The questions:
Does your UMD check determine your caster level for staffs if you are a Artificer?
Does it do so if you are a bard?
Why?
Staff descriptions
Staffs use the wielder’s ability score and relevant feats to set the DC for saves against their spells. Unlike with other sorts of magic items, the wielder can use his caster level when activating the power of a staff if it’s higher than the caster level of the staff.
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.
Not needed quote on emulate class feature:
Show
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).
or this?
"In this case the emulated class feature is equal to the UMD check -20."
Ergo, somebody who made a UMD check of 60, would cast that staff of Owl's Insight at CL 40.
I'm... I'm sorry, have you tried the search function?
or this?
:: gently :: Yes. I've used the handy links, run searches, etc. And I couldn't find a single consolidated resources arguing both sides of the issue in a fashion that satisfied me, wasn't archived, and wasn't just a long discussion thread.
Nice job treating a forum regular worse than I'd treat a newbie.
N2MU, you just quoted yourself out of your own oppinion lmao.
"In this case the emulated class feature is equal to the UMD check -20."
Ergo, somebody who made a UMD check of 60, would cast that staff of Owl's Insight at CL 40.
No, you are not "required" to emulate it. So you cannot emulate it, because you do not need to.
Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item.
The paladin example in the SRD shows that pretty much that "spellcasting" as an ability is not required.
I discuss in the direction of "if it is required to emulate the ability" or "it is not". And it isn't, that simple.
Also same discussion here, thanks to Bronze Beard, I checked some.
http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-448722
Edit: I kept the quote in my first post, as I think it is a relevent one, but I did not use it in my arguments. It contributet to it, whatsoever. I did not want to get big on the "need to" thingy.
I believe you would use the minimum required caster level for the spell cast from a staff you activate with UMD; otherwise a nonspellcaster could easily get more mileage from a staff than a spellcaster and I highly doubt that's intended.
It wouldn't be minimum level for the spell. It would be the caster level of the staff for noncasters since they have no inherent caster level.
As far as bards go, they have a caster level. So once they use UMD (use a wand), they can choose between their actual caster level and the level of the staff.
I'm not sure about artificers since they also have no actual caster level. It looks like they might be stuck with the staff level, but I'll keep looking.
I still owe him a spoon. Someone remind me...
I've seen some indication that keith intended UMD to work this way.
I still owe him a spoon. Someone remind me...
Can you show them, would be kind. I haven't found any. Not that it matters at agaming table, but that could be awesome on cons.
The issue, fundamentally, was that Artificer has no actual caster level, and caster level is apparently a class feature... So in my mind, this says "I would like to emulate that class feature, because I need to." On the other hand, using your current caster level is actually an optional thing for staves.
UMD allows to activate a staff the way you could activate a wand.
There is no further need to emulate a class feature, as would be "spellcasting". The example in the SRD using the paladin describes that you don't even need the class feature "spellcasting".
So as far as I read it, thus neither can bard nor artificer use UMD to boost caster level. The bard could however use his "real" caster level instead of the staff's one.
While I agree that you wouldn't need to emulate the spellcasting, what if you wanted to cast a higher level - which is a specific use of UMD.
I think that someone could use a successful UMD check to boost their caster level with a staff.
Actually, I think there are 2 ways to look at this:
1) UMD to "Use a Wand" (or other spell trigger item). A successful UMD check here allows you to use the item as if you had the spell on your spell list. Wands are fixed caster level, so there is no issue, and spells in a staff have a set caster level.
2) Emulate a class feature - Emulate the spellcasting ability of the appropriate class and have a effective level in that class equal to UMD - 20.
The argument N2MU says is that "spellcasting" is not necessarily a required class feature, and thus you don't have to emulate it. The only option is #1.
After all a 3rd level Paladin has no spellcasting ability. A 3rd level paladin, does have a spell list, which is the part that is "required".
So why couldn't a rogue emulate the spell list feature of the paladin to use the staff?
While I agree that you wouldn't need to emulate the spellcasting, what if you wanted to cast a higher level - which is a specific use of UMD.
To state it clearer: You are only allowed to emulate a class feature if you need to. "Sometimes (...) need to (...)"
According to my logic classes:
need to =! want to (=! not equal)
Or a little on similar terms:
Need to = have to = required
Want to = could = not required
Then again: "Sometimes (...) need to" =! "Sometimes (...) want to"
The sometimes would also be non-sense argument, if you could do it always.
Thinking about this, I didn't need to emulate a class feature wearing a monk's belt as the belt has an option for non-monks. So you don't need to emulate a class feature.
