Post/Author/DateTime	Post
gyp5sy 06-18-07, 09:27 PM	Now, I know it says that you may emulate class abilities with UMD for the purpose of activating magic items, but here's the specific question: Can a character with no prepared arcane spells (unable to prepare, not just out, i.e. a rogue or something) use UMD to activate the Belt of Wide Earth. At least that's what I think it's called. The wording is that you activate the belt and lose a prepared spell slot of 5th level or higher from memory and can then teleport as the spell with a caster level either at whatever the belt is, or your own, whichever is higher. Note that it does not allow you to actually cast teleport, but it is an effect of activating the belt. From my perspective, bearing in mind the example given in the skill description, this is a simple emulate class ability roll to emulate an arcane class with a level high enough to cast 5th level spells. A DC 29 at least. (9th level Wizard = 20 + 9 for the DC) However, you must still make sure that you have a 15 in the stat for the class you are emulating. From reading the skill, I gather that you may emulate a class ability, but may still not actually use said class ability, just use it to activate magic items. So I could activate the Belt of Wide Earth, but not use a Runestaff because activating a runestaff allows a character to cast a spell he/she would not normally be able to cast. Is this the correct interpretation?
SALDAR 06-18-07, 10:28 PM	If you must expend or sacrifice a prepared spell (or spell slot) to activate the item then you could not activate it with UMD since UMD does not allow you to prepare spells. In both cases, belt and runestaves, you could not use UMD to activate them as both require the expenditure of a prepared spell or spell slot.
jaelis 06-18-07, 10:31 PM	I don't think so. If the requirement was that you just needed the ability to cast 5th level spells, then it could work. But you need to actually spend a 5th level spell slot, and you don't have one. That said, the skill description kind of contradicts itself. It says "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." But then the example shows Lidda actually using the turn undead class feature to activate the chalice or whatever. I think the example is wrong and the text is right, but if you think the example is right, then you could probably do what you want, along with many other things.
gyp5sy 06-18-07, 10:38 PM	For the record, I cannot believe this issue is not addressed in the official FAQ. It does appear to imply that you cannot use the abilities you emulate, but if you read the definition carefully, what I believe it says is that you may emulate the abilities for the express purpose of using the magic items, but you may not actually turn undead, or cast a spell. The example goes on to illustrate that though you may power a magic item with an emulated turning attempt, you may not actually emulate a cleric to use the actual turning ability to turn undead. btw, is there anywhere I can go to get an official ruling? I strongly suspect that that's the only way to resolve this question to our group's satisfaction.
jaelis 06-18-07, 10:46 PM	But a cleric would have to actually use his turn undead ability to power the chalice. He's using it in an unusual way, but he is using it. Otherwise, why would he burn a turn attempt for it? Same for the spell slot. If you sacrifice the slot, then you are using it, by any reasonable (IMO) interpretation of "using." Note that a magic item could reasonably just require you to be able to turn undead or to have a spell slot, without making you actually use them. UMD would allow you to do that. You can write to customer service. Maybe I'll do that myself, this has always bugged me too.
Fireclave 06-19-07, 03:29 AM	I don't think so. If the requirement was that you just needed the ability to cast 5th level spells, then it could work. But you need to actually spend a 5th level spell slot, and you don't have one. That said, the skill description kind of contradicts itself. It says "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." But then the example shows Lidda actually using the turn undead class feature to activate the chalice or whatever. I think the example is wrong and the text is right, but if you think the example is right, then you could probably do what you want, along with many other things. I agree. I never did like that example. It's misleading and ambiguous. But here's how I interpret it to make it agree with the text: The chalice Lidda uses merely required the user to have the ability to Turn Undead, and did not require an actual Turn Undead use for the day. If you assume the other interpretation, that UMD gives Ledda a free Turn Undead attempt, then that just opens the floodgates of potential brokenation for other items because now UMD can net you infinite free stuff: Infinite free turn undead, infinite free spellslots, infinite free stunning fists, infinite free X (where X is something that can be potentially broken if given infinitely and for free), and constant requests from people who never read the DMG item creation guidelines asking for help pricing a new item they intend to break with UMD. Oh the humanity! I'm pretty sure that's not how the designers intended UMD to be used. It's just too bad the example didn't use an item we could actually reference in the DMG.
gyp5sy 06-20-07, 12:13 AM	Nice try, but I now believe you are mistaken. After reading the skill one. more. time. I'm certain of the usage and why a scenario like the one you are describing is not true. Right off the bat, the definition says that you use the class features you emulate. It then gives an example of this. Then, like I pointed out before, to pre-empt the scenario you just described, it points out that you are only using these abilities for the purpose of activating the magic item. You cannot emulate a monk to use the stunning fist class ability unless it's to activate a magic item.
tarkin 06-20-07, 12:12 PM	The ability says EMULATE, not GAIN. That seems pretty obvious to me. The only way I can see any person thinking otherwise is if they do not know what the word Emulate means.
Thiez 06-20-07, 12:26 PM	emulate v 1: strive to equal or match, especially by imitating; "He is emulating the skating skills of his older sister" 2: imitate the function of (another system), as by modifying the hardware or the software 3: compete with successfully; approach or reach equality with; "This artists's drawings cannot emulate his water colors" Ok, so I assume we're talking about the first meaning. That doesn't help us one bit, since it allows for 100% succesful emulation of something. Thanks Tarkin. Quote us from your dictionary, please.
SALDAR 06-20-07, 07:42 PM	Right off the bat, the definition says that you use the class features you emulate. No it does not. The first line simply states: "Emulate a Class Feature: Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item." This is simply telling you that there are some magic items that require a class feature to activate them. The same way that the first line in the other uses of UMD tell you what is normally needed to activate some items. Examples: "Emulate a Race: Some magic items work only for members of certain races, or work better for members of those races." "Use a Wand: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list." "Emulate an Alignment: Some magic items have positive or negative effects based on the user’s alignment." Following these statements it tells you how you use UMD to activate such items. In the Emulate a Class Feature use of UMD it states: "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." So it specifies that you do not use the class feature, you only activate items as if you had the class feature. jaelis and Fireclave are correct in that the example directly contradicts the skill's use by having Lidda actually channel positive energy into the chalice as if turning undead since she cannot use the turn undead class feature. Besides, examples are supposed to follow the rules given, not make the rules.
Vegepygmy 06-20-07, 07:59 PM	jaelis and Fireclave are correct in that the example directly contradicts the skill's use by having Lidda actually channel positive energy into the chalice as if turning undead since she cannot use the turn undead class feature.The example does not show Lidda actually channeling positive energy. It simply states that she is able to activate the item as if she had. I'm not familiar with the Belt of Wide Earth the OP mentioned, but if it is activated by expending a prepared spell, I can't see any reason why a rogue could not use UMD to activate such a belt as if he had expended a prepared spell.
