PDA

View Full Version : Use magic device?



BenTheJester
2009-11-08, 04:56 PM
Hmmm I just checked UMD for the first time, as I had never played a character with it as a class skill, and never gave attention to the details when one of my fellow players made a roll.

I was shocked to discover the DC to use wands is static. What the hell? This means that given enough money, you can cast 9th level spells, with fairly good odds of success?

Am I missing something?

rezplz
2009-11-08, 04:59 PM
Wands only go up to 4th level spells.

Boci
2009-11-08, 05:02 PM
Plus, even if 9th level wands did exist, don't you need to emulate the 19 metal state to cast 9th level spells as well?

Milskidasith
2009-11-08, 05:02 PM
How would a skill check against using an item be anything but static? I mean, you could make checks harder and harder to make as you increased in level, but then it would be Truenamer Part II: Revenge of the Terrible Game Design.

Emulating a 19 in the ability score is a DC 34, which, while hard if you only have ranks in UMD, isn't hard with an item, or just having a 13+ in the mental stat and having a +6 item of it.

Eldan
2009-11-08, 05:03 PM
He probably meant that it should increase with spell level of the spell to be used from the item.

truemane
2009-11-08, 05:05 PM
Well, aside from the fact that Wands can only have spells of 4th level or lower, not really. UMD is horribly broken and has been the woe of many a DM for years and years. And not only that, but like all static DC's, once you pass the 'tipping point; you go from 'fairly good chances' to 'excellent chances' to 'can't fail.'

And the DC is only 20. So a decent Charisma score and a few ranks and really, you're seriously off to the races.

EDIT: Why would you have to emulate a 19 in the relevant attribute? You only have to have the spell on your spell list to use a wand, not actually be able to cast it.

Boci
2009-11-08, 05:10 PM
EDIT: Why would you have to emulate a 19 in the relevant attribute? You only have to have the spell on your spell list to use a wand, not actually be able to cast it.

I wasn't sure. I remeber someone mentioned it in a fighter vs. wizard thread. That's why I asked.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-08, 05:12 PM
Plus, even if 9th level wands did exist, don't you need to emulate the 19 metal state to cast 9th level spells as well?

I don't think so, Tim.

Boci
2009-11-08, 05:15 PM
I don't think so,

Okay, my mistake, Must have remembered wrong.


Tim.

Huh?

Jack_Simth
2009-11-08, 05:17 PM
Wands only go up to 4th level spells.
True, but staves go higher, and those use the same check.

TheCountAlucard
2009-11-08, 05:22 PM
Huh?He was feeling like referencing the words of Wilson Wilson Jr.

The Glyphstone
2009-11-08, 05:22 PM
Then again, Staves + UMD is a whole nother ballgame of cheese...

Crafty Cultist
2009-11-08, 05:22 PM
Huh?

Home Improvement:smallwink:

Edit; Ninja'd

UglyPanda
2009-11-08, 05:23 PM
Does it matter? Magic items themselves cost craptons as they go up in power. You won't reliably be able to use magic items until mid levels and you won't be able to afford enough good items until later. And at high levels, UMD is nothing compared to the classes who don't need items to cast their spells.

AslanCross
2009-11-08, 05:35 PM
True, but staves go higher, and those use the same check.

Nope. Staves require both the appropriate ability score and having the spell on your spell list. It takes two UMD checks to activate a staff.

The ability score emulation is rather difficult to make (Check result - 15 = effective ability score ), but admittedly that's easy enough to remedy.

EDIT: My bad, it seems you only need to emulate having the spell. That said, it doesn't use the static Wand activation DC.

Gralamin
2009-11-08, 05:47 PM
Nope. Staves require both the appropriate ability score and having the spell on your spell list. It takes two UMD checks to activate a staff.

The ability score emulation is rather difficult to make (Check result - 15 = effective ability score ), but admittedly that's easy enough to remedy.

EDIT: My bad, it seems you only need to emulate having the spell. That said, it doesn't use the static Wand activation DC.

Uhh, no they don't. Runestaffs require it to be on your list, but all staffs require is:

Activation
Staffs use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a staff is usually a standard action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast, however, has a longer casting time than 1 standard action, it takes that long to cast the spell from a staff.) To activate a staff, a character must hold it forth in at least one hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures).
The Spell Trigger activation is the same as a wand, so activating a staff is the same as a wand, you can just also emulate a caster level higher then the staff, if you wished.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-08, 11:57 PM
Home Improvement:smallwink:

Edit; Ninja'd

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g111/Lycanthromancer/poster18190012.jpg

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g111/Lycanthromancer/poster29503752.jpg
Sorry; I had to get that out of my system.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-09, 06:41 AM
Wands have weaknesses:

1) Can't use metamagic.

2) Uses minimum stat necessary. Thus, Level 1 wands have a save DC of 11.
Level 2? 13. Level 3? 14. Level 4? 16. That is horribly low. By the time one can afford a level 4 wand, a dedicated caster should be slinging a DC 16 with his level 0 spells.

Those two generally limit them to low level utility and such. Things where the low caster level and save DC don't matter.

As for DC 34 to emulate a 19 stat? Assuming level 10 rogue?

13 ranks + 4 Cha + 3 Feat (Skill Focus) +2 Feat (Magical Aptitude) +2 MW Item + 3 Circlet of Persuasion = +27

That's not too heavy in optimization (14 starting Cha, +4 item, 2 feats, and two other reasonably costed items), and can hit it 70% of the time. You need even less with a method of taking 10 on UMD (Drop 4 Cha and a feat, most likely, savings: 16k gold and a feat, or 4 points on your point buy and a feat).

Kaiyanwang
2009-11-09, 06:48 AM
Wands have weaknesses:

2) Uses minimum stat necessary. Thus, Level 1 wands have a save DC of 11.
Level 2? 13. Level 3? 14. Level 4? 16. That is horribly low. By the time one can afford a level 4 wand, a dedicated caster should be slinging a DC 16 with his level 0 spells.


Well, sorry if it could be considered a semi-derailment, but in magic of Faerun there are gems that can be added to the wands to enhance their CL and DC.

Not more than 2 in both cases, and are linked to elements and schools, but a 5-10% more could be something.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-09, 06:49 AM
Well, sorry if it could be considered a semi-derailment, but in magic of Faerun there are gems that can be added to the wands to enhance their CL and DC.

Not more than 2 in both cases, and are linked to elements and schools, but a 5-10% more could be something.

Yeah, it's further investment in an item that will never be decent as an offensive tool without an Artificer and a couple feats.

Boci
2009-11-09, 06:59 AM
You could just use spells that do not allow a saving throw. Enervate, ray of dizziness..

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-09, 09:13 AM
You could just use spells that do not allow a saving throw. Enervate, ray of dizziness..

Enervate, possibly, though both are expensive. Ray of Dizziness, duration would be a bit short, but it's a decent idea.

The general idea is to find ways to ignore saving throws, and find something not too level dependent. Something that will get you 3-5 rounds, and an effect that's good.

ericgrau
2009-11-09, 10:15 AM
A 1 level dip into a caster class gives the same thing but with automatic success. IMO that's the best way to do gishes. By the time you can match that with a rogue 4th level spells aren't a big deal.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-09, 10:21 AM
Hm. Level 6 Rogue.

9 ranks UMD + 3 Charisma + 5 feats + 2 UMD skill tool = +19.

That's a wand on a 1. And the wizard doesn't even have level 4 spells yet.

You can have a +0 Cha with a circlet of persuasion. About the same investment at this level.

Generally, I prefer to make my gishes with a level of Psywar or 3.

ericgrau
2009-11-09, 10:24 AM
What's a UMD skill tool? And don't say "a MW tool". What is it actually? I'm tired of people being a bit too liberal with masterwork tools. Level 6 WBL is 13,000 gp. A circlet of persuasion is 4500 gp. Cha 18 and 2 feats is an awfully big investment for something a wizard gets not at level 7, but at level 1. He can use level 4 wands at level 1. A dip seems easier than a UMD focus. UMD is better used on the side. And in that case it takes a rogue a bit longer.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-09, 10:25 AM
What's a UMD skill tool? And don't say "a MW tool". What is it actually. I'm tired of people being a bit too liberal with masterwork tools.
Pointy hat.

Lapak
2009-11-09, 10:33 AM
What's a UMD skill tool? And don't say "a MW tool". What is it actually? I'm tired of people being a bit too liberal with masterwork tools.A mysterious yellow tome, inscribed with 'Advice on the Use of Magical Devices for those of Limited Intellectual Capacity.' An odd-looking figure with very large, very round eyes adorns the front cover. The book is filled with easy-to-use tips, important reminders, and checklists that can be briefly consulted when attempting to use a device.

(In other words, I agree with you. Any attempt to describe masterwork tools for a lot of skills seem silly. Sense Motive, for example; are you carrying around a portable polygraph or something?)

Ravens_cry
2009-11-09, 10:41 AM
A mysterious yellow tome, inscribed with 'Advice on the Use of Magical Devices for those of Limited Intellectual Capacity.' An odd-looking figure with very large, very round eyes adorns the front cover. The book is filled with easy-to-use tips, important reminders, and checklists that can be briefly consulted when attempting to use a device.