I guess I have a problem with one of my past characters - and I wanted to present it as an example for using it^^
This might be a passage left from 3.0, as several items required monk level X, if I recall it correctly.
To the rogue-paladin-thing
A rogue can emulate a paladin's spell list, I don't read any problem.
Maybe a DM throwing chips'n'cups for the holy sword thing in your possibly chaotic evil hands.
To the rogue-paladin-thing
A rogue can emulate a paladin's spell list, I don't read any problem.
Maybe a DM throwing chips'n'cups for the holy sword thing in your possibly chaotic evil hands.
In short - the CL issue is clear as mud. I believe there is RAW evidence supporting BOTH sides of the argument.
In short - the CL issue is clear as mud. I believe there is RAW evidence supporting BOTH sides of the argument.
Uhm, to me it is as clear as a blueish summersky, or a lake with crystal-clear water.
Can you provide me a quote that makes "emulate class feature" dubious?
Like, "you can emulate a class feature when you want to".
The short lingo equations should have covered the UMD use to emulate a class feature (need to is not equal to want to).
The description is pretty straightforward for the UMD skill in the SRD. And I believe, the intention matches the text.
Maybe I missed a sourcebook, so I cannot catch your point?
For example (this isn't a rule quote, obviously, just a casual sentance, but I hope it displays my pointof the use of the word.) "Sometimes you need to cast your highest level spell prepared first in order to win." Does that mean you can only cast your highest level spell when it's necessary to win? Or does it mean that in those situations, if you don't cast it, you won't win, but your free to do whatever you please.
That's my problem with your interpretation. "Sometimes" carries no weight.
"Need to" =! "want to" is my full argumentation.
If you don't need to, you can't. Simple and beautiful, isn't it?
The sometimes is an addition to "need to", for the full "sometimes (...) need to"
To repeat: NEED TO =! WANT TO
Follow the link I provided and you will see the same discussion.
This might be a case for captain obvious (my intention is a joke):
Uhm, to me it is as clear as a blueish summersky, or a lake with crystal-clear water.
Can you provide me a quote that makes "emulate class feature" dubious?
Like, "you can emulate a class feature when you want to".
The short lingo equations should have covered the UMD use to emulate a class feature (need to is not equal to want to).
The description is pretty straightforward for the UMD skill in the SRD. And I believe, the intention matches the text.
Maybe I missed a sourcebook, so I cannot catch your point?
As I said:
You can either:
Emulate a class feature - I.e. a spell list.
or
Use a Wand.
Both will allow you to use a staff.
There is no need to do it one way versus the other.
and just for a nice summary (So I don't forget and have to keep rereading the thread).
Since N2MU argues that you don't need to emulate a class feature to use (since a Paladin doesn't have to have spellcasting to use a spell trigger item), therefore the only way to use the item with UMD is with the "Use a Wand" method.
My argument was that a Spell List is a class feature. N2MU seemed to agree.
Therefore there are quite literally 2 ways to activate a spell trigger item with UMD.
Trick the item into thinking the spell is on your spell list - aka "Use a Wand"
Trick the item into thinking that you have the appropriate spell list - aka "emulate a class feature".
Edit: I guess, the question is - is a spell list a feature of a class? If it is, then does one really have the choice of which method to use for UMD? Or is the only legitimate use of UMD to activate a wand or staff the "Use a wand" method.
Edit2: Sidenote: The DC for Emulate a Class feature is the exact same as the DC for Use a Wand. 20
Edit3: Sorry for the scattered thoughts - What section in the SRD is the "need to" quote from? And secondly, where is the "need to" for the "Use a Wand" activation method?
As I said:
You can either:
Emulate a class feature - I.e. a spell list.
or
Use a Wand.
Both will allow you to use a staff.
In one word: No.
UMD has a specific application to use staffes, there is no choice. "Spell-list" is not appearing on any of my classes as a class feature (which are described in the section "class features") - so obviously you cannot emulate it. You have to use "Use Wand".
Note, that "spell-list" is not a feature of spellcasting either, spellcasting allows you to select from the list. The paladin example shows, that he has access to spell-list without having spellcasting!
In a pick up line: spell-list =! spellcasting
A spell-list is not tied to spellcasting. See the paladin.
Spell-list is no class feature, read any spellcaster's class features.
There is thus no way to emulate a spell-list via "emulate class feature".
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.
That allows you to use the staff perfectly - and suddenly, there is no more need to "Emulate class feature". No need means you cannot use it.
and just for a nice summary (So I don't forget and have to keep rereading the thread).