SALDAR 06-20-07, 08:59 PM	The example does not show Lidda actually channeling positive energy. It simply states that she is able to activate the item as if she had. But it does say that the chalice only works when a cleric or experienced paladin channels positive energy into it by using the turn undead class feature. UMD states that you do not use the class feature you only act as if you had the class feature. Now if the chalice worked for someone who had the turn undead class feature but they don't actually have to use the turn undead class feature then Lidda could activate it. In the example given you actually have to use the class feature to activate the item. Lidda can't use the class feature so Lidda can't activate the item.
jaelis 06-20-07, 09:12 PM	The example does not show Lidda actually channeling positive energy. It simply states that she is able to activate the item as if she had. I guess I can't personally see the distinction between channelling positive energy into a chalice and channeling positive energy into an undead creature to turn it. My reading says that either way, you are actually supplying some energy to something. Like, suppose there were a little tiny zombie inside the chalice, and you have to turn the zombie to make it work. If the example is correct, why couldn't Lidda do that too? Or what if you made up a magic item that you needed to hit with a lightning bolt to activate? Would you say UMD could emulate that? If there happened to be a monster standing between you and the item, would it take damage? I'm totally going to put a chalice with a tiny zombie in it in my next campaign.
Thiez 06-21-07, 05:59 AM	I'm totally going to put a chalice with a tiny zombie in it in my next campaign. Hehe, inside the chalice is a tiny treadmill attached to a dynamo, and turning the tiny zombie makes him run, thus producing electricity, and dealing 1d4 electricity damage to the person holding the chalice :P
Vegepygmy 06-21-07, 11:38 AM	But it does say that the chalice only works when a cleric or experienced paladin channels positive energy into it by using the turn undead class feature.I does not say it "only" works that way, and even if it did, the reasonable interpretation would be that it normally "only" works that way. The UMD skill allows one to activate magic items in abnormal ways. I don't see why this is so difficult for otherwise intelligent people to wrap their brains around. UMD states that you do not use the class feature you only act as if you had the class feature.That's right. Lidda is not actually turning undead (or even channeling positive energy), she's just "tricking" the magic item into "thinking" that she is. Like, suppose there were a little tiny zombie inside the chalice, and you have to turn the zombie to make it work. If the example is correct, why couldn't Lidda do that too?I believe she could activate the magic item using UMD, though the zombie would not actually be turned. Look, the analysis is simple: [1] Is it a magic item? If yes, proceed to [2]. [2] Can the magic item be "activated"? If yes, proceed to [3]. [3] Does the magic item require the use of a class feature to "activate" it? If yes, you can use UMD to "activate" the magic item. Or what if you made up a magic item that you needed to hit with a lightning bolt to activate? Would you say UMD could emulate that? If there happened to be a monster standing between you and the item, would it take damage?Yes, you could use UMD to activate the magic item as if you had cast lightning bolt. No, even assuming that UMD can be used at range, your hypothetical monster would not take any damage, since no lightning bolt would actually be created.
SALDAR 06-21-07, 04:54 PM	I does not say it "only" works that way, and even if it did, the reasonable interpretation would be that it normally "only" works that way. It says it works when you channel positive energy into it. It gives no indication as to any other means of activating it. So, lacking an alternative, the "only" way it works is the "only" way given to us. Look, the analysis is simple: [1] Is it a magic item? If yes, proceed to [2]. [2] Can the magic item be "activated"? If yes, proceed to [3]. [3] Does the magic item require the use of a class feature to "activate" it? If yes, you can use UMD to "activate" the magic item. Your simple analysis fails on #3. The rules for UMD state unequivocally that you cannot use the class feature.
Pentar 06-21-07, 05:04 PM	I guess I can't personally see the distinction between channelling positive energy into a chalice and channeling positive energy into an undead creature to turn it. My reading says that either way, you are actually supplying some energy to something. Like, suppose there were a little tiny zombie inside the chalice, and you have to turn the zombie to make it work. If the example is correct, why couldn't Lidda do that too? I'm totally going to put a chalice with a tiny zombie in it in my next campaign. HAHAAHAHAHA - MOST AWESOME EXAMPLE EVAR. Tiny zombies! YAY! Anyway, interesting discussion topic. I find it difficult to believe that UMD will allow you to expend energies you don't possess to power magical items. I think the example is erroneous and was probably written while under the influence of multiple (likely illicit) narcotics. If you can only emulate an ability, then you can only fool an item into working if doing so does not require the expenditure of that ability. I believe this includes burning spell slots - if you do not possess a spell slot to burn, then you cannot use that item, because there is no magical energies actually powering the function of that item. Unlike items with charges, that are "pre-charged", so to speak, Runestaves and the like require the user's power to activate them. If the user possesses no power, then the item cannot be used. Regardless of RAW, I believe this is the RAI.
spyderfreek 06-21-07, 05:15 PM	It says it works when you channel positive energy into it. It gives no indication as to any other means of activating it. So, lacking an alternative, the "only" way it works is the "only" way given to us. Your simple analysis fails on #3. The rules for UMD state unequivocally that you cannot use the class feature. 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). Ok Saladar, you can activate ANY magic item with UMD provided you make the check. In the case of an item that requires the class skill, you do not need to have that class skill you emulate (or fake in laymans terms). How are you not getting this. If it requires a class ability, and spell casting is a class ability, then you just need to make the check to emulate(fake) the ability. it is spelled out VERY clearly in the skill description.
Pentar 06-21-07, 05:23 PM	Ok Saladar, you can activate ANY magic item with UMD provided you make the check. In the case of an item that requires the class skill, you do not need to have that class skill you emulate (or fake in laymans terms). How are you not getting this. The problem, Spyderfreek, is that you're actually using the class feature if you're expending it in order to power the item. In the OP's question about the use of UMD with the Belt of Mountain Dew (or whatever), the user has to exhaust a 5th level spells lot. Using a 5th level spell slot is using the class feature, it is no longer emulating the class feature. If the magical item said, "So long as the user can cast 5th level Arcane spells", then I would agree, UMD would work. You can emulate having 5th level arcane spells, but you cannot emulate actually using up a slot you don't possess. That is using a class feature.
Vegepygmy 06-21-07, 06:17 PM	The problem, Spyderfreek, is that you're actually using the class feature if you're expending it in order to power the item.The problem, Pentar, is that the only official example of this use of the skill says you're not actually using the class feature when you emulate it to activate a magic item. You and many others apparently can't conceive of how that could be possible, but that's the rule. Apparently, having enough ranks in UMD lets you wangle your own personal mojo in such a way that you can fuel magic items that normally run on positive energy channeled by a cleric or spell slots from a 5th-level sorcerer or the unconstrained fury of a barbarian's rage. Deal with it.
Vegepygmy 06-21-07, 06:24 PM	It does not say it "only" works that way, and even if it did, the reasonable interpretation would be that it normally "only" works that way.It says it works when you channel positive energy into it. It gives no indication as to any other means of activating it. So, lacking an alternative, the "only" way it works is the "only" way given to us.But we don't lack an alternative. The alternative is the Use Magic Device skill. (Duh.) [3] Does the magic item require the use of a class feature to "activate" it? If yes, you can use UMD to "activate" the magic item.Your simple analysis fails on #3. The rules for UMD state unequivocally that you cannot use the class feature.You're not using the class feature; you're using UMD to emulate the class feature.
