to a point for sorcerer/wizard spells, but the UMD skill says explicitly that only wisdom can be used to power divine spells (regardless of class). I point to page 85 of the PHB under emulate ability score: There it is in black and white (look it up yourself). To use a divine scroll, you have to have the appropriate wisdom when using UMD or emulate it. To my knowledge this section has never been errataed even after the Favored Soul was published. Thus it doesn't matter whether or not favored souls use charisma to read scrolls, RAW and 'Rules According to Hoyle', you need a minimum wisdom (or need to emulate it) to use a divine scroll regardless of class. BZZZT! nice try, but wrong. if you want to be according to hoyle, make sure you read carefully. when using UMD to use a scroll, i don't go to the emulate an ability score description, i go to the use a scroll description. if (and only if) i don't have a high enough ability score, i then check the emulate an ability score section. by a strict hoyle reading, a rogue's casting stat is undefined, a wizard's is intelligence, and a bard's is charisma. thus a wizard with UMD would use intelligence to cast ANY scroll, and a bard would use charisma. read the use a scroll section again. ...Use Magic Device allows you to use a scroll as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list... which ability score is required to cast a rogue spell is completely undefined by the RAW, and thus completely up to the DM, but a wizard uses int to cast wizard spells, and the scroll of resurrection is now considered to be on his class list. it is not until it is determined that his ability is too low, that the emulate an ability score comes into play. please notice that it references mechanics that use a scroll does not even use. emulate says "appropriate to the class you are emulating", but you are not emulating a class. there are not even mechanics for emulating a class, only class features. not to mention it contradicts itself, because following up the "wisdom for divine scrolls" with the "class you are emulating" does not make sense when you are UMDing a scroll a favored soul has made. thus, according to hoyle, emulate an ability score is FUBAR. use a scroll is crystal clear, however, even if it results in an undefined variable (in this case, ability score used to cast rogue, warlock, or artificer spells, or any other non spellcasting class). No. 1. There are explicit rules that state that wands can only be created fully charged. That means if you custom order a wand (which the listed prices in the DMG assume) you get it fully charged. i never claimed otherwise. if someone else claimed such, i certainly do not agree with that. i fail to see how that's relevant to what i was saying. 2. It says NOTHING in the wands item section, that partially charged items are for sale. The only rule Penchant has quoted gives the DM a valuation so such wands can be balanced against party wealth and sold. Nothing more. -Polaris hrmmm. in my copy of the DMG, the column that has the wand prices is entitled market price. perhaps yours is different, or maybe we have different definitions for market price? |
| Polaris07-09-07, 10:21 PM | BZZZT! nice try, but wrong. if you want to be according to hoyle, make sure you read carefully. when using UMD to use a scroll, i don't go to the emulate an ability score description, i go to the use a scroll description. if (and only if) i don't have a high enough ability score, i then check the emulate an ability score section. by a strict hoyle reading, a rogue's casting stat is undefined, a wizard's is intelligence, and a bard's is charisma. thus a wizard with UMD would use intelligence to cast ANY scroll, and a bard would use charisma. read the use a scroll section again. BZZT! WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. 1. The PHB rules always trump the SRD when there is a conflict between the two. 2. The PHB explicitly states in page 85 that in order to use a scroll, you have to have a high score in the appropriate ability, and explicitly states that wisdom is the appropriate ability for all divine scrolls. Edit: Since UMD allows the rogue to 'break' the normal rules regarding item usage, we have to refer to the UMD rules first before looking at general item usage. The appropriate ability for divine scrolls is wisdom for UMD even if it might not be for some classes (like favored soul). End of Discussion. -Polaris Edit PS: "Market Price" means "Fair Market Value", i.e. what something should be worth. It does not guarantee that the item is in fact for sale. |
| Polaris07-09-07, 10:28 PM | Ability to use any magic items without UMD...the closest I can come up with is Cleric with the Magic Domain, and yes, there's still a lot they can't use. Thought I'd reply to this point by you and Ace-of-Time simulaneously. Yes, it's true that UMD is probably the only way (only way I can think of) to be able to have a chance for one character to use any item in the game. However, just how useful is this ability really? 1. There are better ways to take advantage of UMD without being a rogue (Artificer, Warlock, etc). 2. How many different kinds of items does any one character really need to use? Sure there's stuff that a cleric with the magic domain can't use, but not a whole lot. Sure ranger spells are nice, but ranger goes well with other core non-caster classes (esp Rogue), etc. Therefore when UMD comes into it's own, isn't it more important to know how many items the party as a whole can use? Given that case, just how much more flexibility does UMD really give a well balanced and well coordinated party? I am willing to bet the answer to that is, "not so much". -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-09-07, 11:35 PM | (Artificer, Warlock) are cool classes but nobody likes them to much. My players start to read how Art work and went cross eyed after the first part. As to your number two It would depend on how the player wanted his UMD rogue to be played. And yes they can be usefull with 4 people or less parties. |
| Polaris07-09-07, 11:46 PM | (Artificer, Warlock) are cool classes but nobody likes them to much. My players start to read how Art work and went cross eyed after the first part. That's fine, but as the old saying goes, "If you want to fix your TV properly, call a TV repairman." Likewise, if you want to get the most from UMD, use a class (or PrC) that is suited for it. As to your number two It would depend on how the player wanted his UMD rogue to be played. And yes they can be usefull with 4 people or less parties. No one has ever said that UMD could be useful. What I am strongly questioning is if it in fact is worth the opportunity cost. In a large set of cases and parties, that answer seems to be "no". Even a four person party is likely to have a cleric and a wizard, a rogue type, and a fighter type (or varients thereof), but for non-casters multiclassing is both easy and encouraged....so the non-casters could easily have a level of ranger, paladin, or even bard between them. Also the clerical domains will add to available spells on class spell lists (and thus items). What I am driving at, is that it seems like the ability to use ANY item with UMD isn't that great when a typical party should be able to use most items anyway between them (and for no chance of failure at that). -Polaris |
| Metafictional07-10-07, 02:30 AM | Well, Ace, what they're griping about is when I place items I know only the UMD Rogue can use, like a Scroll of Reincarnate. Which the Cleric deduced they would probably never have found if they didn't have a UMD user, and it would have been a Scroll of Raise Dead or something instead. I don't do this too often, but I try to make sure the occasional useful item appears for the characters. I prefer found treasure over buying and selling items. I'd been advised to go purely random, so far....the results have been interesting, to say the least, but there's been almost no UMD fodder in the past two sessions. |
| Polaris07-10-07, 03:32 AM | I'd been advised to go purely random, so far....the results have been interesting, to say the least, but there's been almost no UMD fodder in the past two sessions. This should not suprise you. If you go by the random tables, the vast majority of the magical items will be useable by either a wizard or a cleric. -Polaris |
| Leilond07-10-07, 04:15 AM | False. You can sneak attack with flasks, the same as any other ranged weapon. If it requires an attack roll, and does damage, you can sneak with it. -Polaris Sorry, you've to reread the rules You cannot flank with ranged weapons Read page 153 of the PHB, under the FLANKING seciont that starts with these exact words When making a melee attack ... IF you get the sneak attack. You also get touch sneak attack from Alchemist fire and from many other sources. Even some weapons can provide it (almost). Alchemist fire: wrong. You cannot flank with ranged weapons How much does cost a weapon that grant you "thouch attack"? Tell me please Sunder-Is-The-Fighter's-Friend. A fighter with a wisdom score above that of a stone should sunder the whip ASAP because a whip user is hideously vunerable to it (since the whip doesn't threaten anything). ANY fighter (feat or no feat) will be able to do this fairly easily. And I will take my second of four whips and disarm him Actually it is given the rogue only gets 7 feats (before special abilities are counted which are more than feats), and isn't likely to have 15 skill points per level. Two levels. This means that all other important skill will be "maximized -2" This means that, to have 15 point in UMD, you'll have 13 points instead of 15 in the other primary skills |
| Polaris07-10-07, 09:00 AM | Sorry, you've to reread the rules You cannot flank with ranged weapons Read page 153 of the PHB, under the FLANKING seciont that starts with these exact words FALSE. Reread the rules under sneak attack. I never said anything about flanking. Flanking is only one way to get sneak attacks in. If you make an attack that does damage, and the opponent is denied their dexterity bonus that also counts as a sneak attack (although you must be within 30' if it's a ranged attack). You can sneak attack with Alchemist's fire. Before you tell me to read the rules, read them yourself. Alchemist fire: wrong. You cannot flank with ranged weapons How much does cost a weapon that grant you "thouch attack"? Tell me please See above. And I will take my second of four whips and disarm him And spend an addition second to cast true-stike? Otherwise you are talking about being a whip-wielding rogue.....and the fighter can carry more than the rogue (including weapons). Sorry, but whips actually sort of suck. Two levels. This means that all other important skill will be "maximized -2" This means that, to have 15 point in UMD, you'll have 13 points instead of 15 in the other primary skills That's a significant opportunity cost. It's a flat -2 penalty to your primary skills (worth several feats in fact). -Polaris |
| Leilond07-10-07, 09:22 AM | FALSE. Reread the rules under sneak attack. I never said anything about flanking. Flanking is only one way to get sneak attacks in. If you make an attack that does damage, and the opponent is denied their dexterity bonus that also counts as a sneak attack (although you must be within 30' if it's a ranged attack). You can sneak attack with Alchemist's fire. Before you tell me to read the rules, read them yourself. And what if you cannot deny opponent dex bonus? You sit and look? I will take my wand of "inflict minor wounds" (375 golds) and start to flank my opponent See above. See above And spend an addition second to cast true-stike? One cast, one weapon Leaving the opponent fighter without his primary weapon can easy worth one lost rounds of a rogue Otherwise you are talking about being a whip-wielding rogue.....and the fighter can carry more than the rogue (including weapons). It's not important. Usually fighter use they're most usefull weapons. Taking it away is more than a good result for the party Sorry, but whips actually sort of suck. It's a pity I cannot show you a such rogue in game That's a significant opportunity cost. It's a flat -2 penalty to your primary skills (worth several feats in fact). -Polaris That are incredibly less than the benefit You use your rogue like a normal rogue until 10th level. Leveling to 11th and 12th you put 15 skill point to UMD and take "Skill focus(UMD)" You'll be like another rogue with -2 to skill check but when: - Fighting against an immune to sneak enemy I can fight to deliver something like 5-10 damage (pheraps 15 if you use a very expensive weapon) each succesfully attack (that can be less than once every round), I won't be so usefull nor effective for this encounter Or I can take some scroll/wands to buff my party members so that they can be more usefull or they do not waste their time casting buffing spells Enarge person, bull strenght (and similar), shield of faith, blur, invisibility, silence (SILENCE!!!), web... and so on... all spells that the other caster can give up to do something else. More affective than dealing 10 damage every two rounds. - A character is very in hurry of heal (dying) We all know that curing during combat isn't efficent, but every now and then it happens. Having a rogue that will stabilize the character so that the cleric can continue the fight very good. And wands/scroll are cheeper than potions - An enemy with very high AC (27 for instance) The rogue is going to miss 30-40% of the times with his primary attack. With a simple "touch attack spell" you can flank your opponent and nearly auto-hit it for a full sneak attack damage - A massive short time damage needed The rogue can help the wizard using a wand of fireball or a wand of scorching ray or the like, to speed up the process - Flask cost more than wands 50 flask of alchemist fire cost 625 golds more and deal only 1,5 more average damage than a single wand of "ray of frost", without considering the weight and the action you need to take them from your backpack each one you want to use... and you cannot flank with flask. Every good rogue know that once the flat-footed status finish, the 75% of sneaks are done with flanking Everything you can make with a flask can be made with a 375 gp wand of ray of frost (0 level spell) or acid splash (0 level spell). 1d3 damage instead of 1d6 doesn't really matter when there are 9d6 of sneak damage Thinks you can do with scroll and wands cannot be done with flask - Disarm With a scroll of true strike you can disarm nearly everyone in two rounds. Use the scroll, then move drawing the first of your whips and disarm the more dangerous weapon you see. You can move 30', plus 15' feat reach. This mean that you can move and disarm everyone within 45'.... 75' feet charging You won't be good at casting like a caster You will have -2 to skill in respect of another similar rogue But you will have a variety of opportunities that a normal rogue won't have For all this reason I think that a rougue, once he gain 11 and 12 level he can maximize the UMD, gaining more advantages than the things he lose If the rogue doesn't want to sacrifice the feat, he can do the same thing at 15th level instead of 12th |