Since N2MU argues that you don't need to emulate a class feature to use (since a Paladin doesn't have to have spellcasting to use a spell trigger item), therefore the only way to use the item with UMD is with the "Use a Wand" method.
My argument was that a Spell List is a class feature. N2MU seemed to agree.
Therefore there are quite literally 2 ways to activate a spell trigger item with UMD.
Trick the item into thinking the spell is on your spell list - aka "Use a Wand"
Trick the item into thinking that you have the appropriate spell list - aka "emulate a class feature".
Edit: I guess, the question is - is a spell list a feature of a class? If it is, then does one really have the choice of which method to use for UMD? Or is the only legitimate use of UMD to activate a wand or staff the "Use a wand" method.
Edit2: Sidenote: The DC for Emulate a Class feature is the exact same as the DC for Use a Wand. 20
Edit3: Sorry for the scattered thoughts - What section in the SRD is the "need to" quote from? And secondly, where is the "need to" for the "Use a Wand" activation method?
Highlighted the things I disagree upon.
The point is: You don't need to emulate a class feature at all:
You just use the UMD to "Use Wand", as it perfectly allows you to use a staff as well, as if you had the spell on your spell list. At that very moment, you are done. You can use the staff.
There is no need to emulaty any further class features. And accordingly, UMD does not allow you to use "Emulate Class feature", as there is no more need to do so.
And: Spell-list is not a class feature.
To Edit 3: "Sometimes you need (...)" to is from "Emulate class feature" in the PHB on Use Magic Devise. The first phrase.
Annex: Class features of a sorcerer (who has a spell-list):
Class Features
All of the following are class features of the sorcerer.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency:ShowSorcerers are proficient with all simple weapons. They are not proficient with any type of armor or shield. Armor of any type interferes with a sorcerer’s gestures, which can cause his spells with somatic components to fail.
The curious part is, under this argument, does one of the non-casting variant paladins still have a list?
I say they do, as a paladin has access to his spell-list before he gets spell casting. A non-casting variant just never learns to cast them on his own. And in no word they take away their spell-lists.
This is a bit like pal 3 ftr 17.
Probably, this is D&D's analogy to a mommy's boy, who could live one his own, but decided against it.
So if I were to try and get this to work, is there a loophole, trick, or snibbon I could exploit?
This is a really interesting idea. Thank you so much for all the help, N2MU, by the way. :: hums ::
"Spell-list" is not appearing on any of my classes as a class feature (which are described in the section "class features") - so obviously you cannot emulate it. You have to use "Use Wand".
This is an argument I can agree with. Since there is nothing that specifically states "Spell-list (Ex)"
Note, that "spell-list" is not a feature of spellcasting either, spellcasting allows you to select from the list. The paladin example shows, that he has access to spell-list without having spellcasting!
We were never in debate on this point.
That allows you to use the staff perfectly - and suddenly, there is no more need to "Emulate class feature". No need means you cannot use it.
Again, I can see this argument as above.
To Edit 3: "Sometimes you need (...)" to is from "Emulate class feature" in the PHB on Use Magic Devise. The first phrase.
Thanks for pointing that out.
To repeat: The paladin example shows, that spell-list is not tied to spellcasting. Apparently the list is no class feature, but something else tied to a class. Call it a class parameter (lacking a better term), like BaB and save bonus are.
So, in theory, if I can prove that a spell list is a class feature (I'm in no way saying that I can) I think only then could you use UMD to increase your caster level with a staff.
Edit: As of now the only thing I can really think of is that the "Class Parameters" is probably the best way to describe it. After all Skill points gained by a character are drawn from a Class Skill list, neither of which are listed under class features.
The spell list is mentioned in the "Spells" section of class features for a class that grants spellcasting of it's own (and not a class that advances another classes spellcasting). But is the mention of it here indicative of it being a class feature?
Looking at skills for an example, I'm thinking no.
To look at it from another perspective - is it implied that the spell list is a class feature? I also feel like i'm walking into RAI territory just asking the question (which I am trying to stay away from). But I do feel like this needs to be asked. Why would we need to have a list of features called "Class Parameters" and a list of features called "Class Features" when they are basically the same thing?
Personally, as a DM - I would probably allow a player to UMD a staff at a higher caster level. It's certainly not any easier of a UMD check to do such a thing. Although, at this point I almost completely convinced that the RAW answer is no.
I noted an interesting rule in 4.0e that says (in short):
Specific rules beats general ones.
It is somewhere in the starter's guide.
While I cannot find a similar one for any 3.Xe, this one would also support the "use wand", as it is more specific tied to staffes than "emulate class feature" (that to my knowledge is inappropriate anyway).