Pentar 06-21-07, 06:30 PM	The problem, Pentar, is that the only official example of this use of the skill says you're not actually using the class feature when you emulate it to activate a magic item. You and many others apparently can't conceive of how that could be possible, but that's the rule. Apparently, having enough ranks in UMD lets you wangle your own personal mojo in such a way that you can fuel magic items that normally run on positive energy channeled by a cleric or spell slots from a 5th-level sorcerer or the unconstrained fury of a barbarian's rage. Deal with it. I will quote myself to reply here: Anyway, interesting discussion topic. I find it difficult to believe that UMD will allow you to expend energies you don't possess to power magical items. I think the example is erroneous and was probably written while under the influence of multiple (likely illicit) narcotics. I even emphasized it! Frankly, the example is wrong. Also, examples are supposed to be used to emphasize rules, not set them. In this case, the example contradicts the rule; thus you can safely disregard the example in favor of the actual text of the rule. Deal with that. I won't even argue that the example is completely unclear as to how Turn Undead is supposed to be used to activate the chalice. That is clearly up to interpretation and not worth arguing over.
Vegepygmy 06-21-07, 06:51 PM	Frankly, the example is wrong.Frankly, you cannot prove that the example is wrong. I've given you a plausible explanation of how the skill is intended to work (mojo-wangling) that is completely consistent with the example provided. You may "find it difficult to believe," but that's what it says.
Pentar 06-21-07, 06:56 PM	Frankly, you cannot prove that the example is wrong. I've given you a plausible explanation of how the skill is intended to work (mojo-wangling) that is completely consistent with the example provided. You may not like it, but there's no denying that it's there. The problem is that the example itself is ambiguous. Therefore it should be discarded in favor of the actual text. But if you want to use the example to prove your case, then I'm going to ask you to prove that Lidda needed to expend a Turn Undead attempt to activate the Chalice. No where in the example does it say Lidda actually has to use a Turn Undead attempt. It merely says that she has to have the ability to "channel positive energy". How much positive energy is necessary? Is it just enough to show you can turn undead, without actually draining a charge? Or do you actually have to expend an attempt? No one here can ascertain for certain what the example is intended to say, therefore, it's useless to argue one way or another. But the text of the rule says emulate not use. Burning a spell slot is using the class ability which clearly contradicts the rules - much more clearly than the example would prove to support it. So which would make more sense to follow? The clear contradiction, or the ambiguous example?
Vegepygmy 06-21-07, 07:44 PM	The problem is that the example itself is ambiguous. Therefore it should be discarded in favor of the actual text. But if you want to use the example to prove your case, then I'm going to ask you to prove that Lidda needed to expend a Turn Undead attempt to activate the Chalice.I don't have to prove that Lidda needed to expend a Turn Undead attempt to activate the chalice to prove my case. (In fact, I have been arguing with SALDAR that it is not at all clear that Lidda did.) My "case" is that Lidda can use UMD to activate the chalice regardless of what is normally required to "fuel" it, because that's how UMD works. But the text of the rule says emulate not use. Burning a spell slot is using the class ability which clearly contradicts the rules - much more clearly than the example would prove to support it. So which would make more sense to follow? The clear contradiction, or the ambiguous example?I disagree with you that there is a contradiction. UMD allows you to activate magic items as if you had "burned a spell slot" (or turned undead, or raged, etc.). You do not actually burn a spell slot, so you do not actually use the class ability; the item simply functions as if you had. I don't know how to make it any clearer (and I'll bet the PHB authors didn't, either). You can use UMD to "Activate Blindly" a magic item that is activated by special words, thoughts, or actions as if you were using the activation word, thought, or action, even when you’re not and even if you don’t know it. Similarly, you can use UMD to "Emulate a Class Feature" to activate a magic item that is activated by the use of a class feature as if you had that class feature, even when you don't actually have it and aren't actually using it. :banghead:
gyp5sy 06-21-07, 08:13 PM	I think a lot of people think that something the skill says is that you cannot use the class ability you emulate. No where in the skill is that specified. In fact, the very first sentence says that you use the class ability of an emulated class. The only ambiguous, and only slightly at that, sentence is where it is explained that you do not actually use the class ability. I've seen the opposing side omit this little word (actually) because it is throwing their entire grasp of the skill out of whack. If you are not actually using the feature, but you are using it, as the previous sentences illustrate quite clearly, then what the heck are you using? You are using a "virtual" (i.e. emulated) class ability that can only be used for the activation of magic items. Not clear english, but clear enough. Deliberately misreading the entire rest of the skill is no way to form a logical conclusion. Just because you want it to read a certain way does not mean that it does.
Cariyaga 06-21-07, 08:21 PM	In an attempt to close this topic prematurely, I'll state my and my DM's interpretation of the Use Magic Device skill. You are basically lying to the magic device. Does it need to be turned? Make it think it was. This is different from Bluff, as (A) If it was included in Bluff, it would be overpowered, and (B) You are lying to a (usually) non-sentient object that activates when something happens, or when it thinks it happens. Note that the word *thinks* is used in a different way than normal.
Pentar 06-22-07, 12:45 AM	I don't have to prove that Lidda needed to expend a Turn Undead attempt to activate the chalice to prove my case. (In fact, I have been arguing with SALDAR that it is not at all clear that Lidda did.) My "case" is that Lidda can use UMD to activate the chalice regardless of what is normally required to "fuel" it, because that's how UMD works. I simply don't buy that. Magical energies needed to cause a magical item to work does not exist... you can't pull that out of thin air. I disagree with this in both RAI and thematically. UMD is a skill, not an extraordinary ability, spell-like ability or supernatural ability, which could be argued has some "personal mojo" associated with it. I disagree with you that there is a contradiction. UMD allows you to activate magic items as if you had "burned a spell slot" (or turned undead, or raged, etc.). You do not actually burn a spell slot, so you do not actually use the class ability; the item simply functions as if you had. I understand what you're saying, I just simply don't agree. RAW is unclear because of wording. In terms of balance, I think that would be broken. The suggestion that Rogues can cast spells out of Runestaves that require you to expend a prepared spell or spell-slot is ridiculous. From where is the Runestaff getting the magical power to cast the spell? The item clearly converts the existing energies of a spell to a new spell; if the character does not possess that energy, the staff cannot perform its function, no matter what tomfoolery you perform on it. Even if you were to nitpick the language they used (which you still cannot convince me that the example is ambiguous while as the contradiction of using the skill is not), I don't believe this is RAI.
Pentar 06-22-07, 12:50 AM	I think a lot of people think that something the skill says is that you cannot use the class ability you emulate. No where in the skill is that specified. In fact, the very first sentence says that you use the class ability of an emulated class. The only ambiguous, and only slightly at that, sentence is where it is explained that you do not actually use the class ability. I've seen the opposing side omit this little word (actually) because it is throwing their entire grasp of the skill out of whack. If you are not actually using the feature, but you are using it, as the previous sentences illustrate quite clearly, then what the heck are you using? You are using a "virtual" (i.e. emulated) class ability that can only be used for the activation of magic items. Not clear english, but clear enough. Deliberately misreading the entire rest of the skill is no way to form a logical conclusion. Just because you want it to read a certain way does not mean that it does. All the skill is saying is that you can by-pass certain requirements of using magical items. So a Wizard could use UMD to cast a spell from a spell-trigger item that is not on his class spell list. Or a Rogue can cast a spell from a scroll that he normally could never cast because he lacks the arcane spell casting ability. But requirements that actually require you to use the skill should not be included. Using the skill means actually turning undead, or actually expending a spell slot. I understand that people want to interpret it a different way - and that you're not actually "using" anything, you're just faking it... But I don't think you were ever intended to "Fake spending energy you never possessed to begin with". Thematically, that makes no sense and it makes UMD too powerful. Whatever the case, that is never how UMD will work in campaigns I run - regardless of RAW.