| Polaris07-10-07, 09:45 AM | And what if you cannot deny opponent dex bonus? You sit and look? I will take my wand of "inflict minor wounds" (375 golds) and start to flank my opponent I can flank with my dual-wielded shortswords....or spiked chain....or any number of other ways. Spiked chains can be great for rogues because it's dead easy to set up flanking with them. The point is that flanking isn't hard. In fact, a really clever rogue can spring-attack to flank and then move out of range as well (can't do that with a wand...read the rules). The point is that you made a claim and when I challenged it, you claimed I didn't read the rules. I take umbrage at that. YOU didn't read all the rules. If you wanted to specify melee flanking sneak attacks, then you should have said so. Instead you made a blanket statement about flasks that turned out to be wrong (you can't sneak attack with a flask of acid because it doesn't flank). BTW, what if I can't deny an enemy's Dex bonus? That's what Bluff+Improved Feint is for (and with the right PrC ) you can do this with a full attack action. Failing that you can hide. And spend an addition second to cast true-stike? One cast, one weapon It's not important. Usually fighter use they're most usefull weapons. Taking it away is more than a good result for the party It's a pity I cannot show you a such rogue in game I've SEEN such rogues in a game. They generally suck. Whips are not a strong weapon...and btw, truestrike is one cast, one weapon, on your next attack [i]if it is made before the end of your next round. If the fighter hits, moves out of range (or both which I've shown is possible), sunder's the whip, disarms the rogue (both things any fighter can do without feats since the whip doesn't threaten) then the rogue is S.O.L. At worst the fighter is out his primary weapon and is completely unhurt. That are incredibly less than the benefit Not really. That's what this entire thread has been about. Situationally that may change but no, not in the general case. You use your rogue like a normal rogue until 10th level. Leveling to 11th and 12th you put 15 skill point to UMD and take "Skill focus(UMD)" You'll be like another rogue with -2 to skill check but when: - Fighting against an immune to sneak enemy I can fight to deliver something like 5-15 damage each succesfully attack (that can be less than once every round), I won't be so usefull nor effective for this encounter Or I can take some scroll/wands to buff my party members so that they can be more usefull or they do not waste their time casting buffing spells I can do the same thing with normal items (i.e. weapons) especially those that do energy damage. Rogues suck against things that are immune from sneak attack, and I don't see how UMD changes this much. Item based buffs suck and are easily dispelled...and the whole point of buffs is that it's not worth casting them in combat (and item based buffs also have minimum durations). - A character is very in hurry of heal (dying) We all know that curing during combat isn't efficent, but every now and then it happens. Having a rogue that will stabilize the character so that the cleric can continue the fight very good. And wands are more economical than potions Situational. Again, read the rest of this thread. ANY character with a level of bard, ranger, paladin, cleric, druid (just to stay core for the moment) will have the ability to use cure wands....and for emergencies such as this by 12th freaking level, everyone should have a couple of 25gp cure minor wounds potions at the very least. Point is that healing a dying character is really not an issue....or at least not enough to justify the cost you are paying. - An enemy with very high AC (27 for instance) The rogue is going to miss 30-40% of the times with his primary attack. With a simple "touch attack spell" you can flank your opponent and nearly auto-hit it for a full sneak attack damage If the enemy has a high AC (and 27 is NOT high for 12th level), there is a good chance they at least resist sneak attack as well. Besides, as I said before, a rogue can get sneak attack other ways than just a wand...and don't tell me this hypothetical rogue hasn't had to deal with high AC enemies until this point. The same tactics that worked at lower levels should work again more or less (and ultimately be a lot more cost effective). - A massive short time damage needed The rogue can help the wizard using a wand of fireball or a wand of scorching ray or the like, to speed up the process You only get the sneak damage once and wands are always made to do minimal damage. 4d6 at 12th level.....in an energy type that's the easiest to resist AND splashes against even the slightest SR (not uncommon at level 12). Yeah, that's the ticket. - Flask cost more than wands 50 flask of alchemist fire cost 625 golds more and deal only 1,5 more average damage than a single wand of "ray of frost", without considering the weight and the action you need to take them from your backpack each one you want to use... and you cannot flank with flask. Every good rogue know that once the flat-footed status finish, the 75% of sneaks are done with flanking Everything you can make with a flask can be made with a 375 gp wand of ray of frost (0 level spell) or acid splash (0 level spell). 1d3 damage instead of 1d6 doesn't really matter when there are 9d6 of sneak damage My rogue with a ring of invisibility and/or ring of blinking begs to differ with you (esp when combined with a ring of camouflag). You won't be good at casting like a caster You will have -2 to skill in respect of another similar rogue But you will have a variety of opportunities that a normal rogue won't have For all this reason I think that a rougue, once he gain 11 and 12 level he can maximize the UMD, gaining more advantages than the things he lose Which as I pointed out aren't worth the opportunity costs. CAN you make use of UMD after making this sacrifice? Sure. Is it worth it? No. That's especially true since you could take a level of CLERIC with the magic domain and do virtually everyting you are talking about and only be down minus one on some of your rogue skills (and not even all of them since the cleric gets at least a couple skill points). The rogue that takes a level of cleric can do everything you just said, pays less for it, and actually gets some additional benefits as well. -Polaris |
| Leilond07-10-07, 09:51 AM | Ok, I give up You think that a 15th level rogue without UMD maximized is worse than a 15th level rogue with UMD maximized I think it is a perfectly and effective build I don't want to go one-o-one fight, we monopolized the thread |
| Votan07-10-07, 10:34 AM | Ok, I give up You think that a 15th level rogue without UMD maximized is worse than a 15th level rogue with UMD maximized I think it is a perfectly and effective build I don't want to go one-o-one fight, we monopolized the thread I think the argument is more complex. Of course, if Rogue one has 18 ranks of UMD and rogue two has 18 ranks of Profession (Farmer) then rogue one is better. This is true even if the first rogue only uses his UMD skill once every 10 encounters. What I think that people are worried about is: 1) Low levels (UMD has too high of a failure chance at these levels) 2) Opportunity cost 3) Multi-classing being easier The second, where feats and gold are invested in making UMD effective is the real concern. It's not that a wand of true strike and a whip can't be useful (they can) but that they require work to make effective. Now, if you have a theme for the rogue that requires this then you can do this and make it other than a complete disaster. But it takes work. In my experience, a rogue using magic is a cool archetype but it is always more powerful to multi-class with warlock or wizard (daggerspell mage coupled with able learner and arcane trickster) then to rely on UMD. One level of cleric with the magic domain and the vast majority of wands no longer require effect to activate. Four levels of Warlock and UMD is much better as an option (and, if you are going to use low level magical powers to enhance your rogue then warlock is the best class for that). And a rogueish archmeage is just fun . . . |
| Leilond07-10-07, 10:48 AM | I think the argument is more complex. Of course, if Rogue one has 18 ranks of UMD and rogue two has 18 ranks of Profession (Farmer) then rogue one is better. This is true even if the first rogue only uses his UMD skill once every 10 encounters. What I think that people are worried about is: 1) Low levels (UMD has too high of a failure chance at these levels) You don't need to put point in UMD during low levels. Rogue has enought skill point per level to maximize any class skill with two level up. If you want to maximize the UMD at 12th level, you need to use skill point only when you level up from 10 to 12 2) Opportunity cost I think it worth it 3) Multi-classing being easier Multi-classing isn't an issue, if my character concept doesn't comprend it. If I want to play a rogue, why have I to be a worlock? What if my character concept do not comprend any spell casting abilities? The second, where feats and gold are invested in making UMD effective is the real concern. It's not that a wand of true strike and a whip can't be useful (they can) but that they require work to make effective. I don't see this "work" you're talking about. I think a 12th level character can spend 750 gp for 50 free disarming attempt (and you can disarm a lot of things, remember the "grab item rule") Now, if you have a theme for the rogue that requires this then you can do this and make it other than a complete disaster. But it takes work. In my experience, a rogue using magic is a cool archetype but it is always more powerful to multi-class with warlock or wizard (daggerspell mage coupled with able learner and arcane trickster) then to rely on UMD. One level of cleric with the magic domain and the vast majority of wands no longer require effect to activate. Four levels of Warlock and UMD is much better as an option (and, if you are going to use low level magical powers to enhance your rogue then warlock is the best class for that). And a rogueish archmeage is just fun . . . Multiclassing to wizard doesn't work, because you cannot use divine spell. Mutliclassing in warlock doesn't work four level of warlock will cost me nearly the same skill points amount I need to maximize UMD and make me lose some rogue abilities. Multiclassing in cleric can be totally out of the character concept and it hard sound metagaming. It's like "take a single level in barbarian to gain 3m of movement"... it's a very bad way to play this game I think What If "casting spell" isn't part of the character concept I've in mind? What if I don't want to play a rogue? No, the question is If you're playing a pure rogue, does it worth to maximize UMD? Pheraps I need that 4 level you call me to be used in warlock for some other PrC, or to take some "fighter level" or anything else fit my character concept The issue here is: does it worth to put 15 skill point into UMD instead of putting 2 skill point in the usual 8 usual rogue skill? A well designed rogue (human, intelligence 12) have 10 skill points per level, that means you will have "5 skill maximized -1" and "5 skill maximized -2"... I think it is really a low price to pay to have the power of using any wand and any 1st level scroll without the need to multiclass. With some more points, that means "10 skills maximized - 2" (20 skill points) this rogue can use without fear 3rd level spell scrolls and probably more What's the difference, at 15th level, between a total "+24 move silently modifier" from a "+22 move silently modfier"? Are you saying that it is so terrible? That being able to use any wand and low level scroll, plus any item out there that no one can use at all doesn't worth this little "gift"? I think it worth it |
| tui07-10-07, 12:10 PM | Those Ranger spells are very nice, and having a Wand or Scroll of them would be amazing; by himself, the Ranger can't use those spells very often. The problem is, you can't guarantee access. Very good point. 1. There are better ways to take advantage of UMD without being a rogue (Artificer, Warlock, etc). Don't forget, this is a mostly-core campaign, where players are trying to play a "classic game", so Artificer and Warlock may well be off-limits... Mechanically, probably the best non-UMD core way to get access to most items would be the 1-level dip into Cleric with the Magic domain (which I believe you were the first to suggest)... But some people have issues with short dips into other classes. In fact, I suspect that's the case with this particular party, since all the characters have a single core class. Also, many players have problems with a Cleric dip for RP reasons. |
| tui07-10-07, 12:21 PM | The issue here is: does it worth to put 15 skill point into UMD instead of putting 2 skill point in the usual 8 usual rogue skill? I agree with this.. I don't think it is a waste for the Rogue to put the skill points there... especially in this campaign where there's another Rogue to cover some of the usual Rogue skills. I think the particular question needing an answer is whether the use of consumables by a Rogue is an optimal use of character (or party) resources. I'm not sure what it would take to demonstrate this one way or the other. We've been debating without resolution whether it is worth trying to use UMD at levels when it isn't a sure thing... I think this comes down to player preference, and isn't something that's ever going to be settled here. |
| Ace_of_time07-10-07, 05:47 PM | Well, Ace, what they're griping about is when I place items I know only the UMD Rogue can use, like a Scroll of Reincarnate. Which the Cleric deduced they would probably never have found if they didn't have a UMD user, and it would have been a Scroll of Raise Dead or something instead. I don't do this too often, but I try to make sure the occasional useful item appears for the characters. I prefer found treasure over buying and selling items. I'd been advised to go purely random, so far....the results have been interesting, to say the least, but there's been almost no UMD fodder in the past two sessions. And you could have pointed out that even if it was a RD scroll the rogue could still use it. I can tell you now their point is not right. He could use any magic item give to them. If anything you were placing item that they could use, because the UMD skill doesn't really care if it is RD or Reincarnate, only that what spell level it is. I think you should sit down with the one that have a problem with the way you give out items and explain to them that no matter which item you give the group the rogue could still use it. That the player is not causing problems with the UMD skill. And that it is unfair to get mad at you when the group decides who get what item. (in most game any) To me I have not seen any where where you did something wrong. You could just act like you're rolling for random and just pick one you like off the list and they will never know. But they should know that you pick item that they can use Most of the time because the rogue can use any of them. If the rogue player isn't really doing anything wrong I don't see punishing him because the rest of the group wants more stuff. |
| Ace_of_time07-10-07, 05:58 PM | That's fine, but as the old saying goes, "If you want to fix your TV properly, call a TV repairman." Likewise, if you want to get the most from UMD, use a class (or PrC) that is suited for it. No one has ever said that UMD could be useful. What I am strongly questioning is if it in fact is worth the opportunity cost. In a large set of cases and parties, that answer seems to be "no". Even a four person party is likely to have a cleric and a wizard, a rogue type, and a fighter type (or varients thereof), but for non-casters multiclassing is both easy and encouraged....so the non-casters could easily have a level of ranger, paladin, or even bard between them. Also the clerical domains will add to available spells on class spell lists (and thus items). What I am driving at, is that it seems like the ability to use ANY item with UMD isn't that great when a typical party should be able to use most items anyway between them (and for no chance of failure at that). -Polaris I have been skiping past these because they are pointless but had to post on this one. It is a rogue skill. Rogues were the only one that could do it and since the OP said core only books is the only one. You are still posting off topic. The thread was about a rogue (and whether UMD was useful to them) and not about spellcasters and the like. I say I will not fight about spellcaster and then you bring up spell casting class that are not spell casters. Just because you don't like a build doesn't mean that it isn't useful. |