I know that it is cheesy to bring in a 4.e argument, but this one makes sense. I bet there is the same rule somewhere in 3.e, I just cannot find it right away.
For exploits:
I recall that one could build magic items with restrictions.
Other Considerations: Once you have a final cost figure, reduce that number if either of the following conditions applies:
- Item Requires Skill to Use: Some items require a specific skill to get them to function. This factor should reduce the cost about 10%.
- Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Use: Even more restrictive than requiring a skill, this limitation cuts the cost by 30%.
Prices presented in the magic item descriptions (the gold piece value following the item’s caster level) are the market value, which is generally twice what it costs the creator to make the item.
Spellcasting is not among the list is, but I think it could be easily added (edit: ) by an "uninsightful" DM. Some of the DMG artifacts require spellcasting to be used, so that wouldn't be a huge stretch, as there are kind of examples.
And all of the sudden, a staff requires spellcasting as an arcane caster of 4th level. And costs about 30% less.
Expect your DM to be mad, if you do so^^
_____
Edit:
Personally, as a DM - I would probably allow a player to UMD a staff at a higher caster level. It's certainly not any easier of a UMD check to do such a thing. Although, at this point I almost completely convinced that the RAW answer is no.
I am sure that I would be mad when a player gets a caster 30+ out of his staff^^
Are there any staffs prebuild that are interesting for high caster levels?
I am sure that I would be mad when a player gets a caster 30+ out of his staff^^
Are there any staffs prebuild that are interesting for high caster levels?
Because there aren't other things they could abuse.
I just have to rethink a few uses that I did, as I haven't cared to read over UMD since 3.0e until recently.
I think they dropped UMD as a skill in 4.0e? I can imagine the reasons...
The only stretch I can think of is the "requires cpellcasting" restriction, that is a little homebrew.
However, that UMD option for staffs will surely make blasterficers insane.
I say they do, as a paladin has access to his spell-list before he gets spell casting. A non-casting variant just never learns to cast them on his own. And in no word they take away their spell-lists.
This is a bit like pal 3 ftr 17.
Probably, this is D&D's analogy to a mommy's boy, who could live one his own, but decided against it.
While the CW acf do not actually mention it and just says:
Variant Paladin
This variant paladin gains all the normal class features of the paladin, with the following changes and additions:
Spells: The paladin does not gain the ability to cast divine spells.
the CC acf does explicitly says no to keeping the spell-list:
Holy Warrior
To select this class feature, you must sacrifice your spellcasting ability.
...
Special: A paladin who selects this path can no longer use scrolls, wands, or other magic items that require access to a spell list, unless she has another spellcasting class that grants access to the appropriate spells.
Whether you can emulate this class feature or not I don't know though... I'm just wondering what happens if I use a staff to cast for example a fireball but only have an int of 10? Do I have to emulate an ability score of at least 13 which is minimum for a 3rd lvl spell or not?
Rules are always a mess; especially when one wants to take advantage of them.
I just have to rethink a few uses that I did, as I haven't cared to read over UMD since 3.0e until recently.
I think they dropped UMD as a skill in 4.0e? I can imagine the reasons...
The only stretch I can think of is the "requires cpellcasting" restriction, that is a little homebrew.
However, that UMD option for staffs will surely make blasterficers insane.
Likely if my players were heavy optimizers I'd probably have to drop that houserule.
While the CW acf do not actually mention it and just says:
the CC acf does explicitly says no to keeping the spell-list:
Whether you can emulate this class feature or not I don't know though... I'm just wondering what happens if I use a staff to cast for example a fireball but only have an int of 10? Do I have to emulate an ability score of at least 13 which is minimum for a 3rd lvl spell or not?
I think the argument against the above still applies - Spell lists are a "class parameter" like Base Attack Bonus. Most clerics have a medium base attack bonus, yet Cloistered Clerics don't have "access" to this parameter. They have a poor Base Attack Bonus.
I'm still inclined to agree that you'd have to use the "use a wand".
But assuming that is not true, then yes you'd probably have to roll another UMD check to emulate an ability score.
nix that... humm this is getting very interesting.
Agreed!
Obviously my gut feeling is that the point of UMD device is to allow you to use an item that you would otherwise not be able to.
To me the intent seems to be that - if properly "trained" in Use Magical Device - a person wielding an item can use it just as efficiently as the for the person to which it was designed.
Maybe a new party can shine some new perspective on this?
While the CW acf do not actually mention it and just says:
the CC acf does explicitly says no to keeping the spell-list:
Whether you can emulate this class feature or not I don't know though... I'm just wondering what happens if I use a staff to cast for example a fireball but only have an int of 10? Do I have to emulate an ability score of at least 13 which is minimum for a 3rd lvl spell or not?