Vegepygmy 06-22-07, 01:49 AM	All the skill is saying is that you can by-pass certain requirements of using magical items. So a Wizard could use UMD to cast a spell from a spell-trigger item that is not on his class spell list. Or a Rogue can cast a spell from a scroll that he normally could never cast because he lacks the arcane spell casting ability.No. Those applications of the skill are covered under different headings: "Use a Wand" and "Use a Scroll," specifically. The skill also has an application called "Emulate a Class Feature," and it shows by example that this application of the skill can be used in a way you personally take issue with. FWIW, I agree with you that UMD as written is a very abuseable skill. (It's also a class skill for only two core base classes, requires significant ranks to be at all effective, and has extra limitations not found in most other skills.) But note that Runestaves and such items have come along only recently. It would be silly to blame UMD for any issues of "brokenness" that arise from how these items have been designed to work.
jaelis 06-22-07, 06:51 AM	I think a lot of people think that something the skill says is that you cannot use the class ability you emulate. No where in the skill is that specified. In fact, the very first sentence says that you use the class ability of an emulated class. That's not correct, the first sentence says "Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item." That is a simple declarative that no one would argue with. Then it says (as you note) that "This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class" which certainly does say that you cannot use the class ability you emulate. I agree it can be interpreted more or less tightly, but it does explicitly say you can't use the ability.
Leilond 06-22-07, 07:05 AM	There are two possibility 1) The example is wrong You cannot emulate a class feature if the item require the actual use of the class feature 2) The example is right UMD let you emulate a class feature like you actually use the class feature. You can find tons of way to justify this... it's magic, it can be justified Unfortunatelly the rules aren't perfectly spelled, so every one can freely chose the one preferred I will let you "emulate a class feature" like you can "fake" the item and let it "belive" your actually using it, without actually really using it
jaelis 06-22-07, 08:27 AM	I don't see why this is so difficult for otherwise intelligent people to wrap their brains around. I think you're being disingenous here. It does say that you can't actually use the class feature you are emulating, so if you had a magic item that required you to actually use the class feature, it wouldn't work. Reasonable people can disagree about whether an item falls into that category... I would say a runestaff certainly does, you evidently say it doesn't. And the chalice in the PHB sounds to me like it does, but to you it doesn't. Also, my example with the lightning bolt was a poor one, and I think your response was off. Casting lightning bolt is not a class feature of a wizard, any more than having the Weapon Specialization feat is a class feature of a fighter. They are both simply options that their class features allow them to choose if they wish... plenty of wizards can't cast lightning bolt.
Leilond 06-22-07, 09:31 AM	I think you're being disingenous here. It does say that you can't actually use the class feature you are emulating, so if you had a magic item that required you to actually use the class feature, it wouldn't work. And someone can disagree on this. The fact that you say that, doesn't mean it is I can find perfectly logical that I can fake the item and let him "belive" I use a class feature without actually using it. I'm not saying that UMD let me use the class feature, only fake the item beliving it
Vegepygmy 06-22-07, 11:25 AM	I think you're being disingenous here. It does say that you can't actually use the class feature you are emulating, so if you had a magic item that required you to actually use the class feature, it wouldn't work.I'm not being disingenuous. I really don't see what is so difficult about understanding what "actually use" means. Player: "I'm going to use UMD to emulate a cleric's ability to turn undead so that I can turn that vampire coming towards me." DM: "Sorry, UMD doesn't allow you to actually use that ability." DM: "This magic item is activated when the user turns the tiny zombie inside it." Player: "I'm going to use UMD to emulate a cleric's ability to turn undead so that I can activate the item as if I had turned the tiny zombie inside it." DM: "Make your UMD check." The difference seems plain as day to me. Also, my example with the lightning bolt was a poor one, and I think your response was off. Casting lightning bolt is not a class feature of a wizard, any more than having the Weapon Specialization feat is a class feature of a fighter. They are both simply options that their class features allow them to choose if they wish... plenty of wizards can't cast lightning bolt.The definition of "class feature" does not include any language suggesting that a class feature must be possessed by all members of the class. class feature: Any special characteristic derived from a character class. So I don't entirely agree with your conclusion that a wizard's ability to cast lightning bolt is not a class feature, though it's certainly something to think about.
arjomanes 06-22-07, 11:51 AM	We already know chameleon can actually emulate class abilities. So it's not such a stretch to believe the description written in the Player's Handbook that the rogue can emulate class features for the purpose of using a magical item. It's pretty clear to me. "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." It's pretty clear that if the item required you to expend a turn undead attempt, you can attempt to activate the item as if you had the turn undead ability, but only for the item. You can't actually turn undead, you just emulate the turn undead ability to fuel the item. If you want to think of it as a zombie on a treadmill, that's fine. Basically a rogue is able to trick the item into thinking he's actually expending a turn attempt to fuel it (ie: the chalice thinks he's channeling positive energy into it). It's as if he has the turn undead ability, even though he really doesn't.
jaelis 06-22-07, 11:58 AM	But if you have to actually turn the zombie to make the cup work, then you have to turn the zombie. That's what "actually" means. So are you saying that you would allow UMD to, say, discharge a spell storing weapon without hitting your opponent? What about inflicting energy damage from a flaming weapon? Both of those are magical effects that go off when a certain condition is met... if you think UMD can duplicate such conditions with complete generality, why wouldn't they work? I hope your answer is that they wouldn't, and you might say it's because hitting an opponent isn't a class feature. But why not? Suppose you need to hit an AC of 20... then a level 20 fighter with the Weapon Supremacy feat could hit automatically. Just duplicate that "class ability." (Of course you wouldn't actually hit your opponent, but you could convince the weapon that you did and activate it's effect. Arguably you could even do the weapon's enhancement bonus damage too, that also is "activated" on a hit.) Here's another twist on the same issue. Say there were an ion stone sitting unattended on the ethereal plane. It can obviously be activated by any creature on ethereal plane, they just pick it up and put it on their head. Do you think that you could use UMD to emulate the monk's empty body ability to activate it?
Pentar 06-22-07, 12:03 PM	We already know chameleon can actually emulate class abilities. Well, a Chameleon's ability to emulate class features is a Supernatural ability, right? UMD is a universal skill. I don't believe it is defined as Ex, Sp or Su. Makes it harder to buy into the "it's magic" argument. And someone can disagree on this. The fact that you say that, doesn't mean it is I can find perfectly logical that I can fake the item and let him "belive" I use a class feature without actually using it. The hair we are splitting here is discussing whether or not burning a turn attempt to use an item is the same thing as burning a turn attempt to actually turn undead. In both cases you have to use a Class feature to perform a function. But the clear wording is that you're using the ability, something that UMD clearly does not let you do. This is an issue that cannot be resolved without the intervention of the original designers. Your argument about "how clear and logical it is" to you is merely a statement of biased opinion, as you're not seeing it from both sides. The issue is not as clear cut as you think.