| Polaris07-10-07, 06:57 PM | I have been skiping past these because they are pointless but had to post on this one. It is a rogue skill. Rogues were the only one that could do it and since the OP said core only books is the only one. You are still posting off topic. The thread was about a rogue (and whether UMD was useful to them) and not about spellcasters and the like. I say I will not fight about spellcaster and then you bring up spell casting class that are not spell casters. Just because you don't like a build doesn't mean that it isn't useful. Now that's not true even in strict core rules. UMD is a bard class skill as well, and exclusive skills are a thing of the past, so a sorcerer is probably at least as good as a rogue using UMD even cross class (because of the vastly higher Cha score a sorcerer will have), and heck a bard is better at UMD than a rogue (again because of charisma). Heck, going core only, the Sorcerer with a level of bard or rogue is probably the best UMD user if that's what matters to you. And you could have pointed out that even if it was a RD scroll the rogue could still use it. I can tell you now their point is not right. He could use any magic item give to them. If anything you were placing item that they could use, because the UMD skill doesn't really care if it is RD or Reincarnate, only that what spell level it is. Again you are missing the point. UMD is only really useful if the DM allows it to be. Sure the UMD rogue can use a RD scroll but the cleric can use the RD scroll with no chance of failure. The same applies to most other magical items as well. UMD is really only useful if other party members either can't or won't efficiently use magic items suited to their class(es). -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-10-07, 07:22 PM | Now that's not true even in strict core rules. UMD is a bard class skill as well, and exclusive skills are a thing of the past, so a sorcerer is probably at least as good as a rogue using UMD even cross class (because of the vastly higher Cha score a sorcerer will have), and heck a bard is better at UMD than a rogue (again because of charisma). Heck, going core only, the Sorcerer with a level of bard or rogue is probably the best UMD user if that's what matters to you. Again you are missing the point. UMD is only really useful if the DM allows it to be. Sure the UMD rogue can use a RD scroll but the cleric can use the RD scroll with no chance of failure. The same applies to most other magical items as well. UMD is really only useful if other party members either can't or won't efficiently use magic items suited to their class(es). -Polaris Again with the spellcaster. Ok . Are you saying the bard could have more ranks on UMD skill then a rogue could give both max the skill out? No I'm not missing the point. If the players did not want him to use UMD all they would have to do is sell off everything they couldn't use and give him the splint of the money. Or just don't give him any magic item that he would need to use UMD for. Ether way it is not the DMs fault. |
| Polaris07-10-07, 07:29 PM | Again with the spellcaster. Ok . Are you saying the bard could have more ranks on UMD skill then a rogue could give both max the skill out? The bard will have the same number of ranks as the rogue if both max out AND the bard will have the better charisma. Since it's the total skill modifier that matters (not the skill ranks), that makes the bard better at UMD. No I'm not missing the point. If the players did not want him to use UMD all they would have to do is sell off everything they couldn't use and give him the splint of the money. Or just don't give him any magic item that he would need to use UMD for. Ether way it is not the DMs fault. Yes you are. The DM felt compelled (if I am reading what Metafictional is saying correctly) to throw a non-standard item in just to give the UMD rogue something to do. That certainly is the 'fault' of the DM if you want to call it that. Certainly if an ability relies on the DM forbearence to work well, then it's probably a weak mechanic. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-10-07, 08:11 PM | The bard will have the same number of ranks as the rogue if both max out AND the bard will have the better charisma. Since it's the total skill modifier that matters (not the skill ranks), that makes the bard better at UMD. Yes you are. The DM felt compelled (if I am reading what Metafictional is saying correctly) to throw a non-standard item in just to give the UMD rogue something to do. That certainly is the 'fault' of the DM if you want to call it that. Certainly if an ability relies on the DM forbearence to work well, then it's probably a weak mechanic. -Polaris No it doesn't make him better at using the skill but at least you found one that cast spell and has UMD so that's a start. We were talking about the same person choosing bard over rogue as a UMD. Now he does have less things to use UMD on but that is not part of UMD and wouldn't count for use of UMD. Now most Bards only put 14 on cha because they only need 16 for class spells. And since i already said that may rogue UMD user would have 14 on cha both would start out with the same and would add to cha the same on level up. Now skill ranks are how well you are at a skill and ability mods are raw talent for the skill. As for spell casters being able to cast does not make you better at using UMD. And that would be less points you would be able to use and if you didn't keep levels in check again you would get a XP penalty. Note: that we were going rogue for the Sneak attack damage as well. Multi classing also limits this. So to sum this up Bards my get high cha ( you say) but a rogue get SA on his so I say rogue is still better at UMD. Now there are a number of things wrong with this 2nd statement. He said that is what they thought and wasn't really sure if he was. They didn't have to give him the scroll chose to because they couldn't use it. (their fault) The person it was used on that start the whole thing didn't have to come back at all he chose to so that is his fault because he could have rolled a new PC. ( yes it would have taken longer) All he did was give them items it is up to the group to decide who gets to use what. Any ability in the PHB require the DM to let it work that why he is there. |
| Polaris07-10-07, 08:21 PM | No it doesn't make him better at using the skill but at least you found one that cast spell and has UMD so that's a start. We were talking about the same person choosing bard over rogue as a UMD. Now he does have less things to use UMD on but that is not part of UMD and wouldn't count for use of UMD. Now most Bards only put 14 on cha because they only need 16 for class spells. And since i already said that may rogue UMD user would have 14 on cha both would start out with the same and would add to cha the same on level up. Actually it does. The bard has direct incentive to put a reasonably high stat into charisma since most of his class abilities are powered by it (not just spells, but bardic songs as well). The rogue doesn't have nearly as much incentive to invest in charisma. Ergo, the Bard will have (in general) a better charisma than the rogue and thus will be marginally better at UMD. This shouldn't be disputed and really isn't all that remarkable a statement. Now skill ranks are how well you are at a skill and ability mods are raw talent for the skill. As for spell casters being able to cast does not make you better at using UMD. And that would be less points you would be able to use and if you didn't keep levels in check again you would get a XP penalty. Note: that we were going rogue for the Sneak attack damage as well. Multi classing also limits this. 1. For UMD, skill ranks don't matter (as long as you have at least one). The total skill modifier does. This isn't so for all skills, but is true for UMD. 2. Ergo, the bard is better at UMD because his charisma will (in general) be better than the rogues because he needs it more. So to sum this up Bards my get high cha ( you say) but a rogue get SA on his so I say rogue is still better at UMD. What does sneak attack have to do with UMD? Now there are a number of things wrong with this 2nd statement. He said that is what they thought and wasn't really sure if he was. They didn't have to give him the scroll chose to because they couldn't use it. (their fault) The person it was used on that start the whole thing didn't have to come back at all he chose to so that is his fault because he could have rolled a new PC. ( yes it would have taken longer) All he did was give them items it is up to the group to decide who gets to use what. Any ability in the PHB require the DM to let it work that why he is there. If the DM is tossing bones at a party to make a partymember's pet mechanic feel useful, then there is probably something wrong with the mechanic. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-10-07, 08:38 PM | Actually it does. The bard has direct incentive to put a reasonably high stat into charisma since most of his class abilities are powered by it (not just spells, but bardic songs as well). The rogue doesn't have nearly as much incentive to invest in charisma. Ergo, the Bard will have (in general) a better charisma than the rogue and thus will be marginally better at UMD. This shouldn't be disputed and really isn't all that remarkable a statement. 1. For UMD, skill ranks don't matter (as long as you have at least one). The total skill modifier does. This isn't so for all skills, but is true for UMD. 2. Ergo, the bard is better at UMD because his charisma will (in general) be better than the rogues because he needs it more. What does sneak attack have to do with UMD? If the DM is tossing bones at a party to make a partymember's pet mechanic feel useful, then there is probably something wrong with the mechanic. -Polaris Because after using UMD on the wand you cast, in the right times, you would add your Sneak attack on to the damage of the spell. Thats +10d6 at 2oth level. And that only puts him better at UMD. The bards cha mod would be higher then +2 more then the rogue and doesn't make up for Sneak attack. |
| Polaris07-10-07, 08:45 PM | Because after using UMD on the wand you cast, in the right times, you would add your Sneak attack on to the damage of the spell. Thats +10d6 at 2oth level. And that only puts him better at UMD. The bards cha mod would be higher then +2 more then the rogue and doesn't make up for Sneak attack. An Arcane Trickster, or an assassin (or both!) does this better with more dice in sneak attack (potentially at least) and they don't need to use the UMD skill at all to pull it off. For that matter a rogue that takes one level of cleric with the magic domain can do the same. Sneak attack doesn't make your argument. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-10-07, 09:01 PM | An Arcane Trickster, or an assassin (or both!) does this better with more dice in sneak attack (potentially at least) and they don't need to use the UMD skill at all to pull it off. For that matter a rogue that takes one level of cleric with the magic domain can do the same. Sneak attack doesn't make your argument. -Polaris WOW! Never thought that some one would use rogue based pros to get there point acrossed. Yes sneak att does. It gives the spell you use SA damage for damging spells and wand strike feat. Using pros that require rogue to get will not prove your point. Oh and Acr trickster requires spell casting along with sneak Att and would cost XP and sneak Att damage. |
| angryscrub07-10-07, 09:41 PM | BZZT! WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. 1. The PHB rules always trump the SRD when there is a conflict between the two. did you actually read the relevant sections in the SRD and the PHB before posting? because they do not contradict each other. they both say exactly what i said. 2. The PHB explicitly states in page 85 that in order to use a scroll, you have to have a high score in the appropriate ability, and explicitly states that wisdom is the appropriate ability for all divine scrolls. Edit: Since UMD allows the rogue to 'break' the normal rules regarding item usage, we have to refer to the UMD rules first before looking at general item usage. The appropriate ability for divine scrolls is wisdom for UMD even if it might not be for some classes (like favored soul). sigh. read it again. what you say is the case ONLY IF you have to emulate an ability score. it is a case of a more specific instance over ruling a more general. if your ability score is high enough, it never comes into play. the section on using UMD to use a scroll has a crystal clear if/then statement. if you live according to hoyle, you must die according to hoyle. read it again. both the PHB and the SRD are very simply phrased. if you successfully make a UMD check, you are able to use the scroll as if you had that spell on your class spell list. it's right there in black and white. then, if your ability score isn't high enough, you must make a separate check, using the rules for emulate an ability UMD check. but if you are a bard with a 19 cha, and a scroll of wish, and you successfully make the first roll, you are able to use that scroll as if wish was on your class spell list. bards require a cha score of 10 + spell level to cast a spell on their spell list. that 19 cha means you go no further, you cast the spell from the scroll. read it again. you can not apply the more specific case to the general. that is not how this game, or any game for that matter, works. the emulate an ability UMD description explicitly contradicts how the use a scroll action works, and is most definitely only applicable in specific cases. End of Discussion. hardly that. if you want to argue according to hoyle, you have to be willing to accept all the sillyness that entails. the more i look at the skill description, the more obvious it becomes that it had to be written by a retarded monkey that had a brain aneurysm and fell out of his tree onto a convenient nearby typewriter. not exactly shakespeare. -Polaris Edit PS: "Market Price" means "Fair Market Value", i.e. what something should be worth. It does not guarantee that the item is in fact for sale. hrmm, never claimed that anything was guaranteed to be for sale. but if you are claiming that any wands at all are available for sale, by someone that didn't actually make them, then used wands must also be available for sale, somewhere. if, on the other hand, you are claiming that the only wands available for sale are being sold by the actual crafter, you might have a semivalid interpretation, though that would eliminate the party being able to sell used wands. because, if they can, then quite obviously said used wands would be available for sale by whomever bought them. |