(In other words, I agree with you. Any attempt to describe masterwork tools for a lot of skills seem silly. Sense Motive, for example; are you carrying around a portable polygraph or something?)
Maybe it's a gem that grows warm when someone is being untruthful, or maybe it's a pendulum that might waggle one way for truth and another way for lies. It's fluff, you decide.
Though I get the joke, a small handy booklet with hints and tips on the activation of magical devices actually makes sense for UMD. At least in the default Pathfinder setting, printing presses DO exist, even if only for woodcuts.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-09, 10:42 AM
What's a UMD skill tool? And don't say "a MW tool". What is it actually? I'm tired of people being a bit too liberal with masterwork tools. Level 6 WBL is 13,000 gp. A circlet of persuasion is 4500 gp. Cha 18 and 2 feats is an awfully big investment for something a wizard gets not at level 7, but at level 1. He can use level 4 wands at level 1. A dip seems easier than a UMD focus. UMD is better used on the side. And in that case it takes a rogue a bit longer.

Skill tools, however, are RAW. If you think it's liberal, you're misplacing a word. It's "literal". As in, you take the literal meaning of the words in the SRD, and there you go. As for "what it is"?? By RAW, it is a "Masterwork Skill Tool". That's the SRD entry, I believe. Whether it's a crystal that slightly distorts the ability of an item to detect, or a stone that exudes an aura that facilitates whatever, it's fluff. You can argue "nuh uh, your fluff doesn't make sense"...

Well, neither does arrows that fly straight, instead of a parabolic path. Neither does drowning to heal. I'm not arguing common sense, so shelve that debate right now. I'm arguing based on the crunch.

So, you say that a 4500gp investment at level 6 is enormous...

Then you say that a wizard, at level 1, can use a 21,000 gp item... about 12 levels before 21,000 gp is even close to the level 6 rogue's 4500gp investment.

Other things. Yes. A Level 1 wizard can use a level 4 wand. True.
A Level 1 wizard can use any level 4 wand. False.
Divine Power, for example. Show me the stock standard level 1 wizard doin' that one. Not gonna happen.

The Rogue? Level 4 wand, whether it's Sor/Wiz, or Cleric, or Druid, or Paladin, or Ranger, or even Bard.... Yup.

The one level dip gets you some wand usage. If you're really gonna wandcast your spells, a wizard dip is a horribly subpar way to do it. To reliably use spells in combat, you're either going without armor, or spending a metric buttload on the right armor (+1 Twilight Mithril Chain Shirt)...

Face it, Wizard is a freakin' great class... But it's horrible for a dip. If you're doing a wand focus, you get about 25% of the wands out there. If you're doing a scroll focus? Same. Even UMD works better than a wizard dip. Heck, even sorceror works better than a wizard dip, though it's not really better.

EDIT: To clarify, I'm not saying that rogue is a good way to gish. I'm pointing out that a rogue can easily do it before level 4 wands even become cost effective. Even removing the +2 skill item, that's level 8, when level 4 spells are the best thing out there, and still nobody can afford the wand. It was a refutation to:

By the time you can match that with a rogue 4th level spells aren't a big deal.

As for the other part:
A 1 level dip into a caster class gives the same thing but with automatic success. IMO that's the best way to do gishes.
...?
Odd, I always thought Caster level 5 and Abjurant Champion was a good way to gish.

Or Duskblade.

Or Psywar.

Better than 1 level wizard ninja wand-wielder gish, at any rate.

Lapak
2009-11-09, 11:22 AM
Maybe it's a gem that grows warm when someone is being untruthful, or maybe it's a pendulum that might waggle one way for truth and another way for lies. It's fluff, you decide.Those both sound like minor magical items to me, not mundane skill tools.

Though I get the joke, a small handy booklet with hints and tips on the activation of magical devices actually makes sense for UMD. At least in the default Pathfinder setting, printing presses DO exist, even if only for woodcuts.Which leads me to the problem with this, and the lie-detectors, and most other arbitrarily-fluffed MW tools for skills which are used in the field: they require no hands free and are used with no actions involved. A book of tips to UMD with? That would require at least one free hand and probably a round or so of actions to find said tips. The pendulum would need to be in hand and able to freely swing. And so on. Some tools, it makes sense for: MW Move Silently tools might involve muffling covers for metal objects and such, and that wouldn't need time to use. But I can't think of a Spellcraft tool that would be non-magical, always-on and hands-free, which are pretty much requirements for the uses you typically put Spellcraft to.

I don't have any problem with other people handwaving MW tools, but I personally need an explanation before I OK them - I don't require realism in my D&D worlds, but I do require that we be able to imagine what's happening.

Kylarra
2009-11-09, 11:28 AM
Maybe it's an entire giant set of tools per alchemist lab so you can't carry it around easily on the go. :smalltongue:

Ravens_cry
2009-11-09, 11:38 AM
Those both sound like minor magical items to me, not mundane skill tools
As things 'mundane' items like alchemist fire and thunder stones show, the division between mundane and magic in a world with magic is not always clear.:smalltongue:

AstralFire
2009-11-09, 11:38 AM
As things 'mundane' items like alchemist fire and thunder stones show, the division between mundane and magic in a world with magic is not always clear.:smalltongue:

"Does it work in an anti-magic field?"

Coidzor
2009-11-09, 11:41 AM
Indeed, but they take magic in order to make...

Yuki Akuma
2009-11-09, 11:43 AM
Wands have weaknesses:

1) Can't use metamagic.

Artificer.

Who else would use a wand? ;)


As things 'mundane' items like alchemist fire and thunder stones show, the division between mundane and magic in a world with magic is not always clear.

Alchemist's Fire is also known as "Greek fire". Alternatively, "napalm".

They're not magical. They don't require magic to make. They require the Craft: Alchemy skill. The fact that Craft: Alchemy requires you to be a spellcaster for some reason (which incidentally means Artificers cannot use it) is just an odd rule that nobody really enforces.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-09, 11:44 AM
Sense Motive?A mood-ring.

UMD?The aforementioned yellow tome that you peruse in your off time.

Diplomacy?Read How to Win Friends and Influence People when you're not busy killing them.

Perform: Oratory?A small bottle of KY Jelly? Preferably flavored?

...sorry.

Kurald Galain
2009-11-09, 11:48 AM
Skill tools, however, are RAW. If you think it's liberal, you're misplacing a word. It's "literal". As in, you take the literal meaning of the words in the SRD, and there you go. As for "what it is"?? By RAW, it is a "Masterwork Skill Tool". That's the SRD entry, I believe.
That does not, however, posit that said tool must necessarily exist for every skill in the book. For instance, we already know that the skill tool for alchemy is in fact a portable laboratory that costs 500 gp.

For instance, the problem with using a book as a MW tool for knowledge checks, is that it would logically take several rounds to actually look something up in the book. So yes, a bonus could be warranted, but the check is no longer a free action.

Lists for masterwork tools tend to get silly around certain specific skills. For instance, would you wear MW sunglasses for bluff? Buy people a MW drink for gather info? Have a MW dog for search?

Ravens_cry
2009-11-09, 11:52 AM
Alchemist's Fire is also known as "Greek fire". Alternatively, "napalm".
They're not magical. They don't require magic to make. They require the Craft: Alchemy skill. The fact that Craft: Alchemy requires you to be a spellcaster for some reason (which incidentally means Artificers cannot use it) is just an odd rule that nobody really enforces.
Napalm doesn't spontaneously ignite, alchemist fire does. All we have on greek fire is legends. And the comment still doesn't address the semi-magicness of thunder stones. A rock you throw at someone that can deafen someone and can be reused indefinitely? That's magic to me.
Complaining about rules you don't like that detract from your case isn't exactly cricket.

Bayar
2009-11-09, 12:27 PM
Those both sound like minor magical items to me, not mundane skill tools.

Tobin's Guide to common magics. It is a book that gives you +2 circomstance bonus to UMD. Skill tool. if not, then a lucky string you tie to one of your fingers and makes you better at UMD by making you luckier on the activation process (although that s fluff, it doesnt actually give any luck bonus, just circumstance).

ericgrau
2009-11-09, 12:46 PM
RAW says that other skill tools might exist, not that they do exist for every skil. Either way, a UMD tool is a flagrant violation of RAMS (rules as makes sense), which tends to affect how people actually play.

Books would be difficult to use on the fly and would really be the same thing as what players use when training their skill ranks, not something extra.

Back on topic, UMD is so that high level rogues can easily use utility wands and sometimes utility scrolls. A wand of invisibility is my favorite for targeting any class, but rogues especially. Fighters still get various magic items and potions for their utility needs, but low level utility spells are just too good of a match to the rogue to not let him have them. The fact that you can fail by 9 or less on your UMD roll without blowing a charge is also nice for these purposes.

Person_Man
2009-11-09, 12:51 PM
It's a feature, not a problem. By mid-high levels, non-casters need a way to access some spells in order to keep up with casters. UMD is the solution. If you happen to be a Skill Monkey class (ie, weaker then casters and weaker then many melee builds), then you can effectively use UMD a bit earlier and for a lower investment. Trust me, it's a good thing.