Good catch, I missed that one.
Edit 3: I don't own CC anyway^^. But interestingly, spell list is in "special". This implies, that spell-list is a special ability?
Edit:
I would houserule minimum ability score. RAW you use a lower modifier, as you don't need to have the ability score required to use it:
This means that staffs are far more potent in the hands of a powerful spellcaster. Because they use the wielder’s ability score to set the save DC for the spell, spells from a staff are often harder to resist than ones from other magic items, which use the minimum ability score required to cast the spell. Not only are aspects of the spell dependant on caster level (range, duration, and so on) potentially higher, but spells from a staff are harder to dispel and have a better chance of overcoming a target’s spell resistance.
My comment to the bolded would be: And sometimes a mere joke to resist^^
The underlined just says: Other items than staves use the minimum ability rquired; so, implied it could mean that staves don't. But it is not explicit; I think that one is a DM's choice
Edit 2:
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.
Possibly, this is where the uncertainty ends... mine ended right here^^.
Emulate an Ability Score was coined to the use of scrolls.
Things such as BAB, Skills and skill lists monsters without class levels have. In fact, these are probably more closely tied to hit Dice than class features.
Thus, I vote they be redubbed "Hit Dice Features".
An additional argument supporting "class parameters" -
Things such as BAB, Skills and skill lists monsters without class levels have. In fact, these are probably more closely tied to hit Dice than class features.
Thus, I vote they be redubbed "Hit Dice Features".
Whatever you want them to call^^
I just realized how messed up a few basic things are. I mean, "special: no spell list" is just an aweful wording. Especially the "special:" part. The design could have been a bit clearer, especially on other things:
Example: I wonder if "magical training" from PGtF gives access to a spell-list? One can select a few spells when taking that feat, but what if I chose to add caster levels via a PrC on that?
I did believe that it acts like a normal wiz/sorc. But now, I am having doubts.
Important to note is that feats are generally not tied to a specific class. This is a tremendously large problem for obvious reasons.
Magic domain... you can emulate having a cleric level to access it, and thus indirectly.... Huh this might work. Tell me what you think!!
---
Edit:
I've gotten progressively less convinced.
I have no problem with classifying spell-list as a 'class parameter'. The way I think of class parameters are: certain traits granted to a character purely on the basis that they are part of that class and are not dependant on how many levels of that class are taken.
What this means is, just being that class gives that character access to those traits. A fighter will always have a +1 BAB for the level he took, though levels taken in a different class do not automatically grant this. A wizard will always have access to the wizard/sorcerer spell list. A rogue will always have access to the 8+int skillpoints for the rogue level. Etc, etc, etc.
Whatever you want them to call^^
I just realized how messed up a few basic things are. I mean, "special: no spell list" is just an aweful wording. Especially the "special:" part. The design could have been a bit clearer, especially on other things:
I looked at my DMG last night, and in particular looked at the Assassin prestige class. "Spell List" is it's own category, like "Class Skills" and "Class Features".
Still wondering about potentially hijacking the magic domain... Not sure how I'd swing it though..
gods blood spelltheft
Godsblood spelltheft found here http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/frcc/20070606gives spell thieves the ability to cast domain spells with stolen spells or if you like hijacking . Of course I not sure if this would help or not seeing as it is , spellthief level required ,faerun feat .
:: gently :: Yes. I've used the handy links, run searches, etc. And I couldn't find a single consolidated resources arguing both sides of the issue in a fashion that satisfied me, wasn't archived, and wasn't just a long discussion thread.
Nice job treating a forum regular worse than I'd treat a newbie.
humph...
Take it easy. First thing in my massage was the exclamation that I don't understand your question, so it striked me odd. I wish I could express my voice tones and body luanguage throu the forum, but alas, I cannot.
Secondly, I don't treat a forum "regular" any different than a newbie since to me this titles are obsulete. Anyone's a newbie and everyone's a pro at the same time.
:D
Still, I wish you didn't get offended by my words.
humph...
Take it easy. First thing in my massage was the exclamation that I don't understand your question, so it striked me odd. I wish I could express my voice tones and body luanguage throu the forum, but alas, I cannot.
Secondly, I don't treat a forum "regular" any different than a newbie since to me this titles are obsulete. Anyone's a newbie and everyone's a pro at the same time.
:D
Still, I wish you didn't get offended by my words.
It's that time of the month for Dr. Rocktopus. He feels that since he's a "forum regular" of all of three months that no one should dare question his exalted knowledge
Persnickety.