| Polaris07-11-07, 01:09 AM | did you actually read the relevant sections in the SRD and the PHB before posting? because they do not contradict each other. they both say exactly what i said. Actually they do. Read them carefully. sigh. read it again. what you say is the case ONLY IF you have to emulate an ability score. it is a case of a more specific instance over ruling a more general. if your ability score is high enough, it never comes into play. the section on using UMD to use a scroll has a crystal clear if/then statement. Right and UNDER the section for emulating an ability score, the UMD skill description explicitly states when you have to emulate an ability score. Specifically if you don't have the required intelligence for wizard spells, charisma for sorcerer or bard spells, or wisdom for divine spells. It's very explicit. if you live according to hoyle, you must die according to hoyle. read it again. both the PHB and the SRD are very simply phrased. if you successfully make a UMD check, you are able to use the scroll as if you had that spell on your class spell list. it's right there in black and white. then, if your ability score isn't high enough, you must make a separate check, using the rules for emulate an ability UMD check. It doesn't mean you get to redefine your class as "Favored Soul". It means that IF you make the roll, the spell on the scroll in on a 'psuedo' class list just for you. Your actual class doesn't change. You then check to see if you have to emulate an ability score. If it's a divine scroll, then WISDOM is the ability you need to check. The rule under UMD is quite clear and I am going 'Rules According to Hoyle'. You are interpreting the phrase to mean, "I get to pick a class spell list to simulate" but that is not what the skill description says. Read it again. but if you are a bard with a 19 cha, and a scroll of wish, and you successfully make the first roll, you are able to use that scroll as if wish was on your class spell list. bards require a cha score of 10 + spell level to cast a spell on their spell list. that 19 cha means you go no further, you cast the spell from the scroll. Yes, but wish is on the sorcerer list which means you are explicitly allowed to use charisma. Nice try though. read it again. you can not apply the more specific case to the general. that is not how this game, or any game for that matter, works. the emulate an ability UMD description explicitly contradicts how the use a scroll action works, and is most definitely only applicable in specific cases. No it doesn't. You are reading stuff into the UMD scroll use description that isn't there. hardly that. if you want to argue according to hoyle, you have to be willing to accept all the sillyness that entails. the more i look at the skill description, the more obvious it becomes that it had to be written by a retarded monkey that had a brain aneurysm and fell out of his tree onto a convenient nearby typewriter. not exactly shakespeare. Be that as it may, it has never been errataed. Enough said. -Polaris |
| Polaris07-11-07, 01:13 AM | WOW! Never thought that some one would use rogue based pros to get there point acrossed. Yes sneak att does. It gives the spell you use SA damage for damging spells and wand strike feat. Using pros that require rogue to get will not prove your point. Oh and Acr trickster requires spell casting along with sneak Att and would cost XP and sneak Att damage. I don't require pros to make my point. It only illustrates what I've been saying all along. A rogue with one level of cleric with the magic domain can do everything you want with sneak-attackable wands and still have full sneak attack. Assassins get full sneak attack (and they are core) and can certainly use many sneak-attackable items. Yes arcane-tricksters require five levels of wizard (cast third level arcane spells), but it's easy to get 2d6 sneak attack for two non-casting levels which makes up part of the lack....and the PrC gets the full sneak progression AND you can stack further classes that give sneak attack on top of that. Mind you, Arcane trickster is a pretty weak PrC, but the point is that there are lots of ways to use items for sneak attack damage including spell completion and spell trigger items with nary a rank in UMD. -Polaris |
| Leilond07-11-07, 06:21 AM | I don't require pros to make my point. It only illustrates what I've been saying all along. A rogue with one level of cleric with the magic domain can do everything you want with sneak-attackable wands and still have full sneak attack. That's sure, but my character concept do not comprend, for example, the cleric class. Why my character have to pray for an hour each morning to a god or alignement essence? What if I don't want to play a cleric? No one will say that taking that multiclass level won't be more effective. The question isn't that. The question is "without multiclassing, because I don't want to, does it worth to put 15 points in UMD" for my rogue? Assassins get full sneak attack (and they are core) and can certainly use many sneak-attackable items. Assassin must be evil, and pheraps the rogue don't want to play an assassin at all Yes arcane-tricksters require five levels of wizard (cast third level arcane spells), but it's easy to get 2d6 sneak attack for two non-casting levels which makes up part of the lack....and the PrC gets the full sneak progression AND you can stack further classes that give sneak attack on top of that. Losing 20 skill points for those 5 wizard level instead of rogue level, plus some rogue abilities (not only sneak attack) that make my "rogue" less a "rogue"... and going out the character concept, that wasn't a "rogue/wizard/arcane-trickster"... it was a "rogue" Mind you, Arcane trickster is a pretty weak PrC, but the point is that there are lots of ways to use items for sneak attack damage including spell completion and spell trigger items with nary a rank in UMD. -Polaris But the issue is: If I play a rogue without multiclassing, does it worth to put 15 skill point in UMD? You know, sometimes there are players that have a character concept in mind that do not comprend any spell casting ability. I think that spending 15 points with UMD at 11th and 12th level is little price to pay for the benefit you obtain, while taking some level in a caster class will make me change my character concept, that is the highest price out there Without considering that in this specific situation, the original poster talked about a party where there is another rogue, that can perform some of the "rogue specific" issue. In this situation, for instance, the "other rogue" can maximize "disable device" and "open locks" while the UMD rogue can totally ignore those two skills |
| Ace_of_time07-11-07, 07:26 AM | That's sure, but my character concept do not comprend, for example, the cleric class. Why my character have to pray for an hour each morning to a god or alignement essence? What if I don't want to play a cleric? No one will say that taking that multiclass level won't be more effective. The question isn't that. The question is "without multiclassing, because I don't want to, does it worth to put 15 points in UMD" for my rogue? Assassin must be evil, and pheraps the rogue don't want to play an assassin at all Losing 20 skill points for those 5 wizard level instead of rogue level, plus some rogue abilities (not only sneak attack) that make my "rogue" less a "rogue"... and going out the character concept, that wasn't a "rogue/wizard/arcane-trickster"... it was a "rogue" But the issue is: If I play a rogue without multiclassing, does it worth to put 15 skill point in UMD? You know, sometimes there are players that have a character concept in mind that do not comprend any spell casting ability. I think that spending 15 points with UMD at 11th and 12th level is little price to pay for the benefit you obtain, while taking some level in a caster class will make me change my character concept, that is the highest price out there Without considering that in this specific situation, the original poster talked about a party where there is another rogue, that can perform some of the "rogue specific" issue. In this situation, for instance, the "other rogue" can maximize "disable device" and "open locks" while the UMD rogue can totally ignore those two skills This is right, and I would only add Again for the hundredth time. You would get a XP penalty for that one level. |
| Leilond07-11-07, 07:46 AM | This is right, and I would only add Again for the hundredth time. You would get a XP penalty for that one level. Well... not if you're human, but yes, that can be another reason (if those I expressed aren't enought) to not do it And also human can have that XP problem, if for example I need two or 3 fighter level to fit my character concept |
| Votan07-11-07, 09:30 AM | You don't need to put point in UMD during low levels. Rogue has enought skill point per level to maximize any class skill with two level up. If you want to maximize the UMD at 12th level, you need to use skill point only when you level up from 10 to 12 This is one way to do it. I tend to think that the spells available at these levels via wonds aren't that impressive and the only other use that I see being common is for powerful one shot items (scroll of True Resurrection). But I can support this as a rational approach even if I'd have a lot of trouble doing it myself. No, the question is If you're playing a pure rogue, does it worth to maximize UMD? Pheraps I need that 4 level you call me to be used in warlock for some other PrC, or to take some "fighter level" or anything else fit my character concept The issue here is: does it worth to put 15 skill point into UMD instead of putting 2 skill point in the usual 8 usual rogue skill? A well designed rogue (human, intelligence 12) have 10 skill points per level, that means you will have "5 skill maximized -1" and "5 skill maximized -2"... I think it is really a low price to pay to have the power of using any wand and any 1st level scroll without the need to multiclass. With some more points, that means "10 skills maximized - 2" (20 skill points) this rogue can use without fear 3rd level spell scrolls and probably more What's the difference, at 15th level, between a total "+24 move silently modifier" from a "+22 move silently modfier"? Are you saying that it is so terrible? That being able to use any wand and low level scroll, plus any item out there that no one can use at all doesn't worth this little "gift"? I think it worth it I wonder if the one level of cleric with the magic domain might not be fewer skill points (-6 instead of -15) and do almost the same plus boost saving throws. But, frankly, this does depend a lot on character concept and the ability of the character to multi-class. Still, at least this approach has the benefit of being a logical approach, giving a clear pay-off and having a reasonably fixed pay-off. By the time that it happens you'll also have a sound idea of how available wands are as well. |
| Leilond07-11-07, 09:40 AM | I wonder if the one level of cleric with the magic domain might not be fewer skill points (-6 instead of -15) and do almost the same plus boost saving throws. But, frankly, this does depend a lot on character concept and the ability of the character to multi-class. Still, at least this approach has the benefit of being a logical approach, giving a clear pay-off and having a reasonably fixed pay-off. By the time that it happens you'll also have a sound idea of how available wands are as well. Reply With Quote Exactly. If I need 2 fighter level form my character concept because I need 2 more feat to qualify for the PRC that perfectly feet my character concept? Taking that level in cleric will mean -20% XP for the rest of my character life! And what If my character isn't human? That level will be 20% XP loss anyway, no matter if I need another class or not. I've to sacrifice 20% XP for all my character life only to save me 9 skill points? (I save the 15 UMD points, but I take 6 less for leveling in cleric instead of rogue) I think that 20% XP worth really more than 9 skill points |
| tui07-11-07, 11:01 AM | I think some of the confusion/frustration in this argument is because two totally different things are being argued at the same time. Polaris seems to be mostly arguing (lately, at least) that Rogue isn't the optimal choice for UMD, and not saying so much about why Rogues specifically shouldn't invest in UMD. I think Leilond and Ace are saying the UMD is a good skill for Rogues, and don't particularly care if there are more optimal UMD character choices. Just thought I'd point that out. |
| Leilond07-11-07, 11:06 AM | Well... pheraps... I'm IT and Polaris is OT :P The open poser asked if is a good choice for his rogue to put some point into UMD. He didn't asked the who is the best UMD character. The thread isn't a discussion on "the better UMD user"; the thread is (or pheraps now WAS) a discussion on the rogue and UMD If I want to make a UMD based character since the beginning, pheraps I will make some the choices suggested. But if, like the open poster say, I have a rogue, there's another rogue in the party, it's a "core" based campaign, the rogue player doesn't inted to multiclass and ask: do you think is good to "waste" some points to UMD? YES is my answer. |
| Ace_of_time07-11-07, 06:18 PM | I think some of the confusion/frustration in this argument is because two totally different things are being argued at the same time. Polaris seems to be mostly arguing (lately, at least) that Rogue isn't the optimal choice for UMD, and not saying so much about why Rogues specifically shouldn't invest in UMD. I think Leilond and Ace are saying the UMD is a good skill for Rogues, and don't particularly care if there are more optimal UMD character choices. Just thought I'd point that out. I had go through 2-5 pages to find this and it was hard because it was about the same time the UMD DC fight happened. [QUOTE=Ace_of_time;12879237]1st level you get 8 times 4 with no int mod. thats 32 (36) MS, Hide, Listen, spot, search, UMD at 4 ranks takes 24. That still leaves you 8 points for other thing. 8 (9) points per level minus 6 to keep everything at max rank leaves 2 point for everything else. So at 6th level gives you 9+3 for ability gives 12 for bex skills and 10 for wis and int. You are forgetting a few things such as: Bluff (if you are investing in Cha, you want this) Diplomacy Sense Motive SEARCH!!!!!!! This is the signature skill of any rogue worthy the name. Disable Device Open lock. You were saying about copious skill points? Most of these need maximal ranks to be effective. No it doesn't say that. It says that a spell trigger item requires special spell knowledge and a spoken word. Obviously if you don't know the word (which you wouldn't without the spell knowledge), then you have to activate it blindly using the skill precisely as written. -Polaris He says that since you need max on these just to be a rogue that Plus listen and spot that you are wasting the points. Also he started the who is the best UMD user to prove that it is a wasted skill for rogue. His best one so for was bard but the rogue would still get SA. So then he decided to try to find a build rogue so as not to stay all rogue for 20 levels. Which doesn't even prove his point of something else be better at UMD since he still has to go rogue and buy UMD ranks, which he already posted was a waste because he wouldn't build it that way. If you read from the start and come back to here you will see better what's being said. I already pointed out going human to get the ranks in UMD and not even having to use rogue SP for it and also get the two feats that I said would help use the skill at low levels. |
| Polaris07-11-07, 06:31 PM | Ace-of-Time, What I said and I have always said was that UMD was probably suboptimal for a rogue and that if you really wanted to be a superb item user, there were easier and better approaches to take....and if you wanted to be a solid rogue, the cost didn't seem to be worth the payoff. Given how the thread has progressed, overall, I'd say I've done a fairly solid job at showing both. -Polaris |