Bayar
2009-11-09, 12:59 PM
Back on topic, UMD is so that high level rogues can easily use utility wands and sometimes utility scrolls. A wand of invisibility is my favorite for targeting any class, but rogues especially. Fighters still get various magic items and potions for their utility needs, but low level utility spells are just too good of a match to the rogue to not let him have them. The fact that you can fail by 9 or less on your UMD roll without blowing a charge is also nice for these purposes.

The warlock and artificier disagree with that statement.

ericgrau
2009-11-09, 01:00 PM
That doesn't mean it doesn't hold true for bards and rogues, it means the artificer and warlock expand on UMD's applications.

Duke of URL
2009-11-09, 01:13 PM
Artificer.

Who else would use a wand? ;)

Rogue. Wand of acid splash. 1d3 + sneak attack damage on a ranged touch attack without getting too close to sharp, pointy objects.

Person_Man
2009-11-09, 01:37 PM
The warlock and artificier disagree with that statement.

The Marshal and the Incarnate too.

Fax Celestis
2009-11-09, 01:43 PM
1) Can't use metamagic.Metamagic wand sheath.


2) Uses minimum stat necessary. Thus, Level 1 wands have a save DC of 11.
Level 2? 13. Level 3? 14. Level 4? 16. That is horribly low. By the time one can afford a level 4 wand, a dedicated caster should be slinging a DC 16 with his level 0 spells....unless you get someone to craft it for you, then it uses the crafter's ability. The book's items all recommend using minimum possible for randomly generated treasure, etc, for the express purpose of expediting the process.

Ormagoden
2009-11-09, 02:20 PM
I can't believe MW tool is even a debate in this thread.

They just add a +2 bonus.

For knowledge, craft, and profession skills it makes sense that the "MW tool"
Is a book. It's something your character has read and gained the knowledge from you might need to reference it some times but that doesn't make it any different from a normal knowledge, craft, or profession check.

As for the other skills well

* Appraise, A little monocle
* Balance, A rubber covering for the bottom of your boot
* Bluff, A fan or face mask
* Climb, A set of tight fitting durable gloves
* Concentration, A bit of oil to rub on the wrists
* Decipher Script, A small reference book
* Diplomacy, Perfume or cologne,
* Disable Device, A key ring with keys and tools on it
* Disguise, Higher quality makeup applicators
* Escape Artist, flesh colored wristbands that widen your wrists
* Forgery, A high quality pen and ink set
* Gather Information, Teeth whiteners
* Handle Animal, Animal crackers
* Heal, A healing kit with higher quality items
* Hide, Appropriate colored face paint
* Intimidate, Nasty looking false teeth
* Jump, Rubber boot covers for better traction
* Listen, Ear cones
* Move Silently, Rubber boot covers
* Open Lock, A set of skeleton keys
* Perform, A nice costume
* Ride, Spurs
* Search, Magnifying glass
* Sense Motive, Body language and you, a book by Lostfang
* Sleight of Hand, Gloves or sleeves with hidden pockets or magnets
* Spellcraft, Thaumaturgy and you, a book by Lostfang
* Spot, yellow tinted goggles
* Survival, A boyscout knife
* Swim, water wings (HAHAHAH)
* Tumble, elbow, knee , and wrist pads
* Use Magic Device, A glove with gold wiring that helps conduct magic
* Use Rope, A knot chart

Now get some imagination! (and back to the question at hand!)

Sleepingbear
2009-11-09, 03:59 PM
Alchemical items are not magic.

They do not have a required caster level.

They do not require the expenditure of xp to create.

They are not found in the magic items section of the DMG or the SRD (with the exception of alchemical silver-see below).

They do not have a descriptor indicating type of magic used in creation (ie Abjuration [weak]).

They do not glow when you cast detect magic on them (because if they did, you would be able to know what caster school was used to create them-even if it was only cantrips).

They work in anti-magic fields.

The requirement that only spellcasters can take the skill does not translate into magic actually being used in the creation of alchemical items. It may simply be fluff because only spellcasters are taught how.

Either way, RAW does not support alchemical items being magic.


Silver Dagger, Masterwork: This masterwork alchemical silver dagger is nonmagical. As a masterwork weapon, it has a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls.

No aura (nonmagical); Price 322 gp.

(Emphasis mine)

Every magic item lists it's aura and school. So if alchemical items are magic, tell us their auras and show the RAW. (That means no claiming that alchemical fire is evocation without a direct quote saying it is so).

Something may appear to be magic simply because one does not understand the sufficiently advanced technology behind it.

Curmudgeon
2009-11-09, 04:24 PM
What's a UMD skill tool?
We don't need to know the details, because it's D&D.

What's a hit point?

They're both in the book. Just accept, and move along.

tyckspoon
2009-11-09, 05:40 PM
Metamagic wand sheath.

...unless you get someone to craft it for you, then it uses the crafter's ability. The book's items all recommend using minimum possible for randomly generated treasure, etc, for the express purpose of expediting the process.

Damnit, Fax, you're not supposed to be wrong about this stuff.

Saving Throws Against Magic Items-

Magic items produce spells or spell-like effects. For a saving throw against a spell or spell-like effect from a magic item, the DC is 10 + the level of the spell or effect + the ability modifier of the minimum ability score needed to cast that level of spell.

It's always the minimum ability score. Magic Item save DCs pretty much always suck unless you're using a Staff, in which case you can potentially mimic both an absurdly high caster level and ability score and supercharge the spell.

Caster levels may be set by the crafter, but increasing those gets very expensive very rapidly.

elonin
2009-11-09, 06:01 PM
How do you propose emulating caster level for use with a staff? There is no emulate class level feature of that skill.

Fax Celestis
2009-11-09, 06:04 PM
How do you propose emulating caster level for use with a staff? There is no emulate class level feature of that skill.

Yes there is.


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).

AslanCross
2009-11-09, 06:05 PM
Uhh, no they don't. Runestaffs require it to be on your list, but all staffs require is:

The Spell Trigger activation is the same as a wand, so activating a staff is the same as a wand, you can just also emulate a caster level higher then the staff, if you wished.
:smalleek:

...I never knew that. I should read more.

elonin
2009-11-16, 06:06 PM
FC Class levels are not class features. So no Staffs would use the minimum caster level.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-16, 11:50 PM
That does not, however, posit that said tool must necessarily exist for every skill in the book. For instance, we already know that the skill tool for alchemy is in fact a portable laboratory that costs 500 gp.However, it does not list any that are prohibited. Thus, none are.


For instance, the problem with using a book as a MW tool for knowledge checks, is that it would logically take several rounds to actually look something up in the book. So yes, a bonus could be warranted, but the check is no longer a free action.There was a memory ball in harry potter, I believe, that glowed whenever you were forgetting something. Could steer you on the right track, with practice...


Lists for masterwork tools tend to get silly around certain specific skills. For instance, would you wear MW sunglasses for bluff? Buy people a MW drink for gather info? Have a MW dog for search?
Actually, the sunglasses make sense, in many ways. An outfit could be quite useful for gather information, or an easy-reference dialect guide or somesuch.

Powder sets could help for search. Powder in the air can detect wind drafts, leading to passages. Cracks in doorways, outlines in walls. Even security lasers.

It doesn't need to be a 100% perfect fit. None of the rules are a 100% perfect fit to real life. The game's less about dogmatic slaving to a realistic experience, and more about people having fun. When the rules serve fun, they're working right.

Yukitsu
2009-11-17, 12:03 AM
However, it does not list any that are prohibited. Thus, none are.

That's not logically sound. It gives a list of what is included, which does not automatically include UMD. In fact, the RAW, unless one can find a 6 second guide to the skill, explicitly discludes the use of items for UMD or knowledge. A lack of explicit exclusion simply means that if they state there is such an item in another book, it is not contradicted by core rules.


There was a memory ball in harry potter, I believe, that glowed whenever you were forgetting something. Could steer you on the right track, with practice...

Magical in nature, however.


Actually, the sunglasses make sense, in many ways. An outfit could be quite useful for gather information, or an easy-reference dialect guide or somesuch.

Powder sets could help for search. Powder in the air can detect wind drafts, leading to passages. Cracks in doorways, outlines in walls. Even security lasers.

It doesn't need to be a 100% perfect fit. None of the rules are a 100% perfect fit to real life. The game's less about dogmatic slaving to a realistic experience, and more about people having fun. When the rules serve fun, they're working right.

Those aren't really the sorts of tools that were noted, as he makes mention only of tools that would be beneficial only in a very narrow band of situations, much like most brands of master craft items proposed for UMD. As a side note, sunglasses for the use of bluff as written is more of a give away, rather than a boon to bluffing. It's easier to know people hiding their eyes are hiding something, and since that's all sense motive tells you anyway, that's all they get.

erikun
2009-11-17, 12:18 AM
I would assume that a UMD skill tool would be something like a set of magical thieves' picks - a bunch of magical odds and ends that are useful for getting a magical device to activate. Probably not useful in combat, but it doesn't always need to be.