Vegepygmy 06-22-07, 02:52 PM	But if you have to actually turn the zombie to make the cup work, then you have to turn the zombie. That's what "actually" means.I guess my response to that is: That's not how magic items normally work, but if that's how a designer of a magic item wants it to work, it needs to be made very explicit. For example, "This magic item cannot be activated unless the user actually turns the tiny zombie inside it. Use Magic Device and similar abilities that merely emulate turning are insufficient." So are you saying that you would allow UMD to, say, discharge a spell storing weapon without hitting your opponent? What about inflicting energy damage from a flaming weapon? Both of those are magical effects that go off when a certain condition is met... if you think UMD can duplicate such conditions with complete generality, why wouldn't they work?Hitting an opponent is not a class feature, so I'm utterly baffled by your line of reasoning here. I hope your answer is that they wouldn't, and you might say it's because hitting an opponent isn't a class feature. But why not?Because it's not a special characteristic derived from a character class. Even monsters with no character class at all can hit an opponent. Here's another twist on the same issue. Say there were an ion stone sitting unattended on the ethereal plane. It can obviously be activated by any creature on ethereal plane, they just pick it up and put it on their head. Do you think that you could use UMD to emulate the monk's empty body ability to activate it?I'm totally lost. If the ioun stone is on the ethereal plane, you'd have to actually be ethereal to pick it up, wouldn't you? UMD cannot be used to actually use a monk's Empty Body ability to become ethereal, so the character in question would not be able to pick up the stone. If, however, you had an ioun stone that said: "This stone can only be activated by a monk who is ethereal as if using his Empty Body ability," I'd say yes, you could emulate the class ability to activate the stone without actually becoming ethereal.
zelf_gale 06-22-07, 04:11 PM	After re-reading the use magic device skill description three times, I've decided I would allow an item activated by using a turning attempt to be activated by emulating the class feature of a cleric. However in a feeble attempt to preserve game balance I would probably house rule that emulating the class feature would also include emulating the daily limit. I don't think their is anything by RAW that supports this but I'd do it all the same for my own sanity. From a flavor point of view I can totally see why people hate this topic. Just assume that magic items are not converters of energy but lock boxes and that the turning attempt isn't fuel but instead a key. Or perhaps that the emulating is a really, really weak fuel that is focused on the item activation to work, but could never work for its true intended purpose.
jaelis 06-22-07, 04:36 PM	I'm utterly baffled by your line of reasoning here. Well good, I tried to make them kind of baffling to make sure there was some limit to what you were thinking you could do. So first, we seem to agree that it is possible for a magic item to require you to actually use a class feature, we just differ on how explicitly that requirement would need to be stated. I'm fine with that. Second, I'm not really clear on what you consider a class feature.
Vegepygmy 06-22-07, 05:47 PM	I'm not really clear on what you consider a class feature.Why, it's a special characteristic derived from a character class, of course! ;) We can probably also agree that "class feature" is a poorly defined concept in D&D. The most that I can say with absolute certainty is that it must derive from a character class (and thus "hitting an opponent" is definitely not a class feature, but "casting spells" might be).
gyp5sy 06-22-07, 07:52 PM	All the skill is saying is that you can by-pass certain requirements of using magical items. So a Wizard could use UMD to cast a spell from a spell-trigger item that is not on his class spell list. Or a Rogue can cast a spell from a scroll that he normally could never cast because he lacks the arcane spell casting ability. But requirements that actually require you to use the skill should not be included. Using the skill means actually turning undead, or actually expending a spell slot. I understand that people want to interpret it a different way - and that you're not actually "using" anything, you're just faking it... But I don't think you were ever intended to "Fake spending energy you never possessed to begin with". Thematically, that makes no sense and it makes UMD too powerful. Whatever the case, that is never how UMD will work in campaigns I run - regardless of RAW. Sorry you feel that way, but I am interested in hearing opinions as well as logical interpretations, which you have pretty much conceded that yours is not. For the record, using a class ability is defined where that class ability is written. (i.e. turning undead requires a standard action then you get to make a turning check yadda yadda yadda...) Any other use is not strictly "using" it. Also, for the record, you cannot use Runestaffs just with UMD. The activation of a runestaff changes one spell you have to another and then allows you to cast it. So, while you could use UMD to do some monkeying around with spells in you slots (or whatever) no amount of UMD actually lets you cast a spell. Is it really that unbalancing? Untill recently, we've had pretty much no examples of items that work this way. Officially, that is. But I've found that the definition of UMD is taken into account, even for these new ones (runestaffs, for example). A friend of mine recently told me that this "interpretation" would be unbalanced, as you could place any spell you wanted into a weapon of spell storing, but the activation of this item is well defined. To place a spell in one, you must cast the spell you want into it, the activation comes when you release the spell. This really isn't a hard concept. It's clearly defined within the skill. Wizards has already communicated which interpretation of "actually" they are using. The example has not been errata'd, nor has this issue been addressed in an official FAQ. If you want to read it differently, it would be your house rule and not the official interpretation.
jaelis 06-22-07, 09:17 PM	Why, it's a special characteristic derived from a character class, of course! ;) We can probably also agree that "class feature" is a poorly defined concept in D&D. The most that I can say with absolute certainty is that it must derive from a character class (and thus "hitting an opponent" is definitely not a class feature, but "casting spells" might be). You're right that it's not very well defined, and I don't have any particular axe to grind about it... I know how UMD works when I'm playing, and that's really all I need to know. But just in the interest of working to pin it down... The obvious place to start is with the things listed in the "Class Features" section of the class description. For wizard, that would be: - Weapon and Armor Proficiency - Bonus Language (draconic) - Spellcasting - Familiar - Scribe Scroll - Bonus Feats - Spellbooks So yeah, no base attack bonus or saves. But it isn't so simple. Often class features involve choices. For instance, if "bonus feats" are a class feature, does that mean UMD could emulate having any metamagic or item creation feat? And could you emulate speaking draconic, even though a wizard has to spend a language slot to learn it just like any other language? I have to say, none of those sit well with me. I just don't see speaking draconic as a class feature of a wizard. While I do see speaking druidic as a class feature of a druid. So I think I want to be specific and say that having draconic available as a bonus language is the class feature, not speaking draconic itself. And that being able to select a bonus feat is a feature, but not the feats themselves. That fits my intuition for what a class feature is supposed to be, and also I think it is consistent with the letter of the rules. By that reasoning, I'll stick to my opinion that casting lighting bolt is not a class feature of a wizard. The class feature is spell casting in general, which allows a wizard to learn and cast any number of spells. But particular spells are not class features, because no particular spell is listed in the class description. Another subject that gets argued a lot is whether caster level (or class level in general) is a class feature. I think by my definition it is not... caster/class level is not listed in that section. The half-casters do have a note saying their caster level is half their class level, but it seems to me that isn't really giving them a feature, just specifying how their class level (which is not a feature) impacts their spell casting (which is a feature).