| Metafictional07-11-07, 07:09 PM | Actually, I think the Bard is a better UMD user than the Rogue because of the synergy bonus for Spellcraft to use scrolls (I'm pretty sure there is one), and it won't take 10 cross class ranks to get; plus, Bards use Spellcraft, so it's something they already want high. But Bards were better at using "written" magic items in 2E than Rogues anyways, so that's not really a big change. They're still not better than Warlocks or Artificers, which, while allowed in my game, are not core. And yes. The point of this thread was not to debunk UMD's effect, since obviously the skill works. The point is, with the limited uses a Rogue can get for it (ie, the number of spells the Rogue needs to "cast" from an item, as opposed to letting an actual caster use a spell), the availability of magic items in the campaign, and the fact that they have to sacrifice resources to get something less than the benefit other classes have (use items with no chance of failure), it seems like UMD is a high-cost/questionable impact Skill. I finally found a useful mechanic to compare UMD to. Consider Turn Undead. By itself, it requires a good Charisma to use, and a few skill points for a Synergy. It has a dubious impact on the game, since, at any CR, it's almost impossible for a Cleric to turn Undead of his level; they either have Turn Resistance handed out like candy, or twice the HD the Cleric does. Turn Undead is meant to be used in campaigns where you regularly encounter large numbers of lower HD Undead. Situational at best. To make Turn Undead useful, you must invest Feats to make it really shine, which is the same situation as Skill Focus-UMD and such. Where the analogy breaks down is the Cleric gets Turn Undead for free. Even if he doesn't bother to have high Cha, he can still get some use out of it. And some of the Feats to make Turn Undead useful don't give a hoot about your Turning Check. In fact, most of the best Feats based on Turn Undead don't, and they do things that can blow campaigns out of the water! UMD rarely gets cool advantages like that, and you still have to put skill points into it. So no, UMD isn't bad, IF it works for your game, and your character. But there is a significant opportunity cost if you want to try and use it at lower levels. And you may not know how useful it is at that point. At higher levels, all it's good for, mostly, are scrolls that the other casters don't want and low level spells in wands. I'm not saying you can't use a Staff, but most Staves should go to full casters if there are any... I don't think every Rogue needs to be a Cleric. I just think it's pretty bad that one level of Cleric can totally outshine the majority of what the UMD skill does. That's not balanced game design, IMO. That would be like saying 15 ranks in a skill were roughly analogous to having a spell list and a single special ability... Not sure if that's good or bad, thinking about it. |
| Ace_of_time07-11-07, 07:13 PM | But all I see is you saying that a UMD rogue is less affective then a reg rogue because he can use more magic items. We are not talking about any other builds besides rogue and I rogue using UMD and still keeping up his other skills should be more affective. Just because it is not optimal doesn't mean it is a bad build. |
| Polaris07-11-07, 07:21 PM | But all I see is you saying that a UMD rogue is less affective then a reg rogue because he can use more magic items. We are not talking about any other builds besides rogue and I rogue using UMD and still keeping up his other skills should be more affective. Just because it is not optimal doesn't mean it is a bad build. Yes we are in the sense that we need to examine the opportunity cost a rogue pays for UMD. If there are other ways (and other classes) that can do the same or virtually the same thing better and for less cost, that needs to be discussed. -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-11-07, 07:36 PM | Actually, I think the Bard is a better UMD user than the Rogue because of the synergy bonus for Spellcraft to use scrolls (I'm pretty sure there is one), and it won't take 10 cross class ranks to get; plus, Bards use Spellcraft, so it's something they already want high. But Bards were better at using "written" magic items in 2E than Rogues anyways, so that's not really a big change. They're still not better than Warlocks or Artificers, which, while allowed in my game, are not core. And yes. The point of this thread was not to debunk UMD's effect, since obviously the skill works. The point is, with the limited uses a Rogue can get for it (ie, the number of spells the Rogue needs to "cast" from an item, as opposed to letting an actual caster use a spell), the availability of magic items in the campaign, and the fact that they have to sacrifice resources to get something less than the benefit other classes have (use items with no chance of failure), it seems like UMD is a high-cost/questionable impact Skill. I finally found a useful mechanic to compare UMD to. Consider Turn Undead. By itself, it requires a good Charisma to use, and a few skill points for a Synergy. It has a dubious impact on the game, since, at any CR, it's almost impossible for a Cleric to turn Undead of his level; they either have Turn Resistance handed out like candy, or twice the HD the Cleric does. Turn Undead is meant to be used in campaigns where you regularly encounter large numbers of lower HD Undead. Situational at best. To make Turn Undead useful, you must invest Feats to make it really shine, which is the same situation as Skill Focus-UMD and such. Where the analogy breaks down is the Cleric gets Turn Undead for free. Even if he doesn't bother to have high Cha, he can still get some use out of it. And some of the Feats to make Turn Undead useful don't give a hoot about your Turning Check. In fact, most of the best Feats based on Turn Undead don't, and they do things that can blow campaigns out of the water! UMD rarely gets cool advantages like that, and you still have to put skill points into it. So no, UMD isn't bad, IF it works for your game, and your character. But there is a significant opportunity cost if you want to try and use it at lower levels. And you may not know how useful it is at that point. At higher levels, all it's good for, mostly, are scrolls that the other casters don't want and low level spells in wands. I'm not saying you can't use a Staff, but most Staves should go to full casters if there are any... I don't think every Rogue needs to be a Cleric. I just think it's pretty bad that one level of Cleric can totally outshine the majority of what the UMD skill does. That's not balanced game design, IMO. That would be like saying 15 ranks in a skill were roughly analogous to having a spell list and a single special ability... Not sure if that's good or bad, thinking about it. I do see your point but one level in Cleric doesn't make sense. Why would you even take one level in any class Roleplaying wise? Are you willing to take the XP penlaty at high CR's just to do that. Most players wouldn't. Low level spells used by rogue could be better for the spellcasters. That is one less person to worry about buffing. Since wand and most other magic items are made at min caster level and could be used by a rogue in boss fights and let the spellcasters cast their much better spells. My build for rogue lets him have spell craft as class skill and wouldn't cost extra. I'm not fighting about this any more because it would be up to the players if they wanted to use it. Note that external wand could be use by them to and they never run out of spells. Last thing what is "opportunity cost"? I have never heard this before. |
| Nom07-11-07, 08:00 PM | Last thing what is "opportunity cost"? I have never heard this before."By buying this, what am I not buying?". Personally, I think the opportunity cost of a rogue putting points into UMD is small. Worst case it costs 1/8 (12.5%) of your skill points. A rogue generally has enough points to be good at two things, so probably has enough to squeeze in UMD if he wants. But it's the rogue who is trying to be good at more than two things who benefits most from UMD, since the ability to haul in arbitrary 2nd line magic can be useful. |
| Ace_of_time07-11-07, 11:21 PM | So their trying to use math to tell me how to play a rogue best? Right? |
| Metafictional07-12-07, 12:37 AM | No no, I'm not telling you how to play a Rogue. I'm looking at it from a DM's perspective. If a player has a choice of taking an option, but the rewards are less than other options they can choose, that doesn't sound fair to me. I want to see UMD as something more valid, because from my perspective, it seems like a less useful trick than it should be. Yes, I realize, not every Rogue would want to be a Cleric. But those that do, and can justify it with their stories, are getting a much better deal than those that do not. If you played 3.0 at all, you may have heard of the "Ranger-Rogue". This was a common character decision, when someone realized that 3.0 Rangers were much stronger if they multiclassed as Rogues than simply remaining a pure Ranger. I'm not saying a Cleric 1/Rogue 19 is better than a Rogue 20. I am saying, however, a Cleric 1/Rogue 19 has a much better deal for his investment than even a master of Use Magic Device, because the few areas where UMD is superior to the Magic Domain do not often come into play. At high levels, no Rogue needs to have invested Feats to be good at UMD. It's only if you want to make use of the skill at low levels that it's such a problem. And honestly, I don't really like the idea of offering someone a prize "Look, you can use magic items!" but having it be little more than a carrot dangling from a string for several levels. So no, I am not using math to tell you how to play a Rogue. I'm just saying, the math seems to reward people who choose alternatives other than UMD. Now if in your campaign, UMD works fine, and this method is rewarding, excellent! I'm happy to hear it. But in my own game, I find UMD to be lacking somewhat. The same thing goes for tricks like True Strike + Whip = Disarm. I have seen campaigns where that would work. I have seen campaigns where trying something like that would make you very unhappy. Different playstyles, different DM's, and different enemies. It's all quite subjective, I'm afraid. |
| Ace_of_time07-12-07, 12:45 AM | I was talking about a Opt in general not you sorry? We play dragons in my Game and I'm posting it under the campaign side. Skill points aren't a problem for them. I let them have fun. If they want to use UMD I let them and show them how best to go about that using what they choose. I give items from what they people/monster would have with them. If the players can't use it then they sale it and buy something they can use. As long as they have fun I'm happy. When someone says a player is wrong and then says the math says so then me, loving math the way I do want to see this math for my self. If they say something math wise is better then show your work. This was meant for someone else not you. |
| Polaris07-12-07, 02:00 AM | I do see your point but one level in Cleric doesn't make sense. Why would you even take one level in any class Roleplaying wise? Are you willing to take the XP penlaty at high CR's just to do that. Most players wouldn't. Yes it does. Unless the player of the rogue is a goofball that literally doesn't plan beyond his next level, he should never take an XP penalty for multiclassing. A rogue can dip into one level of cleric with impunity if: 1. His favored class is rogue. In fact rogues have it good in that races whose favored class is rogue also generally tend to be good rogues (even single classed). This list includes (but is not limited to) Halfling, Goblin, and many others. 2. His favored class is cleric. Admittedly this is fairly rare, but it can happen. (The most notable examples are female dark elves and winged elves, but there are others). 3. He has no set favored class (human and half-elf). It's hard to think of too many rogues that won't fit into one of the above categories. -Polaris |
| Leilond07-12-07, 04:45 AM | Yes it does. Unless the player of the rogue is a goofball that literally doesn't plan beyond his next level, he should never take an XP penalty for multiclassing. A rogue can dip into one level of cleric with impunity if: 1. His favored class is rogue. In fact rogues have it good in that races whose favored class is rogue also generally tend to be good rogues (even single classed). This list includes (but is not limited to) Halfling, Goblin, and many others. 2. His favored class is cleric. Admittedly this is fairly rare, but it can happen. (The most notable examples are female dark elves and winged elves, but there are others). 3. He has no set favored class (human and half-elf). It's hard to think of too many rogues that won't fit into one of the above categories. -Polaris Sure? Elves, dwarves, gnomes and half-orcs (more than half the base races) And whant if I'm already playing a multiclass like a "fighter/rogue" or the classic "rogue/ranger"? In this situation, no matter the race, if I take one level into clerci I will have the 20% penalty Let's look at this situation My elf rogue is 13th level. I didn't used UMD at all till now. I'm going to level up. Does it worth to put 16 skill point into UMD for my leveling to 14th and 15th level? Someone suggested: take 4 level in warlock Ok, that means 1) 24 less skill point gained. Also considering the 16 skill points the rogue have to use in UMD I still lose 8 skill points 2) 20% experiece loss. By the time I gain 4 warlock level my rogue will be 19th that means I will lose - 3d6 sneak attack damage - +2 trap sense - two rogue special abilities 3) The 20% experience loss will remain for ever, thus I will be forever one or level lower than I shuld be What about if my charisma value is only 12? Is it a good choice to take 4 level in a charisma based class with that value? Sure you'll obtain some good things from that 4 warlock levels (Eldritch Blast and two invocation only to say two of them) Sure it can be very effective, but I'm not sure it is the "best choice", it's only "a possible choice" that can fit or not fit with the character I've in mind. Pheraps the warlock background is totally not compatible with the character I'm playing. Pheraps I really don't like the warlock class at all. Does it worth it? There's not a final answer, it hardly depend on what character you've in mind I'm not saying that the best magic item user is a pure rogue, because it isn't. There are more effective magic items user, for sure I'm not saying that every rogue must maximize UMD to be effctive. You can play a very effective rogue without maximizing it. I'm not saying that a rogue that maximize UMD is better than a rogue that do not maximize it. They simply play two different roles (little different by the way) I'm saying that I'm sure a rogue that maximize UMD isn't less effective than a rogue that do not maximize it. They're both effective. I'm saying that a rogue that maximize UMD is effective and good, expecially if the character concept is based on a "non caster idea of character" I'm saying that 16 skill points aren't a great issue for a character that have 150 available I'm saying that it can be a valid choice, expecially if there are other character rogue in the party or if there's a character that can take care of some (not all) typical rogue job (ranger) |
| Ace_of_time07-12-07, 09:23 AM | Yes it does. Unless the player of the rogue is a goofball that literally doesn't plan beyond his next level, he should never take an XP penalty for multiclassing. A rogue can dip into one level of cleric with impunity if: 1. His favored class is rogue. In fact rogues have it good in that races whose favored class is rogue also generally tend to be good rogues (even single classed). This list includes (but is not limited to) Halfling, Goblin, and many others. 2. His favored class is cleric. Admittedly this is fairly rare, but it can happen. (The most notable examples are female dark elves and winged elves, but there are others). 3. He has no set favored class (human and half-elf). It's hard to think of too many rogues that won't fit into one of the above categories. -Polaris I was talking about roleplaying the PC in game. Not RAW in my post. And it would matter for favered class. Although my player don't use pro classes, but most people do use them and this would cost them XP or if they decided to go with another class. Simple put there is no in game reason to go one level in a class. If your going to go spellcaster rogue might as well gofor the spells to. I thought you didn't like small class because of the cost of playing them was to high. As for warlocks they have to gain till 4th level to use that, take 10 on UMD, ability that even less rogue abilities. Theyalso have 2+int mod for skill and the COST for them would be high seeing as they do need two skills already. (spellcraft and concen). Arts have 4+int mod in skil points but are a non spellcaster caster and need those for for other things Although they would be more likely to have the skill max. Bards have 6+ int mod but they spell casting will come first, then knowledge skills, dipl, perform. Doesn't leave much room for UMD unless you give something up. Note: Arts have to wait till 13th level to take 10 on UMD. |