Also:

Human Bard, 16 Cha
4 skill ranks + 3 Cha bonus + 2 (Magical Aptitude) + 3 (Skill Focus) = +12 bonus, or around a 2:3 chance of activating a wand (any magical wand) at level 1. Assume that to be +19 by level 5 (with the skill tool), and you can freely activate any wand and can use most level-appropriate scrolls. Also, feel free to activate blindly without mishap, even off high-level equipment.*


*Note: This poster is not responsible for the effects of successfully activating high level magic items on your squishy, level 5 body.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-17, 12:41 AM
That's not logically sound. It gives a list of what is included, which does not automatically include UMD. In fact, the RAW, unless one can find a 6 second guide to the skill, explicitly discludes the use of items for UMD or knowledge. A lack of explicit exclusion simply means that if they state there is such an item in another book, it is not contradicted by core rules.Not even. It's a listed item, with a listed cost. You're saying that they left it open for other books, but wrote the cost in core.

That's like GM announcing the cost of cars they've yet to develop, set to release in 2023. It's a listed item, without "explicit" exclusion. For it to be explicitly excluded, it needs to be spelled out. For example: Empower spell and Maximize spell do not stack together. Each affects the base spell only, by explicit text that says so.
For Knowledge and UMD skills to be explicitly excluded, the SRD would need to state: "This item cannot be used for Use Magic Device or Knowledge-based skills." Anything less is not explicit.


Magical in nature, however.Ever hear of steampunk? Science/alchemy is the new magic. D&D has taken to this with alchemical flashlights and such. No reason that can't extend to other uses.


Those aren't really the sorts of tools that were noted, as he makes mention only of tools that would be beneficial only in a very narrow band of situations, much like most brands of master craft items proposed for UMD. As a side note, sunglasses for the use of bluff as written is more of a give away, rather than a boon to bluffing. It's easier to know people hiding their eyes are hiding something, and since that's all sense motive tells you anyway, that's all they get.Sunglasses are wearable for a variety of reasons, including to *gasp* block the sun's glare. Having sunglasses does not necessarily broadcast "I AM TRYING TO FOOL YOU". It does have the benefit of obscuring when someone is, however, and makes it harder to tell when someone is being straightforward or lying. In fact, they're made more effective if you wear them while not bluffing, also.

Padded Slippers are often used for Move silently. However, those won't help you at all if you're hanging from a support beneath a bridge, moving monkey-bar style, trying not to alert the guards above. Or if you're benefitting from a Fly spell, and attempting to fly quietly past guards while invisible.

An item need not apply in every conceivable use of the skill to be a skill item. It must only be a plausible item that would help in the completion of tasks related to the skill. The narrow band argument doesn't hold water.

sofawall
2009-11-17, 12:46 AM
What's a UMD skill tool?

A leather jacket.

http://digilander.libero.it/happydays/foto_jukebox/fonzie.jpg

Yukitsu
2009-11-17, 01:02 AM
Not even. It's a listed item, with a listed cost. You're saying that they left it open for other books, but wrote the cost in core.

No, it's not. A category of items where it makes sense to apply them exists. A mastercraft item for UMD does not explicitly exist.


That's like GM announcing the cost of cars they've yet to develop, set to release in 2023. It's a listed item, without "explicit" exclusion. For it to be explicitly excluded, it needs to be spelled out. For example: Empower spell and Maximize spell do not stack together. Each affects the base spell only, by explicit text that says so.

Where is the rule that I've emboldened? I don't see any rule in there saying I can't use wish just because I feel like it. Exclusion applies in any specific case or when it's necessary to exclude something. Master crafted skills are explicitly DM oriented in the selection, but as written and as proposed, I've yet to see a satisfactory one for all UMD uses.


For Knowledge and UMD skills to be explicitly excluded, the SRD would need to state: "This item cannot be used for Use Magic Device or Knowledge-based skills." Anything less is not explicit.

Actually, knowledge simply has a past precedent that was never overruled in explicit from 3.0. Books don't let you make immediate knowledge checks, but if you take a few hours, you get the answer then. Stronghold builder's guide, on the topic of books. They also cost significantly more for the same benefit when compared to the new system. UMD on the other hand simply has no analogue that could reasonably be used for all UMD checks.


Ever hear of steampunk? Science/alchemy is the new magic. D&D has taken to this with alchemical flashlights and such. No reason that can't extend to other uses.

Those won't be 50GP nor will they be entirely non-magical, even within those sorts of settings. Alchemy to create a phosphlourescence effect, BTW was found in fermented urine in the middle ages, fires that ignite on contact with clothe wrapped around a bottle was earlier, and acid has been around for ages, so they aren't exactly out of the typical learned person's reach.


Sunglasses are wearable for a variety of reasons, including to *gasp* block the sun's glare. Having sunglasses does not necessarily broadcast "I AM TRYING TO FOOL YOU". It does have the benefit of obscuring when someone is, however, and makes it harder to tell when someone is being straightforward or lying. In fact, they're made more effective if you wear them while not bluffing, also.

They are suspicious when they haven't actually been invented yet, actually. And people who did the analogue of the time of covering their eyes with the cowl of their hoods were often viewed as suspicious, because there were fewer reasons for doing so.


Padded Slippers are often used for Move silently. However, those won't help you at all if you're hanging from a support beneath a bridge, moving monkey-bar style, trying not to alert the guards above. Or if you're benefitting from a Fly spell, and attempting to fly quietly past guards while invisible.

An item need not apply in every conceivable use of the skill to be a skill item. It must only be a plausible item that would help in the completion of tasks related to the skill. The narrow band argument doesn't hold water.

Or it means getting a master crafted tool kit to a specific skill is harder than you seem to believe it is. In all honesty, I'd not allow softer shoes as a master crafted bonus to move silently, because I assume the baseline is when you're naked, not when you're wearing iron shoes. Wearing soft shoes will not be more silent than simply walking about in your stockings or perhaps bare footed.

On the other hand, a magnifying glass is superior to the naked eye when veiwing gems, flippers make it easier to swim than nothing, and a good set of rope, pitons and hooks is better for climbing than your bare hands.

sofawall
2009-11-17, 01:09 AM
I've yet to see a satisfactory one for all UMD uses.

Leather jacket not included, of course.

horseboy
2009-11-17, 01:18 AM
I would assume that a UMD skill tool would be something like a set of magical thieves' picks - a bunch of magical odds and ends that are useful for getting a magical device to activate. Probably not useful in combat, but it doesn't always need to be.

This I like. Since we don't have this form of "technology" there's no concrete yes or no on how to get it to work. The +2 could pretty easily represent that the character has "Jimmied" the magic lock or implanted a Trojan into it's esoteric matrix or something using a set of tools earlier.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-17, 01:37 AM
No, it's not. A category of items where it makes sense to apply them exists. A mastercraft item for UMD does not explicitly exist.But the item which grants +2 to a skill is there, and it does not exclude any skill. That must be done by individual DM's. Sorry if you don't like that.


Where is the rule that I've emboldened? I don't see any rule in there saying I can't use wish just because I feel like it. Exclusion applies in any specific case or when it's necessary to exclude something. Master crafted skills are explicitly DM oriented in the selection, but as written and as proposed, I've yet to see a satisfactory one for all UMD uses.For spell use, there are rules outlining when you can use them. You gain 17 levels of wizard, memorize the spell, and cast it.

For MW Skill tools? You get 50gp, buy the item, and use it. That's the extent of the rules laid down. Individual exceptions are governed by individual DM's.

As for a satisfactory item for all UMD uses? Pick any skill in the game. Give me a 50gp item that applies for all uses. Can't be done. Which means that the listing has no use, by that guideline. Which means that that isn't the guideline that should be used.


Actually, knowledge simply has a past precedent that was never overruled in explicit from 3.0. Books don't let you make immediate knowledge checks, but if you take a few hours, you get the answer then. Stronghold builder's guide, on the topic of books. They also cost significantly more for the same benefit when compared to the new system. UMD on the other hand simply has no analogue that could reasonably be used for all UMD checks.Nor does any other skill. There is no skill that could be improved in every single case by a 50gp item. And yet, the item exists. So this cannot be a valid interpretation of the RAW.


Those won't be 50GP nor will they be entirely non-magical, even within those sorts of settings. Alchemy to create a phosphlourescence effect, BTW was found in fermented urine in the middle ages, fires that ignite on contact with clothe wrapped around a bottle was earlier, and acid has been around for ages, so they aren't exactly out of the typical learned person's reach.Yes, they will. See the SRD entry? 50gp. How it's rationalized is up to you. But the cost for a nonmagical item that improves a skill by +2... is 50gp.

I mean really. Do masterwork thieve's tools apply for all uses of disable device and open lock? Yes. What about locks designed for colossal creatures, where the appropriate picks would need to be the size of spears? Nope, RAW says it applies there too. The RAW does not agree with your interpretation of common sense. You'll find often that this is the case.



They are suspicious when they haven't actually been invented yet, actually. And people who did the analogue of the time of covering their eyes with the cowl of their hoods were often viewed as suspicious, because there were fewer reasons for doing so.Or they were monks, or leprous. And they do exist. Sundark goggles are RAW, and are functionally sunglasses.