Pentar 06-22-07, 11:54 PM	Sorry you feel that way, but I am interested in hearing opinions as well as logical interpretations, which you have pretty much conceded that yours is not. I've already given my interpretation and I feel it's pretty logical, given that the wording and example are unclear. I don't feel it's anymore or less logical than your interpretation, which having read the below is rather inconsistent anyway. For the record, using a class ability is defined where that class ability is written. (i.e. turning undead requires a standard action then you get to make a turning check yadda yadda yadda...) Any other use is not strictly "using" it. Sure, if that's what you feel. So I guess when a Paladin burns a Turn attempt to activate Divine Might, he's not actually "using" a Turn Undead attempt, since it's not the text of the "class ability" as you have indicated above. Free Divine Might and Divine Shields for all!! Hurrah! Also, for the record, you cannot use Runestaffs just with UMD. The activation of a runestaff changes one spell you have to another and then allows you to cast it. Wrong. In following Veg's interpretation, you could use a Runestaff. The whole *******ed point was that you could "fake" burning a slot using UMD and that suddenly the Runestaff would cast the spell for you. Remember, the Runestaff is casting the spell - not you. You might not even have that spell to cast. That's the whole point of the item. Is it really that unbalancing? Untill recently, we've had pretty much no examples of items that work this way. Officially, that is. But I've found that the definition of UMD is taken into account, even for these new ones (runestaffs, for example). My only issue with Veg's interpretation is that it would allow UMD to activate and power items that require the expenditure of class abilities - like spell slots. If it works in one case, it will work in all cases - you cannot pick and choose what is convenient to make your case. Or well, you could, but it would make for the half-baked argument you've strung together. As for house rule, I have no problem with that. If this is their official interpretation, so be it. I'll house rule it. Is there a committee I need to be submitting this to?
Bladenite78 06-24-07, 07:36 AM	my opinion on these things has always been simple, you can trick the item into thinking that you have an ability, but you can't trick the world into thinking the item has been given an ability to use. Thus, sure, you can activate the item or whatnot if all you need to do is effectively "lie" to the item, but you can not utilize functions that require you to expend actual limits of an ability, otherwise class abilities become paled in comparison to UMD and I think that's just asinine. In my campaign, Id let you have the item but if you wanted to use it then you better have someone sacrifice a 5th level slot for you, because if you don't have it, then you dont get it...you're not fooling the item after that point, you're fooling the world and I don't think its meant to work like that.
SALDAR 06-24-07, 11:04 AM	In following Veg's interpretation, you could use a Runestaff. The whole *******ed point was that you could "fake" burning a slot using UMD and that suddenly the Runestaff would cast the spell for you. Remember, the Runestaff is casting the spell - not you. You might not even have that spell to cast. That's the whole point of the item. And the opposing point is that you can make the item believe you have a slot to burn but you cannot make the item believe you are burning a slot. There is nothing in the UMD description that says it works with any and all magic items no matter what is required by the magic item. Some items require you to actually use a class feature to activate them but UMD does not allow you to actually use the class feature so you cannot activate them. The example in the PHB states "a magic chalice that turns regular water into holy water when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead." The cleric or paladin must use their turn undead class feature to activate the chalice. It doesn't say that the cleric or paladin must simply have the ability to turn undead, they have to actually use turn undead. The next paragraph states that UMD does not allow you to actually use the class feature but only allows you to act as if you have the ability to. Having the ability and using the ability are two seperate things and the difference is specified within UMD, you can't use it but you can act like you have it. The example says you must use the ability to activate and that Lidda can pretend to use it to activate, but the actual UMD rules say you cannot pretend to use the ability but can only pretend that you have the ability. So the example is wrong.
Pentar 06-24-07, 12:30 PM	And the opposing point is that you can make the item believe you have a slot to burn but you cannot make the item believe you are burning a slot. There is nothing in the UMD description that says it works with any and all magic items no matter what is required by the magic item. Some items require you to actually use a class feature to activate them but UMD does not allow you to actually use the class feature so you cannot activate them. Oh you don't have to tell me twice - you're preaching to the converted :D I was merely explaining to gyp5sy why his argument was inconsistent. :) I fully agree that the example is incorrect, or at best, misleading.
SALDAR 06-25-07, 08:29 PM	Sorry Pentar, I didn't mean to sound like I was debating you. I was just expounding on your point about Vegepygmy's take on the subject.
arjomanes 06-25-07, 09:18 PM	I'm not at all satisfied with the description of Use Magic Device. It says: "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." So. . . you need to use a class feature to activate the magic item. How do you do that? In this case (using a class feature), you roll a UMD check, and that score -20 equals your effective level in that emulated class. Ok. "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." Hey! WTF? Now I can't use the class feature? You just told me how to! Now I can only activate items as if I had the class feature. . . but, but it just said that I need to use the class feature, and it showed me how to, not just act as if I had the class feature. Ok maybe the example will clear things up now. . . Hey! WTF?? That's what I thought it said! But then that got shot down. The example goes and shows Lidda doing something that matches the first half of the description but is forbidden by the second. Well, maybe by "this skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class" it just means I can't go around turning undead normally. I can only use it to power the item. That's all I can figure. Though I'll admit I'm probably wrong. I don't like either interpretation and I think it will have to come down to individual house rules, probably erring on the side of balance and forbidding the actual use of class abilities.
Pentar 06-25-07, 10:53 PM	Sorry Pentar, I didn't mean to sound like I was debating you. I was just expounding on your point about Vegepygmy's take on the subject Np :) That's all I can figure. Though I'll admit I'm probably wrong. I don't like either interpretation and I think it will have to come down to individual house rules, probably erring on the side of balance and forbidding the actual use of class abilities. Yep, pretty much. UMD, for that particular situation, is pretty much FUBAR. IMHO it doesn't make sense that they can use an ability they don't possess to power an item, regardless of "RAW". But unless someone asks Wizards to clarify, we're all pretty much shooting blanks into the dark. :)
Vegepygmy 06-26-07, 01:37 AM	Well, maybe by "this skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class" it just means I can't go around turning undead normally. I can only use it to power the item.Gee, ya think? I'll say it one more time: I don't see why this is so difficult for otherwise intelligent people to wrap their brains around.
SALDAR 06-26-07, 10:19 PM	I'll say it one more time: I don't see why this is so difficult for otherwise intelligent people to wrap their brains around. Because we also read the second sentence in that paragraph? From the PHB: "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."
jaelis 06-26-07, 11:13 PM	Indeed. You all are basically interpreting that line as "It just lets you activate items as if you had used that class feature" which is really not the same thing.
Vegepygmy 06-27-07, 05:29 PM	Because we also read the second sentence in that paragraph?We've all read it. The difference is that you choose to interpret it in such a way that it contradicts the example, rather than in a way that it remains consistent with the example. That's simply unreasonable in the absence of any evidence that the example is, in fact, wrong.
SALDAR 06-27-07, 07:31 PM	We've all read it. The difference is that you choose to interpret it in such a way that it contradicts the example, rather than in a way that it remains consistent with the example. It cannot be consistent with the example any way because of the preceeding line. From the SRD: "This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class." It is this line that contradicts the example. The line you keep interpreting as "That if you emulate the Turn Undead class feature that you cannot actually use it to turn undead but you can use it to activate a magic item". This line tells us that you cannot use the class feature by using UMD. If you cannot use UMD to use a class feature then you cannot use UMD to use a class feature for any reason, even for the UMD skill itself. The second line simply tells us that you can act like you have the class feature in order to activate items that require someone with that class feature to activate them. The chalice in the example requires you to use the turn undead class feature to activate it. UMD does not allow you to use the turn undead class feature. The example is wrong.