| cbush07-20-07, 01:47 AM | Personally, I think the problem is these arguments are based on a rogue that does nothing but use UMD. If your character wants to use wands and spells, then multi-classing into sorc holds no problems from a RP standpoint. However, players should not be forced into thinking that using UMB requires multi-classing. Once the mid-levels have been hit, UMD is very useful to a rogue when used in the proper way. UMD is nice in a pinch to add versatility or an encounter, and for in situations you might not expect you can fill in a variety of roles. For example, I am currently playing a level 12 rogue. We have a warblade, a bard/SotS, and a Druid/MMF, none of these being optimized. the druid spends most of the fight as a dire bear tanking it out, and lacks any spells over 3rd level, and the bard has only up to a single 4th level arcane spell a day. As a result, I have bought/kept several wands and scrolls, a spend a fair amount of time using invisibility/greater invis/hide in plain sight and bouncing around the battlefield sneak attacking where it does good and throwing dispels, nukes, buffs, and healing where it is needed and where it does the most good. End result, a mid level rogue has the ability to act as a caster or healers when no better alternatives exist. I'd been advised to go purely random, so far....the results have been interesting, to say the least, but there's been almost no UMD fodder in the past two sessions. UMD fodder as it were should not always be things that can only be used via UMD in your party. If they pick up some low level scrolls of healing that the clerics have a bunch of spell slots in, have them throw them to the rogue. Even better so as to avoid favoritism, have a word with the player before hand, and give him the chance to use diplomacy or bluff to convince the other characters. Likewise, do a random roll, but maybe fudge it a bit, and make a wand one that the sorc or cleric already has, even if the new one is only a few charges. That way, they may be likely to throw it his way, and he has a chance to prove to his party how he is useful, and this way it doesn't show favoritism. Remember, changing loot just to give this charecter something to do is not a good thing, but subtly giving him something to work with is alright. Let the player convince the party of his usefulness rather then shoving the charecter down their throats. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like Bluff and Tumble are nice options, but not necessary for combat. UMD is the exact same as bluff and tumble. All three give you an advantage in combat, but generally when maxed and not until mid levels. However, building a character solely around one of these skills is not nearly as useful, and tends to be boring. If your player is doing nothing but using UMD round after round after round, then that is likely a problem. However if he is using it when it benifits both himself and the party, and the party is bugged just because he is pushing on their turf, then thats a problem with them, not him. UMD is very nice, when it gets high enough, but it is not a game break, or even something that gives a rogue an unfair advantage |
| Llathos07-20-07, 03:12 PM | Here's a crazy question: Is Rogue #1 having fun? |
| Cariyaga07-20-07, 09:23 PM | As above; Here's a crazy question: Is rogue #2 having fun? |
| Metafictional07-21-07, 07:02 PM | Yes to both questions, but the presence or absence of fun is not really a factor in determination. Sure, these individuals are happy with their choices so far (although Rogue #1 isn't having quite as much fun as he'd hoped with his build), but that's hardly a good measure of whether or not UMD is a viable investment for low level characters. In my personal style of gaming, I hate giving people an option that does nothing useful for several levels. I've already house ruled how I will fix that in future campaigns, however, so it's no longer an issue for me. It seems UMD is very campaign-specific to whether or not it's a worthy investment, and in most games, you shouldn't bother spending points on it until you can find a use for it in the game. |
| Nathreet07-21-07, 07:47 PM | UMD scrolls of a level higher than what your party wizard can handle. True, normally your failure chance is higher than his. But you can boost your UMD a lot more easily than he can boost his caster level: Marshall 1 w/ charisma aura, Warlock (lev 5, I think), circlet of persuasion (+3), feats, cloak of charisma, (greater) heroism, etc. Or carry utility scrolls. Handy for any caster, advantage is now more people can handle an obscure need at once. And no, you can't sneak attack/etc. an obscure need. So the counter-argument of "he should do something else" is moot. My sorc used to use one every session in the most obscure way imaginable. Ironically the party wizard just nuked stuff (tho he was darn good at it). For example, I bought multiple scrolls of spiderclimb b/c it seemed like the most versatile way to get the party past an obstacle (jump, etc. doesn't always work). Who knew there'd be a self-resetting ceiling trap, in a giant castle, when we have a halfling rogue? |
| Horseshoe_Hermit07-21-07, 08:19 PM | I have always believed Use Magic Device was a dumb skill. Rogues have all sorts of strange, varied abilities, but this goes too far. Look, if the restrictions for magic device use can be bypassed with some Charisma check... what the hell is the point? What exactly is an alignment restriction if you can 'fake it'? I knew I never wanted to take UMD, and after reading Rogue #2, I know why. The skill brings something to the game that shouldn't be there, for power reasons, for team-building reasons. Also, if you read the first post as in-game dialogue from an episode of 8-bit theatre, it's freaking riotous. XD |
| Polaris07-21-07, 08:25 PM | UMD scrolls of a level higher than what your party wizard can handle. True, normally your failure chance is higher than his. But you can boost your UMD a lot more easily than he can boost his caster level: Marshall 1 w/ charisma aura, Warlock (lev 5, I think), circlet of persuasion (+3), feats, cloak of charisma, (greater) heroism, etc. First of all this points out neatly something I've been saying the entire thread. Even if your campaign is one that rewards item use, there are better ways to get the ability to use items....even with UMD than rogue. Warlock is one such way. Secondly, while it's true you can boost UMD somewhat, you never make up for the difference in DCs. The DC for a scroll is 20+caster level to use it after you've deciphered it (DC 25+spell level). Note that casters can pretty much automatically decipher scrolls either by spellcraft or via the Read Magic cantrip which all caster classes have access to. Casters automatically read scrolls up to their own caster level (not spell level...that's an important distinction with practiced spellcaster and other such mechanics in the game), and even if the caster level is higher, the DC is a caster level check against the scroll caster level+1. Note that the UMD DC will ALWAYS be at least 19 higher than the caster level check. You can boost to reduce this a little, but not by 19. Or carry utility scrolls. Handy for any caster, advantage is now more people can handle an obscure need at once. And no, you can't sneak attack/etc. an obscure need. So the counter-argument of "he should do something else" is moot. My sorc used to use one every session in the most obscure way imaginable. Ironically the party wizard just nuked stuff (tho he was darn good at it). For example, I bought multiple scrolls of spiderclimb b/c it seemed like the most versatile way to get the party past an obstacle (jump, etc. doesn't always work). Who knew there'd be a self-resetting ceiling trap, in a giant castle, when we have a halfling rogue? Any caster should (and IMX does) carry utility scrolls. If you want to do this as a rogue, take one level of cleric with the magic domain and you're golden. Either way it doesn't support the notion that UMD is a tremendously great skill for a rogue in general. -Polaris |
| Polaris07-21-07, 08:30 PM | I have always believed Use Magic Device was a dumb skill. Rogues have all sorts of strange, varied abilities, but this goes too far. Honestly it's a proud nail from the beginning of DnD (back as far as 1974 in fact). Then and all the way to third edition, high level Thieves (rogues now) and high level Assassins had the ability to 'use' certain magical items on a (low) percentage chance (esp scrolls). For some reason, WOTC decided to fold that into the skill system when 3E was made and the rest as they say is history. -Polaris |
| Metafictional07-21-07, 11:08 PM | Bards could use magical items as well (and had a better chance to use written items like scross). Why, since Bards are casters, I'll never know, but that's not worth getting into. I don't think UMD should be a skill, it should have been just what it's always been, a special ability. It basically exists so you can play an "Aladdin-Rogue", the cunning hero who uses magical doodads to get the job done. And that's a fun, viable concept, but it's based on two factors: 1) Availability of magical items in your game (and more importantly, how available magic items are to your Rogue). 2) Ability to hit the UMD DC's. Number 2 has been the main point of contention in this thread to date. You can, with luck, hit many of these DC's at level 1...so some people say "aha, I have a 40% chance to use a scroll at (insanely low level), thus proving UMD is awesome!" Other people, like Polaris and myself, say "um, that's nice, but what good is an ability you can't count on in a turn-based game where every action counts"? And a final group says "eh, it's for high level characters, my level 12 Rogue with Charisma 13 uses low level magic items all the time, that the higher level characters don't need/bother with." I can understand the high level use, I just don't like investing in a Skill that does nothing for a very long time without significant optimization. Isn't that why Scry was removed from the skill list in 3.5? |
| Metafictional07-21-07, 11:09 PM | And yes, the first post was a little dramatized, I cut out the stupid arguing, name-calling, and played up the humorous parts. It's not bad as 8-bit dialogue, but I was actually imagining it more like a KotDT comic. ^_^ |
| Nom07-22-07, 10:38 AM | Other people, like Polaris and myself, say "um, that's nice, but what good is an ability you can't count on in a turn-based game where every action counts"?Actually, that goes for just about every ability in the game. OK, there's some stuff that works unconditionally, and a few other things that have a weaker effect when they fail to work properly, but by and large almost anything that you do requires some sort of roll to get it to work. The risk-reward of UMD might be low, but that's an argument about quantity, not that UMD is somehow fundamentally different in having a chance of failure. |
| Horseshoe_Hermit07-22-07, 01:12 PM | And yes, the first post was a little dramatized, I cut out the stupid arguing, name-calling, and played up the humorous parts. It's not bad as 8-bit dialogue, but I was actually imagining it more like a KotDT comic. ^_^ I meant it as a compliment. I think 8-bit is funny, on a good day. Your initial story was like a good day - all the funniest things were said. But let's not argue about whether it sucks or not. I'll say right now, 8-bit is the only thing of its genre I've seen, so perhaps my opinion is ignorant. I came to ask, if scry was removed in 3.5. . . well, how do people Scry in 3.5? |
| Tallow07-22-07, 01:32 PM | And he's right, if we didn't have a UMD user, I would snip all uncastable/unuseable wands and scrolls from the treasure, most likely. This is the statement that I find most disturbing actually. Why do all magic items in treasure hordes have to be usable by the players? If the main badguy is a NE Ghost Druid or Vampire Druid (Sunless Citadel anyone?) why wouldn't he have a wand with a druid only spell in it? He's a Druid after all right? My thoughts on UMD is, why not? I am playing a warlock, and right now I can take 10 and use any device at DC 26 or lower without rolling, at 7th overall level (6th Warlock). UMD won't become highly useful until higher levels, when you can be assured of at least a 50/50 chance of success (Rogues cannot take 10 on this skill unfortunately.) But once you reach about 12th level, you can have 15 ranks, a high Charisma (which is not unheard of for Rogues) of say +3 bonus, and skill focus for another +3, would give you 21, which would give only about a 15% chance of failure on most of the static DC checks. I think its a useful ability, and a wizard can give the rogue a few tool spells that he'd rather not prepare at the expense of combat spells. Not to mention, the Wizard could give the rogue a bunch of Improved Invisibility scrolls, which then would allow the Rogue to get sneak attacks for the entire combat for ALL of his attacks in a round! Andy |
| Tallow07-22-07, 01:39 PM | It's amusing to me that Rogue #2 can say that an still not see the value of Use Magic Device. He should invest in some scrolls of Summon Monster and Silence for his buddy and then he'll never have to worry about flanking or sneaking again. Not to mention from Spell Compendium, "Grave Strike". It essentially allows you to sneak attack undead as a 1st level spell. Andy |
| Tallow07-22-07, 01:42 PM | Guys, ...remember that charisma is at best the fourth most important stat for a rogue (after Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution) Depends on what type of Rogue you are creating. If you are creating a rogue to be good at social and political things (Gather Information, Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, etc.?) then Charisma might be at least 2nd most important, if not 1st on your list even about Dex. And if you want to argue that those skills won't help in combat... Bluff is the primary skill of the combat maneuver of Feint. Improved Feint and other feats allow you to eventually use Feint as a swift or free action (forget which), and allows you to get sneak attacks without flanking or other than the 1st round of combat. It all depends on what type of rogue you want to play. |
| Polaris07-22-07, 02:46 PM | This is the statement that I find most disturbing actually. Why do all magic items in treasure hordes have to be usable by the players? If the main badguy is a NE Ghost Druid or Vampire Druid (Sunless Citadel anyone?) why wouldn't he have a wand with a druid only spell in it? He's a Druid after all right? If you use the standard random treasure tables, then almost all magical items will be usable by a cleric, a wizard, or both. My thoughts on UMD is, why not? I am playing a warlock, and right now I can take 10 and use any device at DC 26 or lower without rolling, at 7th overall level (6th Warlock). Yes, but as I said before, the UMD analysis changes with Warlocks. Warlocks are actually good at this skill at reasonable levels. Depends on what type of Rogue you are creating. If you are creating a rogue to be good at social and political things (Gather Information, Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, etc.?) then Charisma might be at least 2nd most important, if not 1st on your list even about Dex. And if you want to argue that those skills won't help in combat... Bluff is the primary skill of the combat maneuver of Feint. Improved Feint and other feats allow you to eventually use Feint as a swift or free action (forget which), and allows you to get sneak attacks without flanking or other than the 1st round of combat. Nope. Even then Intelligence would have to be rated first or second in importance. You have to understand that the major thing the rogue brings to the party is trapfinding and skll use, and the higher your intelligence modifier, the more skills you will be able to use (and the fact that Search and Disable Device are Int based skills don't hurt any either). After that you need Dexterity for what should be obvious reasons and Constitution (given the rogue only has a d6 hit-dice). Thus even for a social rogue, charisma is probably only the fourth most important stat. -Polaris |