And there's nothing that says you can't be suspicious. If I cover my eyes with a cowl, and tell you 100 truths, and 1 lie, does that suspiciousness assist you in distinguishing the truths from the lie? Not a bit.



Or it means getting a master crafted tool kit to a specific skill is harder than you seem to believe it is. In all honesty, I'd not allow softer shoes as a master crafted bonus to move silently, because I assume the baseline is when you're naked, not when you're wearing iron shoes. Wearing soft shoes will not be more silent than simply walking about in your stockings or perhaps bare footed.In this case, there is no valid use for the MW skill tool. After all, no one wonder item will assist with all uses of ANY skill.

However, I tend to believe that text in the SRD and PHB was put there with the intent that it be used. I know, crazy concept, right? Thus, I must reject your argument, on the basis that if correct, it essentially means that text is wasted space. The only argument that I can accept for wasted text is if the primary source for an ability contradicts somewhere else, explicitly.

This is the case when there's a contradiction between text and a table. There is no explicit contradiction in this case, however.


On the other hand, a magnifying glass is superior to the naked eye when veiwing gems, flippers make it easier to swim than nothing, and a good set of rope, pitons and hooks is better for climbing than your bare hands.
So, a magnifying glass qualifies as a MW skill tool for Appraisal?

Did you know that appraisal works for items other than gems as well?
And that flippers don't always make it easier to swim? For example, how about if you're unable to use your legs?

Reinboom
2009-11-17, 01:51 AM
I also believe in this assumption, though, I believe the DM should manage what should and shouldn't be masterwork tools, as well as how it modifies the time use.
For example, the whole reference library is no longer a free action for knowledge checks. Instead, you need to use a PokéDex.

taltamir
2009-11-17, 02:38 AM
* Gather Information, Teeth whiteners
toothpaste!

As for UMD tool...
A nonmagical cord woven of platinum and silk, which has the inherent property of increasing magic energy absorption from surroundings when wrapped around something. (kind of like how an antenna increases electrical reception).

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-17, 02:41 AM
toothpaste!

As for UMD tool...
A nonmagical cord woven of platinum and silk, which has the inherent property of increasing magic energy absorption from surroundings when wrapped around something. (kind of like how an antenna increases electrical reception).

Or an item with an array of colors, that, when gazed upon, subliminally alters thought processes in such a way as to facilitate the use of magical items.

Yukitsu
2009-11-17, 11:44 AM
But the item which grants +2 to a skill is there, and it does not exclude any skill. That must be done by individual DM's. Sorry if you don't like that.

Of course I don't mind. It makes far more sense than assuming you can do whatever you want to so long as the rules don't expressly forbid it.


For spell use, there are rules outlining when you can use them. You gain 17 levels of wizard, memorize the spell, and cast it.

This is inclusionary. There is nothing discluding my character looking at the first star at night with a dancing awakened cricket and getting a wish off of it, simply because that method is not discluded. Hence the problem that exclusion of abilities must be explicit.


For MW Skill tools? You get 50gp, buy the item, and use it. That's the extent of the rules laid down. Individual exceptions are governed by individual DM's.

The extent is, you may do so if such a tool exists.

As for a satisfactory item for all UMD uses? Pick any skill in the game. Give me a 50gp item that applies for all uses. Can't be done. Which means that the listing has no use, by that guideline. Which means that that isn't the guideline that should be used.

Nor does any other skill. There is no skill that could be improved in every single case by a 50gp item. And yet, the item exists. So this cannot be a valid interpretation of the RAW.
[/quote]

A mastercrafted forge for forging armour with the craft: (armour) skill is a listed example that seems to apply to all cases of forging armour. The combination of a weigh scale and a magnifying glass will enable someone to better appraise anything. A master crafted saddle that will fit the beast in question will improve ride checks in all situations.


Yes, they will. See the SRD entry? 50gp. How it's rationalized is up to you. But the cost for a nonmagical item that improves a skill by +2... is 50gp.

I really don't get why you keep spewing the cost at me. Whether or not it can be applied to any skill at all has absolutely nothing to do with the cost.


I mean really. Do masterwork thieve's tools apply for all uses of disable device and open lock? Yes. What about locks designed for colossal creatures, where the appropriate picks would need to be the size of spears? Nope, RAW says it applies there too. The RAW does not agree with your interpretation of common sense. You'll find often that this is the case.

Considering the mastercrafted version is a full pound heavier than the standard, one would assume that includes contrivances for opening larger locks. That aside, locks as written are the same regardless of the size of the user.


Or they were monks, or leprous. And they do exist. Sundark goggles are RAW, and are functionally sunglasses.

And monks didn't talk to people with the cowl down, and people didn't trust lepers.


And there's nothing that says you can't be suspicious. If I cover my eyes with a cowl, and tell you 100 truths, and 1 lie, does that suspiciousness assist you in distinguishing the truths from the lie? Not a bit.

And yet the game seems to assume you'll know automatically if they are telling the truth. In a mechanical manner, if you're disinclined towards trusting the person in the first place, you're more likely to ask for a sense motive check.


In this case, there is no valid use for the MW skill tool. After all, no one wonder item will assist with all uses of ANY skill.

However, I tend to believe that text in the SRD and PHB was put there with the intent that it be used. I know, crazy concept, right? Thus, I must reject your argument, on the basis that if correct, it essentially means that text is wasted space. The only argument that I can accept for wasted text is if the primary source for an ability contradicts somewhere else, explicitly.

You mean that it be used when a reasonable tool matching the skill is applicable? For instance, have you got a 6 second fix to the entire history of the world? Even the internet isn't that fast.


This is the case when there's a contradiction between text and a table. There is no explicit contradiction in this case, however.

Correct, because the table does not in any way imply that the tool can be purchased for any skill in existance.


So, a magnifying glass qualifies as a MW skill tool for Appraisal?

Did you know that appraisal works for items other than gems as well?
And that flippers don't always make it easier to swim? For example, how about if you're unable to use your legs?

A magnifying glass can assist in appraising anything, from paper quality to metal properties. And in the latter case, if you're simply can't equip the item, it's not a fault of the item, but rather of the individuals inability to actually equip it. If you mean their legs are lashed together or something, flippers are still beneficial compared to the massive penalty they would likely have for missing a set of limbs for that check.

ericgrau
2009-11-17, 12:09 PM
I mean really. Do masterwork thieve's tools apply for all uses of disable device and open lock? Yes. What about locks designed for colossal creatures, where the appropriate picks would need to be the size of spears? Nope, RAW says it applies there too. The RAW does not agree with your interpretation of common sense. You'll find often that this is the case.

Colossal locks are quite the corner case. Standard locks don't have size options. And bigger locks in general (within reason) would be easier to pick, even with standard tools. Really the rules aren't that specific and you're saying that because the rules don't specify every situation imaginable and thus aren't 10,000 pages thick, you can do whatever you want. Uh, no. That just means it's unspecified, and the generality may or may not apply to every situation.

Heck, even forget real games for a moment here. Next time you play PvP by RAW try to heal yourself with drowning and when you die try to keep acting normally since there are no RAW drawback listed for dying. See if filling in the details yourself works even then. Unspecified does not mean "whatever I want is RAW" (WIWIRAW). It means RAW does not necessarily prohibit, but it does not necessarily allow either.

And last I checked, the OP wanted tips for a player he could play, i.e. a real game. Why does all this RAW nonsense keep showing up in threads like this?

Killer Angel
2009-11-17, 12:24 PM
The fact that masterwork tools exist for any skill, this don't mean they can be always at disposal.
Yes, by raw you can have an item +2 to UMD. You can try to justify the item to the DM, and the DM can say: no, it doesn't exist.
DM can ban anything he feels unbalanced or he didn't like, even if it's raw, varying from single objects, to whole PrC, to entire books.

An Item +2 to UMD by raw exists. It can exists even by RAI and by commons sense. But it's not given.

Can we, at least, all agree that by raw it exists?

Yukitsu
2009-11-17, 12:25 PM
No. Where's the rule that says it does?

taltamir
2009-11-17, 01:06 PM
lack of evidence is not proof of lack.
lack of evidence is not proof of existance.

The raw does not properly address this question, therefore we simply do not have a proper RAW ruling. The fact that it is not expressly forbidden doesn't mean that it is allowed, the fact that it is not expressly allowed does not mean it is forbidden.

Basic logic here.

Killer Angel
2009-11-17, 01:56 PM
No. Where's the rule that says it does?

The argument is the same heard a lot of times...
Page 130 of the Player, tells: "Tool, masterwork: this perfect well-made item is the perfect tool for the job" etc etc. It is general and, so, it applies to all object and all skills, unless proven the contrary.
then, follow some examples of such tools, taken from table 7-8.

You can only argue that table 7-8 lists all the masterwork items available. You're right, in that table, under the section "skill kits" there isn't a masterwork item for UMD.
But there isn't neither a set of different ink and papers, so I suppose you cannot have any bonus on forgery for quality material. There isn't neither equipment for desert (skin cream, special flask, and so on), so I suppose you cannot have a masterwork survival kit. :smallconfused:

Amphetryon
2009-11-17, 02:03 PM
No. Where's the rule that says it does?