Vegepygmy 06-27-07, 08:13 PM	We are clearly at the "dead horse" stage of this argument. It is apparent to me that the UMD authors distinguish "use to activate a magic item" from "actually use." You reject that notion and, in an attempt to buttress your argument against it, conveniently omit the word actually from your conclusion. There's really nothing more left to say. :tiphat:
SALDAR 06-27-07, 08:23 PM	If UMD does not let you actually use the class feature then you cannot use UMD to actually use the class feature to activate an item. Better?
spyderfreek 06-28-07, 01:25 PM	ok lets try this argument from a new angle: Spell casting is a class feature. In order to cast spells you need a spell list, therfore spell lists are a class feature. In order to use a wand without UMD you need it on your class list. Since a rogue does not have a spell list, he cannot emmulate that class feature to be able to activate the wand. sound plausible? No, beacuase that COMPLETELY negates the ability... duh
Pentar 06-28-07, 01:27 PM	ok lets try this argument from a new angle: Spell casting is a class feature. In order to cast spells you need a spell list, therfore spell lists are a class feature. In order to use a wand without UMD you need it on your class list. Since a rogue does not have a spell list, he cannot emmulate that class feature to be able to activate the wand. sound plausible? No, beacuase that COMPLETELY negates the ability... duh Except that UMD allows you to use Wands as a separate entry of its abilities. You do not need to Emulate a Class Feature in order to use a Wand. Try again.
jaelis 06-28-07, 01:38 PM	Spell casting is a class feature. In order to cast spells you need a spell list, therfore spell lists are a class feature. In order to use a wand without UMD you need it on your class list. Since a rogue does not have a spell list, he cannot emmulate that class feature to be able to activate the wand. Besides Pentar's point, your conclusion is wrong. It is reasonable to say that your spell list is a class feature, and if some non-spell trigger item required you to have a spell on your spell list to activate it, I'd be fine with that. Because that item doesn't require you to use that class feature, just to have it. Actually using your spell list only occurs when you learn spells. If some crazy item required you to scribe a spell into your spell book in order to activate it, then I don't think UMD could help you.
Vegepygmy 06-28-07, 02:58 PM	If UMD does not let you actually use the class feature then you cannot use UMD to actually use the class feature to activate an item. Better?Yes, much better. The chalice in the example is activated when positive energy is channeled into it. Lidda is able to activate the magic item as if she could channel positive energy into it, even though she cannot actually do so.
Pentar 06-28-07, 04:15 PM	Yes, much better. The chalice in the example is activated when positive energy is channeled into it. Lidda is able to activate the magic item as if she could channel positive energy into it, even though she cannot actually do so. Part of the problem we're facing here is we don't know what the activation requirements of this example chalice is. So if the item's activation requirement was: "Use one of your Turn Undead attempts for the day to activate the chalice..." What happens?
Vegepygmy 06-28-07, 04:49 PM	I agree, Pentar, that the activation requirements of the example chalice are unclear. I believe, therefore, that we should strive as much as possible to interpret the rules and example in such a way that they do not contradict each other. (Others seem to be doing the opposite, and are resolving any ambiguity in favor of a self-contradictory interpretation, which I think is patently unreasonable.) Turning to your question, I would interpret "Use one of your Turn Undead attempts for the day to activate the chalice..." so as to achieve what I believe is the clear intent of the UMD skill: you can emulate a cleric's class ability to turn undead (with a DC 21 UMD check) and thereby activate the chalice. If the chalice designer's intent is that it can only be activated by someone actually using a Turn Undead attempt, I believe that needs to be very explicitly stated as I mentioned here: http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12821608&postcount=39
ninjasuperspy 06-28-07, 04:55 PM	See, it would seem to me that the chalice in the example is activated by the turn undead attempt, not powered by it. This is the distinction that we are butting heads on. One side of the argument seems to be going from the stance that the turn undead attempt is functioning as the battery, where as the other half is going from the stance that the turn undead is just flipping the invisible, magical switch. In my opinion, if you made a chalice with a tiny zombie in it that when turned would run on a treadmill and cause something to happen, then the use of UMD would completely bypass the tiny zombie treadmill and go right into the magical part of the device. Using a turned zombie to generate some kind of energy isn't really a Magical Device at all, it is a fantastical version of a mundane device. That said, on the UMD skill description (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/useMagicDevice.htm) under "Use a Wand" it states "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." The spell trigger part of this statement links to: 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. So no on Runestaves. I mean you could drop a UMD to "attune" yourself to them like a wizard could, and heck you may even try to use the thing to sub a spell, but you don't have a spell list, the spell wouldn't be able to go anywhere. The Belt of Wide Earth you mentioned says "Burn a fifth level spell slot and the Belt uses teleport" so it lets a 9th level wizard get away with never preparing teleport. Going by your quote, the Belt is a Wand of Teleport that never needs charging, requires a skill to use (5th level spells) and occupies a belt slot in order to lower the cost. Yeah, UMD covers that. Now if the belt says "you burn a 5th level spell and you can cast teleport" then that's completely different. In that case the Belt isn't casting teleport, it is letting you substitute a spell you have prepared of 5th level or higher for Teleport. That is a completely different case. I imagine that you could use UMD to trick the belt into thinking you were an arcane caster with 5th level spell slots, but when it passed you the spell it wouldn't also confer the ability to cast it. It really all lies in what the Belt (or chalice) does and how it does that.
Kian 06-28-07, 06:46 PM	I decided to chip in after reading someone mention that magic doesn't come out of thin air =P Anyway, I don't see why people say that you couldn't use an item that required you to use a class feature. Going with the description of the skill, 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. Now, if the skill read, "Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item. In this case, you can't use this skill," then yes, you couldn't use an item that required you to use a class feature. However, the skill specifically says that you can use items that require the use of class features. Notice, also, that it says your level in the emulated class is your check minus 20. Going by what the skill says, you're not emulating a feature. You're emulating being a character of a different class and different level. Meaning that for the express purpose of activating the item, you're a character of the required class and level. You could choose to emulate a class that gets the feature at a lower level to decrease the check. Moreover, a character of a given class and level ussualy has a limited number of uses for a class feature. This would also apply to the rogue, giving some semblance of balance to the skill. A wizard has, at most, 4 slots from the class, and bonus slots equal to (INT-10-spell level)/4, rounded down. Keep track of the number of times the rogue has used the item emulating a particular class and level (or ability score!), and that's as much as he can use. If he's used the item once, making the lowest necesary check, then using it again would require a higher check, since it would take a higher level character to have more uses of the feature. Even with a high modifier for UMD, he doesn't get infinite uses of the skill. As for what is powering the effect, I liked the rogue's mojo comment someone made. It's magic, it already breaks all sort of laws of conservation. Let the poor rogue in on it as well.