| Tallow07-22-07, 02:59 PM | If you use the standard random treasure tables, then almost all magical items will be usable by a cleric, a wizard, or both. So what's your point? You can still get Druid/Ranger only spells if you get a Divine scroll or wand. Not to mention, if you actually purposefully place, as a DM should, items on NPC's that make sense for that NPC, then you will wind up with some items that the party may not be able to use overtly. Nope. Even then Intelligence would have to be rated first or second in importance. You have to understand that the major thing the rogue brings to the party is trapfinding and skll use, and the higher your intelligence modifier, the more skills you will be able to use (and the fact that Search and Disable Device are Int based skills don't hurt any either). After that you need Dexterity for what should be obvious reasons and Constitution (given the rogue only has a d6 hit-dice). Thus even for a social rogue, charisma is probably only the fourth most important stat. -Polaris Yes, you are absolutely correct. What could I possibly be thinking? I mean seriously, why would I go and think that there might be more than one way to create a rogue? And if we had two in the party? Why would I want to be anything but exactly the same as the other rogue in the party? Its ludicrous of me to think there might be more than one way to create a Rogue. Of course I'm not a metagame powergaming min-maxer twink. I tend to create balanced characters who fit a particular theme for um... I don't know... roleplaying instead of roll-playing? |
| Votan07-22-07, 04:55 PM | Yes, you are absolutely correct. What could I possibly be thinking? I mean seriously, why would I go and think that there might be more than one way to create a rogue? And if we had two in the party? Why would I want to be anything but exactly the same as the other rogue in the party? Its ludicrous of me to think there might be more than one way to create a Rogue. Of course I'm not a metagame powergaming min-maxer twink. I tend to create balanced characters who fit a particular theme for um... I don't know... roleplaying instead of roll-playing? I think that the argument of "are there multiple ways to play a rogue" is discrete from "is Use Magic Device comparatively a weak option". I think that the real issue with UMD is that it uses up actions at low levels for very low chances of success. Out of combat, it is rare cases where it actually matters. Given that it competes with other skills and feat choices (as many advocated using feats to enhance it), it's worth knowing if it is a good or a bad option. You can create the same character in multiple ways. Curiously, a Cleric 1/Rogue 19 with magic and knoweldge domains can easily replicate the tinkerer who likes to play around with magical devices very nicely. Only rarely will this not be a better choice than UMD and all of these cases show up at high levels. Does this make a Rogue 20 who uses UMD a bad character -- no!! But it's also the case that a Half-Orc Sorcerer is sub-optimal in terms of power but can be fun too. In general, I see only opportunity cost for buying ranks, it's just that I don't see usefulness to this ability until high levels. I'd be more sympathetic if immediate or swift action spells could be feasibly cast from wands (gravestrike, wraithstrike and golemstrike would all be important enhancements for the rogue to consider). |
| Tallow07-22-07, 05:08 PM | I think that the argument of "are there multiple ways to play a rogue" is discrete from "is Use Magic Device comparatively a weak option". I think that the real issue with UMD is that it uses up actions at low levels for very low chances of success. Out of combat, it is rare cases where it actually matters. Given that it competes with other skills and feat choices (as many advocated using feats to enhance it), it's worth knowing if it is a good or a bad option. You can create the same character in multiple ways. Curiously, a Cleric 1/Rogue 19 with magic and knoweldge domains can easily replicate the tinkerer who likes to play around with magical devices very nicely. Only rarely will this not be a better choice than UMD and all of these cases show up at high levels. Does this make a Rogue 20 who uses UMD a bad character -- no!! But it's also the case that a Half-Orc Sorcerer is sub-optimal in terms of power but can be fun too. In general, I see only opportunity cost for buying ranks, it's just that I don't see usefulness to this ability until high levels. I'd be more sympathetic if immediate or swift action spells could be feasibly cast from wands (gravestrike, wraithstrike and golemstrike would all be important enhancements for the rogue to consider). Granted, the arguments are not entirely the same argument. I just don't like it when someone tells me that UMD is a bad skill choice because Rogues would never make Charisma a prefered ability. I've made very effective rogues and DM a player with a rogue who prefer charisma to intelligence and constitution. UMD is probably not a highly useful skill to the traditional rogue who does chince on Charisma (like my favorite rogue character who started his career with a 6 Cha.) But for a Social or Political rogue, where they are basing their character around the Charisma based skills (bluff and feint work very well in combat mind you, especially when you get the feats that make feint work as a free action), UMD could be highly useful, because by 8th level, you may have a 20 Cha (+5), 11 ranks, and dependent on whether you want to use a feat for Skill Focus: UMD or not, another +3 for a total of +19, and not have to make a roll at all for DC's at 20 and only a 20% chance failure for DC's of 25 (no chance of mishap on blind activation.) I think it can be a useful skill once you reach about 7th or 8th level. And you don't really need to take any ranks in it until then either. Cause lets say as the Social Rogue, you take Int as your 3rd stat and have at least a +1 in it, you go with 8+1+1 for 10 skill points per level. At 7th level, you increase 4 other primary skills by 1 rank each, and have 6 ranks to put in UMD. At 8th level, you can only put 5 ranks in UMD. You have it maxed, and you still have 5 to 7 other skills maxed as well (included Diplomacy, Gather Info, Bluff, Disguise/Intimidate, Move Silently, Hide, and Search.) You could choose not to take ranks in Disguise/Intimidate and possibly Gather Info, to gain good scores in Open Locks and Disable Device. But in the party the OP described, the original Rogue was a Traditional rogue, so the 2nd rogue doesn't need to focus on Disable Device, Open Locks and Search. Hide may also become less important than Move Silently, as he may have a wand of Greater Invisibility. I think its useful under the right circumstances. The OP stated the right circumstances for it to be highly useful at 8th level and up, and definitely in a team environment where it allows the wizards to craft several scrolls of utility and buff-like spells for use, so he can prepare only combat spells and escape spells on a daily basis. |
| Leilond07-23-07, 04:20 AM | A 16th level human rougue with intelligence 12 (that is perfectly belivalble) has a total of 190 skill points. Do you really think that using 19 skill points to use wands make the rogue "bad"? Do you really think that 19 skill points on 190 available are a "terrible waste" for the benefit you obtain? - You can, for example, make 50 touch sneak attack with only 350 golds (inflict minor wounds). This can be very usefull against high armored fighters - You can help your friendly party members with lot of "buff spells" when a "immune to sneak attack" enemies are met, so that the wizard and clerics can concentrate on "other spells" that you cannot cast with your wands/scrolls - You can use a scroll of true strike to disarm nearly EVERYONE. - Grease, disguise self, Ray of Enfeeblement, shocking grasp, all the +4 to stats spells, blur, invisibility and tons of other spells can be good for a rogue to cast, not only on "himself" but to friendly party members... not always, but it can be usefull I think that 19 skill points on 190 is a VERY LOW price to be paid for a pure rogue |
| penchant07-23-07, 03:50 PM | I'm sorry, I have to break in here. The idea that a rogue will become a 1st level cleric (with magic and knowledge domains) is pretty ludicrous. First, you are now part of a church, even if you never gain another level of cleric. You also now have alignment restrictions that other rogues never do (like poison use, alignment based magic, or anything that goes contrary to your new faith). The mechanics may seem sound but, as I keep saying, the battle on the ground is quite different. Religions with magic as their domain are nearly always quite friendly with wizards and a rogue who wanted to use all those nifty magic items so he can raid wizard's towers is now out of a job. A character build is not a set of mechanics, but a person who has to fit into a campaign world and make sense. Otherwise you are just the mix/maxing powergamer that everyone hates. Cleric (with only a few exceptions) is just not one of those classes you can just take for its abilities and move on without being totally munchkin. The exceptions certainly don't have those domains available (Mask might accept a one level dipper for example). I've said my piece on UMD, but this dipping idea ticks me off. Fighter, dip Rogue, dip Ranger, dip Cleric, Paladin, Monk, Druid, hell no! All of these require some dedication and true belief to be in, mechanics aside. You either have to join some exclusive orgainization or be a true believer to go in. You certainly won't decide that after a level you "just wanted a hobby":mad: |
| Polaris07-23-07, 03:56 PM | I'm sorry, I have to break in here. The idea that a rogue will become a 1st level cleric (with magic and knowledge domains) is pretty ludicrous. No it's not. Clerics come in many ways, shapes, and forms. It might not fit your character conception, but ludicrous it's not. First, you are now part of a church, even if you never gain another level of cleric. You also now have alignment restrictions that other rogues never do (like poison use, alignment based magic, or anything that goes contrary to your new faith). Not really. In the first place, just because you have a cleric level in no way forces you to belong to any church or other organization. Heck, you don't even have to worship a god! As for alignment restrictions, as long as you are within one step of the alignment of your diety (if you have one!) or stay true to your own personal philosphy (if you don't), then I don't see any practical restriction. The mechanics may seem sound but, as I keep saying, the battle on the ground is quite different. Religions with magic as their domain are nearly always quite friendly with wizards and a rogue who wanted to use all those nifty magic items so he can raid wizard's towers is now out of a job. A character build is not a set of mechanics, but a person who has to fit into a campaign world and make sense. Otherwise you are just the mix/maxing powergamer that everyone hates. Cleric (with only a few exceptions) is just not one of those classes you can just take for its abilities and move on without being totally munchkin. The exceptions certainly don't have those domains available (Mask might accept a one level dipper for example). I've said my piece on UMD, but this dipping idea ticks me off. Who says? I can easily see an Alladin type philosophy and if so, having the knowledge and magic domains would make a lot of sense without any of the baggage you are referring to. Fighter, dip Rogue, dip Ranger, dip Cleric, Paladin, Monk, Druid, hell no! All of these require some dedication and true belief to be in, mechanics aside. You either have to join some exclusive orgainization or be a true believer to go in. You certainly won't decide that after a level you "just wanted a hobby":mad: Again, why limit us to the limits of your imagination? -Polaris |
| Votan07-23-07, 05:13 PM | I'm sorry, I have to break in here. The idea that a rogue will become a 1st level cleric (with magic and knowledge domains) is pretty ludicrous. First, you are now part of a church, even if you never gain another level of cleric. You also now have alignment restrictions that other rogues never do (like poison use, alignment based magic, or anything that goes contrary to your new faith). The mechanics may seem sound but, as I keep saying, the battle on the ground is quite different. Religions with magic as their domain are nearly always quite friendly with wizards and a rogue who wanted to use all those nifty magic items so he can raid wizard's towers is now out of a job. Two quick thoughts: 1) You don;t have to have a diety or belong to a church to be a cleric (cleric of a philosophy is a core option) and CN is a feasible alignment for such a cleric 2) Rogues come in mnay different varieties and the sort of Charisma based rogue that would find UMD appealing anyway might actually prefer subtle fraud and manipulation (even of wizards) to rading towers. Heck, Vecna is an option for knowledge and magic domains in Greyhawk and his followers will have no trouble with acting in a traditional "roguish" manner. :) |
| Leilond07-24-07, 06:55 AM | If you take 1 cleric level only for the UMD issue, you're only metagaming and your not role-playing. If that cleric level fit your character concept, I can admit it It's a matter of play style. You can say "hey! This cleric level perfectly fit my character concept"... but it isn't a matter of what you say... it is a matter of what you think Thus, you can make your DM trust you, but you will know if you're metagaming or not. And what you suggested (take one cleric level) wasn't referred to the OP character concept We are talking about a rogue here. The OP asked a question for his rogue that wasn't thinked to be a "rogue/cleric", thus we have to discuss if it worth to spend 19 of 190 skill points in UMD It isn't a matter "there are more efficent ways to do it" (we all know there are), because that "efficent ways" aren't in the character concept that the player has in mind. Thus, considering that the OP was talking about rogue that do not want to be a "rogue/caster" (as the OP clarifyed us), does it worth to use 19 skill points at 16th in UMD (for example)? Are those 19 skill point a too high price for the benefit of using some magic items that he cannot use and sometimes no one in the group can? Here is the question the OP was doing? Does it worth to spend some skill point for UMD for a "pure rogue"? If "yes", why? And at what level? If "no", why? If "no", what you lose that worth much than what you obtain? I've already replied and explained my view, this post is only to clarify that the OP wasn't asking for an "optimized UMD character" (character optimization board is there for these questions), but about a pure rougue and UMD |
| Polaris07-24-07, 12:15 PM | Here is the question the OP was doing? Does it worth to spend some skill point for UMD for a "pure rogue"? If "yes", why? And at what level? If "no", why? If "no", what you lose that worth much than what you obtain? 1. This was a pure mechanical thread. The person that was metagaming was the OP (by his own admission in the end) at least in terms of making UMD useful. 2. This is a mechanical discussion, and thus in order to fully analyze whether or not UMD is worth taking for a full rogue, it is certainly worth looking at the alternatives and one of the best alternatives is a one level dip in cleric with the magic domain. I am not saying it fits all concepts, but that isn't the issue for this particular thread. Thus I contend that for a pure rogue, you give up a lot of skill points (and maybe feats) for something that doesn't give you noticable returns until mid to high levels, AND when it does, it's something that others (casters) can do better anyway. Add in the fact that other options are better item users (warlocks, 1 level dip with the magic domain, etc) and that most other characters will be able to use some items themselves (1 level ranger or paladin dips aren't uncommon), and the skill looks suboptimal. -Polaris |