It's right before the rule that says your character's not allowed to get up and fight when the HP total reduces him to dead. :smallwink:

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-17, 02:59 PM
Are we doing TO or practical optimization? TO, UMD masterwork tools exist. Practical optimization dictates that, like the Sarrukh, UMD masterwork tools do not exist in most games. Unless you have evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that a significant portion of games liberally use masterwork tools, I'm inclined to believe otherwise.

And this has been bugging me since I read it on the first page: Yes, that guy did mean that masterwork tools are allowed too liberally. That is, masterwork tools are allowed too freely/abundantly.

My "justification" for disallowing UMD tools, besides a briefly mumbled excuse about "balance" I haven't actually thought of, is this sentence in the PHB description of masterwork tools.
"This entry covers just about anything else." "just about anything else" is distinct from "everything else" - and IMO, Sense Motive and UMD are two of the things "just about anything else" doesn't encompass. I'm disinclined to allow any masterwork tools, in fact, because nobody is anywhere near as liberal with masterwork tools as I've seen on internet forums. Even on PbP games.


You can only argue that table 7-8 lists all the masterwork items available....

Don't presume to know how other people reason.

dsmiles
2009-11-17, 03:23 PM
Are we doing TO or practical optimization? TO, UMD masterwork tools exist. Practical optimization dictates that, like the Sarrukh, UMD masterwork tools do not exist in most games. Unless you have evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that a significant portion of games liberally use masterwork tools, I'm inclined to believe otherwise.

And this has been bugging me since I read it on the first page: Yes, that guy did mean that masterwork tools are allowed too liberally. That is, masterwork tools are allowed too freely/abundantly.

My "justification" for disallowing UMD tools, besides a briefly mumbled excuse about "balance" I haven't actually thought of, is this sentence in the PHB description of masterwork tools.
"This entry covers just about anything else." "just about anything else" is distinct from "everything else" - and IMO, Sense Motive and UMD are two of the things "just about anything else" doesn't encompass. I'm disinclined to allow any masterwork tools, in fact, because nobody is anywhere near as liberal with masterwork tools as I've seen on internet forums. Even on PbP games.



Don't presume to know how other people reason.

Masterwork tools do exist, but are rare. What craftsman would sell his masterwork tools? And you are right about this...there are no tools for Sense Motive and UMD, let alone masterwork tools. What tool could possible give you a bonus to these skills, along with Diplomacy, it's madness!

However, as a player of many the Charisma-based rogue, I am a firm believer in activitaing blindly any magic item I come across (Yay! Only DC 25).

Bayar
2009-11-17, 03:28 PM
Masterwork tools do exist, but are rare. What craftsman would sell his masterwork tools? And you are right about this...there are no tools for Sense Motive and UMD, let alone masterwork tools. What tool could possible give you a bonus to these skills, along with Diplomacy, it's madness!

However, as a player of many the Charisma-based rogue, I am a firm believer in activitaing blindly any magic item I come across (Yay! Only DC 25).

The guy that creates masterwork tools for a living. DUH !!!

Yukitsu
2009-11-17, 05:06 PM
The argument is the same heard a lot of times...
Page 130 of the Player, tells: "Tool, masterwork: this perfect well-made item is the perfect tool for the job" etc etc. It is general and, so, it applies to all object and all skills, unless proven the contrary.
then, follow some examples of such tools, taken from table 7-8.

You can only argue that table 7-8 lists all the masterwork items available. You're right, in that table, under the section "skill kits" there isn't a masterwork item for UMD.
But there isn't neither a set of different ink and papers, so I suppose you cannot have any bonus on forgery for quality material. There isn't neither equipment for desert (skin cream, special flask, and so on), so I suppose you cannot have a masterwork survival kit. :smallconfused:

I like how you listed all the irrelevant parts, then said "etc. etc." over the relevant part that refutes your conclusion.

Killer Angel
2009-11-18, 03:03 AM
Don't presume to know how other people reason.

errr... sometime I presume, sometime either you, 'cause it's in the human nature to make hypothesis; if the other person says I'm wrong on my presumption, then I stand corrected.


I like how you listed all the irrelevant parts, then said "etc. etc." over the relevant part that refutes your conclusion.

It wasn't my intention and the missing text don't seems to go against my conclusion. the text continues: "It grants a +2 circumstance bonus on a related skill check (if any)".
Any tool can be masterwork. Not all the tools gives bonus to skill check (masterwork socks?).
Can you tell me why, in your opinion, by raw a MW tool for UMD didn't exist?
I'm not mind-closed, and I can change my mind.

That said, imo a masterwork tool for UMD exits by raw, merely for a bad writing of the entry for masterwork tools, but in real play it shouldn't be allowed.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-18, 03:40 AM
The extent is, you may do so if such a tool exists.Which is text allowing a DM to disallow skill tools he finds unreasonable.


A mastercrafted forge for forging armour with the craft: (armour) skill is a listed example that seems to apply to all cases of forging armour. The combination of a weigh scale and a magnifying glass will enable someone to better appraise anything. A master crafted saddle that will fit the beast in question will improve ride checks in all situations.Other than armor which does not require a forge... Such as Padded, or any of the wood or leaf based armors.

The mag glass and weigh scale will not assist in appraising invisible gems. Or the value of an object too large to effectively use a magnifying glass on in a timely fashion, or too massive to weigh. Say, a 55 foot tall gold statue of King Leonidus.

A master crafted saddle for a horse won't apply for all ride checks. Just all ride checks involving riding horses. It will not apply for all listed uses of ride conceivable.

None of these meet the standard you set for UMD. Keep trying.


I really don't get why you keep spewing the cost at me. Whether or not it can be applied to any skill at all has absolutely nothing to do with the cost.Oh, simple. It's a listed item. The title of the item is "MW Skill Tool". The cost is 50gp. The text gives DM permission to decide what skills do and do not apply.

DM's vary by game. Thus, we cannot objectively limit this and call it RAW. You can attempt to offer your opinion on what skills are excluded, but either it's one of two ways.

Either it's exclusive, which means: No skill is excluded, and thus all are allowed, RAW...

Or it's inclusive, which means: No skill is included in the description, and thus no skill is allowed, RAW.

You can't piecemeal in the ones you like, leave out the rest, and call that double standard RAW.


Considering the mastercrafted version is a full pound heavier than the standard, one would assume that includes contrivances for opening larger locks. That aside, locks as written are the same regardless of the size of the user.Incorrect. Locks, as written, have no size at all. Thus, they must all be sizeless thought locks, comprised only of our lack of will to open the locked item. There are rules for size alteration. Use them.


And monks didn't talk to people with the cowl down, and people didn't trust lepers.And that, in no way, assisted any of those people in distinguishing truth from falsehood.

See? Bluff isn't just "don't trust that guy". It's "I have the feeling this guy is lying". It's only accurate when you think that, and the person is. If he's being honest with a cowl on, then it's a bad check. Thus: Assuming someone's a liar when they're honest, due to an item, is a failed sense motive. Sounds like the item's doing something causing the other person to be able to less accurately gauge honesty and dishonesty.


And yet the game seems to assume you'll know automatically if they are telling the truth. In a mechanical manner, if you're disinclined towards trusting the person in the first place, you're more likely to ask for a sense motive check.Opposed Checks do not work that way. I roll bluff, you roll sense motive. Rolling one means rolling the other. This is why a DM usually performs that roll.
Unless you believe that the ninja wearing a camo cape in a forest makes his mark more likely to roll a spot check.


You mean that it be used when a reasonable tool matching the skill is applicable? For instance, have you got a 6 second fix to the entire history of the world? Even the internet isn't that fast.You're arguing common sense, when the PHB rule is DM judgement. The DM may not see things your way. As we have no way of gauging individual DM opinion on the interwebs, we tend to go with RAW. By RAW, it's either all skills (as none are excluded) or no skills (as none are included). It's not "Ummm, I can kinda see that skill, but not that one, cause I personally can't think of something". In other words, you're making UMD to be the Fat kid at the team picking for dodgeball.


Correct, because the table does not in any way imply that the tool can be purchased for any skill in existance.
Then I shall ask you this.

What are the exact RAW criteria for deciding what skills are allowed via the MW skill tool, and what skills are not allowed? Back up your answers with RAW support.

If you can find none, then it's either all by RAW, or none.

And if it's none, then there's no point in the text existing.
Since I won't accept an interpretation that invalidates the rule it's interpreting, I go with "all inclusive". Otherwise, there are no skill items at all, for any skill.

Yukitsu
2009-11-18, 04:15 AM
Which is text allowing a DM to disallow skill tools he finds unreasonable.
Other than armor which does not require a forge... Such as Padded, or any of the wood or leaf based armors.

I'd argue it still does help, as all cases that I can see involve metal components, such as buckles etc. The difference is further exacerbated in that many of those armours require additional checks unrelated to armoursmithing, implying that some metal components are forged, while the rest is either alchemically treated, or is woodworked.