Pentar 06-29-07, 12:19 PM	Honestly, my only real concern was that RAW would allow Rogues to use Runestaves. That makes no sense at all. But since it seems agreed that Runestaves are out, they can do whatever else they want with the damn thing :)
jaelis 07-01-07, 05:46 PM	I asked Cust Serv about the runestaff question specifically: Can a character with sufficient ranks in Use Magic Device activate and cast spells with a runestaff or similar item that requires the user to sacrifice spell slots? The argument is that this can be done using the Emulate a Class Feature rules. No they cannot. They have nothing to sacrifice. Most people seem to agree with this anyway. I didn't ask about the chalice example because the situation there isn't spelled out, I don't think it's possible to have a definitive answer. But I don't personally see the distinction between sacrificing a spell slot and sacrificing a turn attempt.
Pentar 07-02-07, 03:39 PM	I asked Cust Serv about the runestaff question specifically: Most people seem to agree with this anyway. I didn't ask about the chalice example because the situation there isn't spelled out, I don't think it's possible to have a definitive answer. But I don't personally see the distinction between sacrificing a spell slot and sacrificing a turn attempt. I think that pretty much clears up that matter in my mind. Thanks, Jaelis.
jaelis 07-02-07, 07:29 PM	Actually, here's a follow-up Would the same logic apply to an item or effect that required the sacrifice of a turn undead attempt, a paladin's smite good ability, or other daily-use effect? The Player's Handbook entry talks about a rogue using UMD to activate a chalice that requires a turn undead attempt, and this has always been a little confusing. It's not the same thing. You're not really "sacrificing" a turn undead attempt. You're emulating an ability. But with a Runestaff, the required spells to sacrifice are an actual resource outside the activation of the item itself and cannot be performed because you don't have anything to sacrifice. Thus supporting the view of Vegepygmy et al.
Leilond 07-03-07, 06:49 AM	I asked Cust Serv about the runestaff question specifically: Most people seem to agree with this anyway. I didn't ask about the chalice example because the situation there isn't spelled out, I don't think it's possible to have a definitive answer. But I don't personally see the distinction between sacrificing a spell slot and sacrificing a turn attempt. Nor do I, and I will admit both with UMD
Pentar 07-03-07, 12:13 PM	Actually, here's a follow-up Would the same logic apply to an item or effect that required the sacrifice of a turn undead attempt, a paladin's smite good ability, or other daily-use effect? The Player's Handbook entry talks about a rogue using UMD to activate a chalice that requires a turn undead attempt, and this has always been a little confusing. It's not the same thing. You're not really "sacrificing" a turn undead attempt. You're emulating an ability. But with a Runestaff, the required spells to sacrifice are an actual resource outside the activation of the item itself and cannot be performed because you don't have anything to sacrifice. Thus supporting the view of Vegepygmy et al. Interesting... Now taking this back to the OP's original question and applying this answer, UMD would not work on the Belt of Wide Earth (or whatever), where the user has to sacrifice a 5th level, or higher prepared spell or slot, to gain the benefits of a Teleport. This goes in line with the fact that the UMD user (assumed) does not have a 5th level spell slot to sacrifice. Simultaneously, if I'm reading this correctly, if the ability states, "You use a Turn attempt to...", someone with UMD could emulate using a Turn Attempt, even if they don't have any, and activate the item. o.O :hides: :crazy:
ArcTan 07-03-07, 01:58 PM	So no on Runestaves. I mean you could drop a UMD to "attune" yourself to them like a wizard could, and heck you may even try to use the thing to sub a spell, but you don't have a spell list, the spell wouldn't be able to go anywhere. The Belt of Wide Earth you mentioned says "Burn a fifth level spell slot and the Belt uses teleport" so it lets a 9th level wizard get away with never preparing teleport. Going by your quote, the Belt is a Wand of Teleport that never needs charging, requires a skill to use (5th level spells) and occupies a belt slot in order to lower the cost. Yeah, UMD covers that. How is this "no on runestaves"? Runestaves function by letting you burn a spell of a certain level and instead get a different spell on the runestaff list. It's silly to split hairs over whether "you" are casting the spell or the "staff" is casting the spell. I used to be upset by the very clear implication from this example that Lidda can use a runestaff for free with UMD, but now I'm more okay with it. It is a 3/day ability, after all, and it's expensive, and it's not fundamentally different from buying a wand or a regular DMG staff.
Pentar 07-03-07, 02:18 PM	How is this "no on runestaves"? Runestaves function by letting you burn a spell of a certain level and instead get a different spell on the runestaff list. It's silly to split hairs over whether "you" are casting the spell or the "staff" is casting the spell. I used to be upset by the very clear implication from this example that Lidda can use a runestaff for free with UMD, but now I'm more okay with it. It is a 3/day ability, after all, and it's expensive, and it's not fundamentally different from buying a wand or a regular DMG staff. The official CSR answer is that you cannot use it to operate a Runestaff. No matter what though, UMD is powerful enough that it doesn't need to allow users of the skill access to items that has a spell-slot cost as well. So technically Lidda cannot use a Runestaff for free. But if you want to disregard the answers given by Wizards, then "Fight da powah mah brotha!"
Leilond 07-03-07, 03:42 PM	Interesting... Now taking this back to the OP's original question and applying this answer, UMD would not work on the Belt of Wide Earth (or whatever), where the user has to sacrifice a 5th level, or higher prepared spell or slot, to gain the benefits of a Teleport. This goes in line with the fact that the UMD user (assumed) does not have a 5th level spell slot to sacrifice. Simultaneously, if I'm reading this correctly, if the ability states, "You use a Turn attempt to...", someone with UMD could emulate using a Turn Attempt, even if they don't have any, and activate the item. o.O :hides: :crazy: I will accept both use of UMD.
ArcTan 07-03-07, 03:50 PM	The official CSR answer is that you cannot use it to operate a Runestaff. No matter what though, UMD is powerful enough that it doesn't need to allow users of the skill access to items that has a spell-slot cost as well. So technically Lidda cannot use a Runestaff for free. But if you want to disregard the answers given by Wizards, then "Fight da powah mah brotha!" CustServ is making an off-the-cuff ruling just like us here on the boards. I'm still waiting to hear a reason why a spell slot is fundamentally different from a turning attempt. It's not about "fighting the power". It's about acknowledging that the people who write CustServ and the FAQ are *not* "Wizards" in this sense -- they're ordinary employees with no special knowledge making guesses the same way we are. It's *not* the same as something written in an actual sourcebook or errata, which has gone through an editing process and was written by the primary designers of the game.
jaelis 07-03-07, 04:05 PM	CustServ is making an off-the-cuff ruling just like us here on the boards. Sure, but Andy Collins wouldn't do anything much different. It's not like there's really a "right" answer here, and anyone can play however they want. What customer service gives is an "official" answer. If you already know how you want to play it, then you should ignore that. But if you're in doubt about it, you might as well use the official decision. Anyway, my take on the difference is actually not so much that its a spell vs a turn attempt, but the notion of "sacrifice". If an item said you needed to "sacrifice" a turn attempt to activated, then I guess UMD wouldn't work, while if it said you needed to "use" the turn undead ability, it would. I can't say I really see the distinction, but that seems to be the line taken in the cust serv response.