| penchant07-24-07, 02:24 PM | No it's not. Clerics come in many ways, shapes, and forms. It might not fit your character conception, but ludicrous it's not. Well, if it doesn't fit a character concept, then it would be ludicrous in light of a character concept. Not really. In the first place, just because you have a cleric level in no way forces you to belong to any church or other organization. Heck, you don't even have to worship a god! As for alignment restrictions, as long as you are within one step of the alignment of your diety (if you have one!) or stay true to your own personal philosphy (if you don't), then I don't see any practical restriction. While you don't have to have a church or even a god, you still have to have a faith and a creed. It is the foundation of faith (and the limitations imposed by that faith) that cause the problem of the 1 level dip into cleric. As I said, there are no rules against it, until you actually try to put such a build into a real game with a DM who expects more from his players than "cool builds" Who says? I can easily see an Alladin type philosophy and if so, having the knowledge and magic domains would make a lot of sense without any of the baggage you are referring to. Alladin was not a cleric. And it is being a cleric that comes with baggage even if you don't have a god. Again, why limit us to the limits of your imagination? -Polaris You aren't imagining anything. You are justifying a mechanic in a vacuum with only the RAW as support. Sure you can convince a DM to let you take 1 level of cleric and he doesn't bother you with it again. He might not even hold to you the restrictions of being a cleric because you told him you were a cleric of an idea, with that idea being that you get the magic and knowledge domains so you don't have to roll for UMD. It was an idea so powerful and moving that you never bothered to take another level in the class. In fact those cleric spells you have lay unused since they increasingly become useless and infact you only just use magic items. But your faith is strong in whatsisname, and you never betray that ideal of using the knowledge and magic domains (because you would lose access to the magic items if you did and would have to make UMD checks again). Now who volunteers to let this character into their game? And I believe you mentioned Vecna as a possiblity for this? Seriously? How exactly is Vecna going to let you join his cult and NOT require you to become vested in the church? How much loyalty do you show to him if you never advance in the church anymore? This is exactly what I am talking about. |
| Polaris07-24-07, 04:08 PM | Well, if it doesn't fit a character concept, then it would be ludicrous in light of a character concept. That would be an RP decision, but this is a thread devoted to a mechanical issue....and there are many sorts of rogues. The idea of dipping into a single cleric level is hardly ludicrous. While you don't have to have a church or even a god, you still have to have a faith and a creed. It is the foundation of faith (and the limitations imposed by that faith) that cause the problem of the 1 level dip into cleric. As I said, there are no rules against it, until you actually try to put such a build into a real game with a DM who expects more from his players than "cool builds" Why? It's completely up to you how you define your faith and ethos. A limitation that doesn't limit the character is not a real limitation. Such is the case with the cleric class. Alladin was not a cleric. And it is being a cleric that comes with baggage even if you don't have a god. Who says? Granted, cleric is not the class at the tip of my tongue when I think of Alladin, but it's completely possible that Alladin (or a character like him) in fact had one level of cleric (of the correct philosophy). The cleric class doesn't come with the baggage you think it does. You aren't imagining anything. You are justifying a mechanic in a vacuum with only the RAW as support. Sure you can convince a DM to let you take 1 level of cleric and he doesn't bother you with it again. He might not even hold to you the restrictions of being a cleric because you told him you were a cleric of an idea, with that idea being that you get the magic and knowledge domains so you don't have to roll for UMD. It was an idea so powerful and moving that you never bothered to take another level in the class. In fact those cleric spells you have lay unused since they increasingly become useless and infact you only just use magic items. But your faith is strong in whatsisname, and you never betray that ideal of using the knowledge and magic domains (because you would lose access to the magic items if you did and would have to make UMD checks again). False. You can't imagine a clerical character outside a narrow range of possibilities. You need to open your mind a bit. Yes, I was talking about RAW mechanical reasoning because that was the topic of the thread. Now who volunteers to let this character into their game? And I believe you mentioned Vecna as a possiblity for this? Seriously? How exactly is Vecna going to let you join his cult and NOT require you to become vested in the church? How much loyalty do you show to him if you never advance in the church anymore? This is exactly what I am talking about. Vecna doesn't assume loyalty from any of his followers except as motivated by fear. You are thinking of Hextor. Seriously, the upshot of all this is that it's fruitless to try to claim that RPing restrictions actually balance/restrict mechanical advantages. -Polaris |
| Metafictional07-24-07, 06:44 PM | And to clarify, the problem with UMD isn't a "mere 19 skill points". There's nothing wrong with spending a "mere 19 skill points". It's the fact that you can't spend those 19 skill points until 16th level! If 19 skill points is your idea of what you need to make UMD good, then I postulate that there's something wrong with a skill you can take at 1st-level, that is not equal to a 1st-level Granted Power of a freakin' Domain until 16th-level! Since 19 skill points at 16th-level is academic, why isn't UMD just a Special Ability Rogue characters can pick up at high levels? I'm thinking it probably should be, and it would allow a Rogue to use magical items as if he was ANY Caster Class of half his Rogue level. No rolls required, pick it up at 10th level or any level you get a "Special Ability" as a Rogue. When I see players going crazy with high Charisma, synergy bonuses, magic items, and spending Feats just to use a skill they have at low levels, and that it is mostly useless without taking these kinds of steps, I say there's something wrong with Use Magic Device. A high-level option should not pretend to be an option at low levels. That would be like saying Wizards may cast a 2nd-level spell at 1st-level, but only if they spend 500 gold and make a DC 20 Profession-Magical Charlatan check. Sure, it's possible for a first-level character to do this. Wisdom isn't a high-priority attribute for Wizards (although a Rogue probably has more business playing with a high Charisma than a Wizard has playing with a high Wisdom). Now you can say "Oh well, the Wizard would obviously have 14 Wisdom, and you'd want to take Skill Focus-Profession, for a +9 check". Which would give you a 45-50% chance to cast a 2nd-level spell with your action. Now, players may like to gamble in this way. This wouldn't take a spell slot to do, and a 2nd-level spell has more punch, and could end an encounter faster. But if you're trying to create an adventure, knowing full well that you have a player who's set himself up with a 50% chance to do something cool, which is a 50% chance he's not pulling his weight in a combat.... That gets rough. And it shouldn't be that way! In fact, it ISN'T that way for the Wizard or any other spellcasting class, because they can spend however much gp on a wand (or find a wand) and just....do it. No roll required, a 1st-level Wizard who somehow gets his hand on a Wand of Fireball can kick off 5d6 Fireballs as much as he likes. Use Magic Device is a con, and a subtle one. It gives you the illusion of being able to use the skill at low levels. There are many options to pad your skill check, which adds to the con; the player invests more and more to make the skill useful, when the truth is, it's not intended to be used until higher levels anyways! Yes, you CAN get ahead of the power curve by using Feats, or prioritizing Charisma. I'm not saying prioritizing Charisma is bad, but most Rogues are better served by prioritizing Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution. But then, you eventually hit apogee, when anyone could spend 19 skill points to get UMD to useable levels. And then what? You've spent multiple feats to save 5 skill points? At this point, you'd be crying to the DM to let you retrain! I am a DM, and I strive to be a fair one. I see UMD as a con game, a trap that entices players with what looks like a cool ability, but one with a significant opportunity cost (to borrow Polaris's term). You can argue this point, and you have. I see how UMD is useful, I love the Skill, I just think that it's bunk that it's not intended to be used short of higher levels. I realize it's not alone in this, there are other offending skills, but UMD seems to be one of the largest offenders in high DC's, making it hard to use at low levels. Now Polaris, I realize you didn't mean this to be offensive, but about the "metagaming" comment... I was the DM. The DM's whole job involves metagaming. You have to prepare challenges for the party, and that obviously implies metagame knowledge of what the characters (and players) can/will do. You have to adjust the game on the fly to make sure it remains challenging, but never ridiculously difficult. You use metagame knowledge of their magic items, and of their attributes. I base monster AC's full knowing what their attack bonuses are. I set NPC's with information in their path, to warn them if super dangerous opponents are up ahead. And yes, I tune treasure, because I can now say, with certainty, that the random treasure tables in the DMG bite. People constantly stress that you should follow the wealth-by-level guidelines or your game will become unbalanced. Trying to do this with a random system of treasure generation is impossible, you are constantly having to go back, say, wait, that's too expensive, and replace. At least 40% of the things I have rolled on the DMG tables grossly violate the wealth by level guidelines. Further, if a hoard of treasure has one big item, obviously, only one person can use it, which means one person will be above the rest in wealth until a big item appears that another person can use. This means I am also forced to ensure that the party doesn't find two big Sorcerer items back to back. I found this out the hard way after my last adventure gave the Barbarian a really nice sword AND good armor (to be fair, the Rogues and the Cleric could have worn the armor, but the players feel that the Barbarian has top priority for armor). The party's wealth wasn't destroyed, but the Barbarian now has too much wealth. Wealth by level is also a completely metagame concept, I have decided. So I'm going back to my old system, taking the extra time to create "logical" treasure hoards, and hoping it brings the game closer to balance, even if there's the "metagame" concept that "Wow, look guys, there was a Small Greatsword in the Troll's lair, just what I needed!". |
| Polaris07-24-07, 06:53 PM | Metafictional, As I have said in other threads, not all DM metagaming is necessarily bad (but a lot are and so the tactic should be used with caution), but I (nicely I hope) would like to remind you that your own players (the cleric in fact) caught you red-handed 'metagaming' in order to make UMD more useful than it was. Specifically when the cleric pointed out that had the rogue not had UMD, you would have provided a scroll of raise dead rather than a scroll of reincarnation. There were other such example in your initial post, and as I recall, you admitted to doing just that ('metagaming' with the item distribution just to make UMD seem more useful than it really was). -Polaris |
| Metafictional07-24-07, 07:07 PM | Well yes, it was metagaming. Of course, if you followed my rant a bit there, you'll notice I pointed out exactly why the very job of a DM involves metagaming. You can't really be an effective DM without metagaming, I don't think. I haven't taken offense with you, I just found myself twitching a bit because I don't think I did anything wrong, or anything a DM shouldn't do. Too often in gaming circles, "metagaming" is a serious offense, and calling someone a metagamer (or a cheater) can lead to some nasty situations. Anyways, my point is this. As a DM, I have a duty to make the game fun for the players, and to support the way they want to play, as long as it is reasonable. I don't see anything unreasonable with wanting to see a payoff for investing in UMD. Even though I now realize UMD is a total con. So if I have to "metagame" or rule zero to make UMD fun for the guy who uses it, it's my job to do so. The problem came up that the other players noticed that, in a vacuum, if I was not making these DM decisions, UMD would be much less useful in my game. In other words, they saw that UMD was a shell game. The tragic part is, by trying to make UMD useful for Rogue #1, I was perpetuating the shell game! I became the person tempting the player with rewards, which made him continue to think his skill was viable long before it really should have been. In essence, UMD is a trap for player and DM alike. However, I've found that NOT metagaming with regards to treasure, as my previous post/rant indicates, has caused new problems in my game. I've made a post on the DM rules boards, asking for advice with this new problem. |
| Polaris07-24-07, 07:47 PM | Metafictional, Oh, from what I have read so far and by what I know, I have no complaints about the way you've handled the situation...and while I agree that 'metagaming' is a loaded term, it's (sadly) true that all too many people (players and DMs alike) do so often without realizing it.....and I hasten to add that metagaming isn't always bad (and as you note sometimes necessary). However, I completely agree with you about UMD being a Con...and it's a Con that tempted you (the DM) into metagaming. While I don't fault you for doing this necessarily, if a rule forces or even encourages a DM to metagame in this fashion, then the rule may well be suspect and that was my real point. [And Lielond IIRC first brought in the loaded word 'metagaming' because of an unfriendly discussion on another thread.] -Polaris |
| Ace_of_time07-25-07, 08:57 PM | I'm trying my UMD build now with my new group (same players new game). So far we are 2nd level and I have a +11 to UMD. Next level I'm taking MA feat and with another rank will give me a +14 on UMD. So I will post how it feels play tested. We play high powered game so stats aren't a problem but I could see pow powered games having trouble with a UMD rogue. One thing to point out. How does a DM matagame? Still don't understand that one. sorry. |
| CarcassesAndCantaloupe08-03-07, 07:38 PM | I really like UMD. I like the idea of being able to be able to use scrolls and wands in certain situations. Especially if you are not playing a large party where you may not have a healer or spellcaster. I actually have a character who is a rogue and is pretending to be a wizard. Who will ever think that the wizard would steal stuff? And a highly steriotypical wizard at that. |