The mag glass and weigh scale will not assist in appraising invisible gems. Or the value of an object too large to effectively use a magnifying glass on in a timely fashion, or too massive to weigh. Say, a 55 foot tall gold statue of King Leonidus.

Explicitly magical items, such as an invisible gem (which is technically worthless, since a gem is only valued because of its visual properties) are not determined by appraise, so that's a non-issue. As well, a lens certainly can determine flaws in a large structure. Timely or not is a different issue of course, though for all I know, large statues tend to have defects in the same places. Generally where the mold came apart, leaving a crease.


A master crafted saddle for a horse won't apply for all ride checks. Just all ride checks involving riding horses. It will not apply for all listed uses of ride conceivable.

I did say that the inability to equip the item has no bearing on whether or not it applies to the skill check, but on a very, very technical level, there is nothing barring a person from using a military saddle on any creature out there.


DM's vary by game. Thus, we cannot objectively limit this and call it RAW. You can attempt to offer your opinion on what skills are excluded, but either it's one of two ways.

No, it means that once someone fulfills the criteria of a mundane item that can actually do as advertized with a modicum of sense, it can apply. Such a tool hasn't been proposed, other than a book, which as with a book applied to knowledge, must take more than 6 seconds.


Either it's exclusive, which means: No skill is excluded, and thus all are allowed, RAW...

Or it's inclusive, which means: No skill is included in the description, and thus no skill is allowed, RAW.

You can't piecemeal in the ones you like, leave out the rest, and call that double standard RAW.

Or it's limited to skills which rationally have beneficial tools.


Incorrect. Locks, as written, have no size at all. Thus, they must all be sizeless thought locks, comprised only of our lack of will to open the locked item. There are rules for size alteration. Use them.

Actually, all locks are 1 pound, which one assumes would encompass a fairly narrow band of sizes. As well, size alteration rules are given for equipped gear, but not for generic items.


And that, in no way, assisted any of those people in distinguishing truth from falsehood.

Strictly speaking from the sense motive side of things, it tells you that the individual is less trustworthy. When opposing bluff, it merely tells you something is up, not that they are explicitly lying.


See? Bluff isn't just "don't trust that guy". It's "I have the feeling this guy is lying". It's only accurate when you think that, and the person is. If he's being honest with a cowl on, then it's a bad check. Thus: Assuming someone's a liar when they're honest, due to an item, is a failed sense motive. Sounds like the item's doing something causing the other person to be able to less accurately gauge honesty and dishonesty.

There are, unfortunately no rules for assessing truths. It's assumed that if you roll, and they weren't lying, then the result is academic, so there is no such thing as a "bad check" when the individual isn't bluffing.


Opposed Checks do not work that way. I roll bluff, you roll sense motive. Rolling one means rolling the other. This is why a DM usually performs that roll.

And you can request sense motive checks for specific parts of statements or statements that normally the DM would skim over, simply because it's not realistic to roll bluff and sense motive for every sentance unless you think it's worthwhile trying, or are otherwise suspicious.


Unless you believe that the ninja wearing a camo cape in a forest makes his mark more likely to roll a spot check.

Complete adventurer has specific rules for that, and you can cue additional spot checks as a standard action if you have a reason to believe someone is hiding. Active spotting is generally only useful if you have quick recconoiter though.


You're arguing common sense, when the PHB rule is DM judgement. The DM may not see things your way. As we have no way of gauging individual DM opinion on the interwebs, we tend to go with RAW. By RAW, it's either all skills (as none are excluded) or no skills (as none are included). It's not "Ummm, I can kinda see that skill, but not that one, cause I personally can't think of something". In other words, you're making UMD to be the Fat kid at the team picking for dodgeball.

By explicit rules as written, it's DM call, or requires an explicit tool related to the check in question.


Then I shall ask you this.

What are the exact RAW criteria for deciding what skills are allowed via the MW skill tool, and what skills are not allowed? Back up your answers with RAW support.

Is it a tool that you can use to assist in such an endeavor when you actually go about attempting such a skill under the listed assumptions written into the skills section of the PHB? And that is RAW. If there is a tool for the skill, you can make a mastercrafted version of said tool. Now show me where it says all skills have tools.


If you can find none, then it's either all by RAW, or none.

And if it's none, then there's no point in the text existing.
Since I won't accept an interpretation that invalidates the rule it's interpreting, I go with "all inclusive". Otherwise, there are no skill items at all, for any skill.

That's only true if you invent contrived situations that assume non-core material against the skill, such as extra large locks, or some odd individual that can't wear flippers, or some odd creature that can't have a military saddle strapped to it.

And yet again, have you got a proposal for a skill based item that can be used within 6 seconds that gets the listed skills on the UMD section of the PHB?

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-18, 04:50 AM
I'd argue it still does help, as all cases that I can see involve metal components, such as buckles etc. The difference is further exacerbated in that many of those armours require additional checks unrelated to armoursmithing, implying that some metal components are forged, while the rest is either alchemically treated, or is woodworked.All reasonable. All non RAW.


Explicitly magical items, such as an invisible gem (which is technically worthless, since a gem is only valued because of its visual properties) are not determined by appraise, so that's a non-issue. As well, a lens certainly can determine flaws in a large structure. Timely or not is a different issue of course, though for all I know, large statues tend to have defects in the same places. Generally where the mold came apart, leaving a crease.
Invisible gems are not magical. No experience was spent in their creation. And the notion that they are worthless is actually against RAW. You're saying I have a 5000gp gem, and I'm getting ready to imprison the king with trap the soul, and some scrub wizard casts invisibility on the gem, and suddenly it fails, because the gem has no value? Incorrect. Value is Value, regardless of opinions on why the value is there.


I did say that the inability to equip the item has no bearing on whether or not it applies to the skill check, but on a very, very technical level, there is nothing barring a person from using a military saddle on any creature out there.Excepting, of course, for the rule that penalties apply for inappropriate beasts? And that a medium saddle won't fit a large mount for the same reason that a medium suit of armor won't fit an ogre?


No, it means that once someone fulfills the criteria of a mundane item that can actually do as advertized with a modicum of sense, it can apply. Such a tool hasn't been proposed, other than a book, which as with a book applied to knowledge, must take more than 6 seconds.Reasonable. Also not RAW. "Modicums of sense" aren't definable by anything other than personal opinion.


Or it's limited to skills which rationally have beneficial tools.Rationality as defined by who? You? No. RAW is RAW. It is not based on personal opinion or perception. Trying to claim opinion is RAW on basis of your personal beliefs on the matter is not RAW.


Actually, all locks are 1 pound, which one assumes would encompass a fairly narrow band of sizes. As well, size alteration rules are given for equipped gear, but not for generic items.Incorrect. Rules exist for increasing a lock's size. It increases weight by a factor of 8, same as any other item.


Strictly speaking from the sense motive side of things, it tells you that the individual is less trustworthy. When opposing bluff, it merely tells you something is up, not that they are explicitly lying.Incorrect. It allows you to detect that something's out of place with a statement or behaviour. If you're determining that something's out of place with a dress code, it has no bearing on the behaviour. The argument is also not based in RAW, but rather, opinionated interpretation of common sense to rationalize a double standard in the interpretation of that RAW.


There are, unfortunately no rules for assessing truths. It's assumed that if you roll, and they weren't lying, then the result is academic, so there is no such thing as a "bad check" when the individual isn't bluffing.Except that a successful check will reveal "nothing about the statement seems distrustworthy". Even if he's wearing a cowled cloak, with a monocle, and holding a dagger to a baby's throat.

And you can request sense motive checks for specific parts of statements or statements that normally the DM would skim over, simply because it's not realistic to roll bluff and sense motive for every sentance unless you think it's worthwhile trying, or are otherwise suspicious.Or, perhaps, you follow RAW, and the DM rolls your sense motive versus a bluff, and automatically informs you if something doesn't quite sit right with what you heard. That way, you don't waste time rolling on every sentence.


Complete adventurer has specific rules for that, and you can cue additional spot checks as a standard action if you have a reason to believe someone is hiding. Active spotting is generally only useful if you have quick recconoiter though.The PHb also has rules for it. You are entitled to a reactive, opposed spot whenever you have the opportunity to see something. This is generally because a DC changes (something moves closer, for example), something becomes able to be seen (a sneaking rogue enters LOS, or an invisible wizard enters within 30 feet), or the like. But if you don't see it, your character is no more likely to look harder than if he didn't see something because it wasn't there. Same with bluff/sense motive. If you don't detect something fishy with the statement, the cloak, RAW, doesn't incline you any more to. That's opinion and roleplaying, which is fine and dandy, but not universal to all games.


By explicit rules as written, it's DM call, or requires an explicit tool related to the check in question.And is this a game, of which you are a DM? No? Then it's not your call.


Is it a tool that you can use to assist in such an endeavor when you actually go about attempting such a skill under the listed assumptions written into the skills section of the PHB? And that is RAW. If there is a tool for the skill, you can make a mastercrafted version of said tool. Now show me where it says all skills have tools.Incorrect. Mastercrafting is not allowed to any object, by RAW. Show me a guideline that states that anything that exists in a normal fashion may be masterworked. It doesn't exist. And you're grasping at straws.


That's only true if you invent contrived situations that assume non-core material against the skill, such as extra large locks, or some odd individual that can't wear flippers, or some odd creature that can't have a military saddle strapped to it.Like a Purple Wurm (core)? Size category increases are core. "Odd individuals that can't wear flippers" are exceptions. Your standards for UMD were every possible use of the skill.

So show me a 50gp item that will provide a character paralyzed due to strength damage a +2 to swim checks related to movement.

And yet again, have you got a proposal for a skill based item that can be used within 6 seconds that gets the listed skills on the UMD section of the PHB?Proposals are not RAW. You are not the DM of this thread. I don't have to vet my issues through you for approval. Your views on UMD and skill views are opinions, no more. They are unsupported by conclusive RAW, and there is no conclusive RAW support for which skills are and are not allowed via a MW skill tool.

Which means, in the absence of a DM to make the decision, it's either all skills, or no skills.

Otherwise, you're Paul the Player, trying to armchair DM the other players.

Don't be Paul.

Yukitsu
2009-11-18, 08:33 AM
You can't make swim checks at all when paralyzed, so whether you have a +2 or not is academic, I cannot find where the statement regarding saddles for other sizes exists, as it's certainly not under saddles in the SRD, and I also certainly see no entry for changing the size of generic gear that is not equipped.

And lastly, even if it didn't, a military saddle assists with all of the abilities found within the ride skill, as does a looking glass and scale with appraise, as does a set of flippers for swimming.

I fail to see why I should say that "It's RAW that people may take a mastercraft item of UMD" when they have no proposed item that can assist them in all of the abilities listed in the UMD skill.

dsmiles
2009-11-18, 08:52 AM
Hey...RAW is WAR spelled backwards...I'm just sayin'.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-18, 09:19 AM
RAW covers "just about everything" with Masterwork Tools. Without a DM adjudicator we cannot decide what isn't covered. This is true.

RAW is the ultimate authority only in Theoretical Optimization. When engaged in Practical Optimization, i.e. optimizing intended to be used in an actual game, masterwork tools (especially those that people seem inclined to disagree with, such as UMD) should not be assumed as a given. They can be offered as a potential avenue for skill boosts, with some potential justifications of what they could be; but they ought not to be assumed as a given, no matter how nice the argument sounds. A build IMO ought not to hinge on them, and if my experience with DMs and masterwork tools suggests that a common baseline would be to ignore masterwork tools completely.

Why did this simple matter spiral into a large argument again?

Tyndmyr
2009-11-18, 09:24 AM
So show me a 50gp item that will provide a character paralyzed due to strength damage a +2 to swim checks related to movement.
Proposals are not RAW. You are not the DM of this thread. I don't have to vet my issues through you for approval. Your views on UMD and skill views are opinions, no more. They are unsupported by conclusive RAW, and there is no conclusive RAW support for which skills are and are not allowed via a MW skill tool.

Honestly, if a character is paralyzed due to strength damage, masterwork tools currently in existance, such as artisians tools, would also seem to apply no bonus.

And frankly, a paralyzed swimmer/crafter shouldn't reasonably be able to make the check due to the condition, so the mw tool would be irrelevant.

This seems like a rather ridiculous assumption, that tools must work under EVERY possible set of conditions, including those in which you would normally simply fail the check or not be able to take it at all. I certainly wouldn't allow a paralyzed player to craft like normal, and I don't see why anyone else would consider that to be routine.

dsmiles
2009-11-18, 09:28 AM
Thrice dratted ninjas (ninji?).

@ Foryn Gilnith:
BOO-YA!
I completely agree. If a player cannot show me a practical example of a MW Tool Kit for the skill in question, it doesn't exist in my campaign. This is all completely up to the DM of the campaign in question.

Vizzerdrix
2009-11-18, 10:08 AM
A UMD tool, in my mind, comes across as a ring of special metal and a book. wear this (non magical) ring to help your body tune in to a magical item, and read the book during down time/ before bed/ in the privy for your +2 bonus.

Now my $0.02

Honestly, limiting UMD hurts all party members and adds nothing but a further dependence on the casters. Turning them into Buff dealers and pimps.
(<- Funny image ^_^)

dsmiles
2009-11-18, 10:16 AM
Honestly, limiting UMD hurts all party members and adds nothing but a further dependence on the casters. Turning them into Buff dealers and pimps.

I really don't think that not having a MW tool kit for a skill limits it. Any rogue worth his/her weight in salt has a high enouch charisma and enough skill ranks to make "activating blindly" a healthy choice.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-18, 10:17 AM
I really don't think that not having a MW tool kit for a skill limits it. Any rogue worth his/her weight in salt has a high enouch charisma and enough skill ranks to make "activating blindly" a healthy choice.

Incidentally, salt in DnD is worth very little.

dsmiles
2009-11-18, 10:26 AM
Exactly. You don't have to be worth very much to have enough skill ranks invested in an important skill like UMD. I find a ring...I activate it blindly!
I find a...anything, really...I activate it blindly. I blew up a beholder like that once.

Edit: Literally...It was a wand of enlarge person.

Asbestos
2009-11-18, 10:43 AM
I don't like UMD as implemented. Why is it CHA and not INT? Why does it feel like you're 'tricking' an inaminate object? How pointless are wizard schools if some dumb as bricks thief can cast from scrolls and use wands just because he has an awesome personality?

Tyndmyr
2009-11-18, 10:47 AM
I don't like UMD as implemented. Why is it CHA and not INT? Why does it feel like you're 'tricking' an inaminate object? How pointless are wizard schools if some dumb as bricks thief can cast from scrolls and use wands just because he has an awesome personality?

Because wizards are powerful enough, and sorcs/rogues/bards also deserve nice things?

Vizzerdrix
2009-11-18, 11:09 AM
Because wizards are powerful enough, and sorcs/rogues/bards also deserve nice things?

LIES!!! :smallfurious:Strip them of their very gear! only the mighty should get things!:smallfurious:

Kidding!:smallwink::smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

dsmiles
2009-11-18, 11:11 AM
@^: You're a wizard, aren't you?

Vizzerdrix
2009-11-18, 11:19 AM
Pfft. Nothing so weak. I sir, am a half dragon, half asimar, half illithid, half daelkyr half minotaur mineral warrior star elf. quadruple gestalted into S2P Eurdite/cloistered DMM Cleric to the F.S.M./ Articifer/ Crusader.....

For flavor. :smallwink:

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-18, 02:10 PM
UMD has no fluff by the basic rules. If you create fluff of your own for it, you may need to change the mechanics. A sample, quickly thought-out take on UMD, which I'm pretty sure I'm inadvertently stealing from somebody:

Wizards and clerics create "hacks" in reality: Using a small amount of innate mystic power, they make reality "think" that it should be a certain way. The briefly rewritten laws of reality proceed to create the desired effect. Each spell slot represents a specific hack, elaborately studied and rehearsed for the day, understood through intuition or abstract intellect. Sorcerers, on the other hand, force their effects into reality. Using their innate mystic power, derived from Charisma (correlated with mystic force), they bend reality to their will far more directly than traditional Vancians.

UMD is a lesser version of that personal mystic force. Magic items contain predetermined "hack" instructions, or occasionally raw, leaking mystic power from a sorcerer's item. UMD either pushes the sorcerer power out with mystic force, or jolts the hack into action with said mystic force. UMD training represents channeling more of this mystic force.

dsmiles
2009-11-18, 02:15 PM
Mmmm...sounds like your fluff on magic comes from WoD Mage...look out for paradox. :smalltongue:

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-18, 02:28 PM
Ah, that's where it's from. I remember reading a post detailing this somewhere. Must have been D&D: Mage Edition.

But there are plenty of ways to justify Charisma-based UMD, even if the example didn't follow too well. You could easily base it off Int, as Asbestos suggested, but Cha can work. And as for why UMD has not replaced wizard schools: UMD can only consume, not produce; and is unreliable both in its failure chance and requirement for constant magic item fuel.

dsmiles
2009-11-18, 03:18 PM
Ah, that's where it's from. I remember reading a post detailing this somewhere. Must have been D&D: Mage Edition.

But there are plenty of ways to justify Charisma-based UMD, even if the example didn't follow too well. You could easily base it off Int, as Asbestos suggested, but Cha can work. And as for why UMD has not replaced wizard schools: UMD can only consume, not produce; and is unreliable both in its failure chance and requirement for constant magic item fuel.

That's not what I said...I was just speaking regarding your fluff. Your example below the fluff perfectly illustrates charisma based UMD based on the fluff, and that's pretty much how I see it. The UMD character is forcing the item in question to do his bidding based on his personal aura/force of personality/whatever you want to call it. Thus: skill ranks + charisma modifier.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-18, 03:28 PM
I view UMD more as intuition. Understanding clues about the creator from his creation. Using that to make guesses.

Otherwise, yes, it is tricking items. You pretend to have class features, ability scores, and more. I mean, emulating an intelligence score higher than yours? Hm. That's gotta be trickery.