Warlocks and Runestaffs

[Sudain]

Can warlocks use Runestaffs via UMD?

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ps/20070216a says they can only cast things off the runestaff if they have it on their spell lists. UMD should emulate a larger spell list; am I correct?

Edit:
I know there are some warlock invocations that duplicate spell effects(and allow entry to prestige classes that require the ability to cast spells of X(I'm thinking of Iniiate of Seven Fold Veil)). I'm assuming these invocations would be needed to power the spell slot needed to actually power the staff.

[Zaq]

How UMD works with Runestaves (I refuse to say "Runestaffs," sorry) is unclear. Most GMs I've played under allow you to emulate "is an arcane spellcaster" with UMD, but whether that's actually how the rules work isn't really obvious, and I wouldn't strenuously disagree with a GM who ruled that it doesn't work.

That said, Warlocks don't have any spell slots to pour into Runestaves and turn into different spells, so I don't think that works. Even when SLAs mimic spells, they aren't spells, and they certainly aren't spell slots.

[Mystify]

I would rule against it working. Their balanced cheaply under the assumption that you are still powering them with your limited spell slots. Runestaffs would definitely be somewhat unbalanced with a warlock, even if they aren't actually gamebreaking. At least they have a built in limit on uses/day, which should keep it from getting too crazy.
If you really want a warlock with sorcerer spells, you could try an eldritch theurge. They have some cool tricks.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

You could use UMD to attune yourself to a Runestaff, you could use it to access a given spell on a Runestaff even if it's not on your class spell list.

You still must spend a spell slot of the appropriate level to cast a spell contained in a Runestaff.

If you have no spell slots (i.e. a single-classed Warlock), then you gain absolutely no benefit from UMDing a Runestaff.

[Chronos]

On the other hand, a beguiler can make great use of them, since they have both UMD and spell slots, but a very limited class spell list.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

On the other hand, a beguiler can make great use of them, since they have both UMD and spell slots, but a very limited class spell list.

If you're going that far, you may as well just get Magical Training (Wizard) and Versatile Spellcaster. For two feats, you're a Tier 1.

[HunterOfJello]

Runestaves require not only the ability to cast spells but a spell itself cast into the staff to work. There's an equivalent exchange principle worked into the staff's design. You can't use it to get something from nothing.

Wizard Spell burned = fine for runestaff
Beguiler Spell burned + UMD = generally held as fine for runestaff
Warlock UMD + No Spell = not fine for a runestaff

[Thurbane]

Wizard Spell burned = fine for runestaff
Beguiler Spell burned + UMD = generally held as fine for runestaff
Warlock UMD + No Spell = not fine for a runestaff
Indeed, pretty much exactly what my understanding is as well.

[mikau013]

Runestaves require not only the ability to cast spells but a spell itself cast into the staff to work. There's an equivalent exchange principle worked into the staff's design. You can't use it to get something from nothing.

Wizard Spell burned = fine for runestaff
Beguiler Spell burned + UMD = generally held as fine for runestaff
Warlock UMD + No Spell = not fine for a runestaff

You can use UMD to 'trick' the equivalent exchange.

[Thurbane]

You can use UMD to 'trick' the equivalent exchange.
So, in effect, successful UMD checks bypass the need of the staff to be powered by spell slots? So you can spam the spells all day long? Sounds a bit...off...to me.

[Feytalist]

So, in effect, successful UMD checks bypass the need of the staff to be powered by spell slots? So you can spam the spells all day long? Sounds a bit...off...to me.

Well... 3x per spell per day. There's still that restriction. Powerfull, but in an "uber eternal wand" type of manner.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

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).

You cannot spend a spell slot you do not have. You can activate it as though you have spell slots of the appropriate level, but you cannot spend those fake spell slots so you cannot benefit from a Runestaff.

[Hirax]

Agree 100% that warlocks and others without spell slots can't use runestaves by RAW. And I'm glad, not because I don't want non-casters to have nice things, but because that interpretation would help casters way more than non-casters, because casters could allocate much more of their WBL to what would amount to lots of free spells per day.

UMD doesn't let you gain uses of wild shape by UMDing an item that grants an additional use of wildshape either, for instance. Nor does it let you have a 100% chance of destroying an AMF just because you hit 100 on your UMD check when using a staff of disjunction. Whenever I get confused about UMD, I just remember that UMD can hotwire you a car, but not fill it with gas.

[Yuki Akuma]

What about Artificers?

(Serious question, I can't work it out.)

[mikau013]

You cannot spend a spell slot you do not have. You can activate it as though you have spell slots of the appropriate level, but you cannot spend those fake spell slots so you cannot benefit from a Runestaff.


This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class. It just lets you activate items as if you had that class feature.

So you can't use the class feature on its own, but you can use it to activate magical items.
For example: we have a chalice which purifies water if we channel energy into it with turn undead.
A rogue can activate it with UMD even if the rogue in question has no TU uses of her own.

[Yuki Akuma]

If a magic item requires you to spend Turn Undead uses, and you don't have any Turn Undead uses, you can't use it.

You'd be treated as a Cleric with the Turn Undead class feature, just with no uses remaining. Because you don't have any.

It's the same as if you tricked an item that requires a Meldshaper to invest essentia into thinking you're a Meldshaper. Great, the item recognises that you should be able to put essentia into it, good for you. You still don't have any essentia to put into it unless you took the right options to give you essentia, though.

[mikau013]

If a magic item requires you to spend Turn Undead uses, and you don't have any Turn Undead uses, you can't use it.

You'd be treated as a Cleric with the Turn Undead class feature, just with no uses remaining. Because you don't have any.

Yes you can :smallconfused:

[Yuki Akuma]

Yes you can :smallconfused:

I'd love to know where you got this idea.

You can't spend something you don't have. You could use UMD to use an item that merely requires you to have the Turn Undead class feature, but not if it requires you to spend a Turn Undead use you don't have, any more than a Cleric all out of uses could use the item.

[mikau013]

I'd love to know where you got this idea.

You can't spend something you don't have. You could use UMD to use an item that merely requires you to have the Turn Undead class feature, but not if it requires you to spend a Turn Undead use you don't have, any more than a Cleric all out of uses could use the item.

This specific example is right out of UMD description in the phb.

Yes you can with use magic device, read your phb.

- Edit: I'd quote it, but I don't think you can quote examples etc from the phb right?

[Hirax]

This specific example is right out of UMD description in the phb.

Yes you can with use magic device, read your phb.

- Edit: I'd quote it, but I don't think you can quote examples etc from the phb right?

Fair use, it's fine, especially given that all the crunch of UMD is on the SRD.


For example, Lidda finds a magic chalice that turns regular water
into holy water when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels
positive energy into it as if turning undead. She attempts to activate
the item by emulating the cleric’s undead turning ability. Her
effective cleric level is her check result minus 20. Since a cleric can
turn undead at 1st level, she needs a Use Magic Device check result
of 21 or higher to succeed.

I'd say that actually goes against your claims, because activating the chalice doesn't explicitly expend a turn undead attempt. Which is a good thing, from a balance perspective. Otherwise wizards could get wildshape from magic items trivially, use runestaves for free spells every day, use domain staves, etc. Too many terrible ramifications. Loremaster (or any prc that has UMD and +CL at 1st level) would become the best dip ever.

[Yuki Akuma]

Quoting copyrighted text for the purposes of commentary is absolutely fair use. It's one of the basic definitions of the term.

In this case, that passage makes no mention of Turn Undead uses - merely that the magic item apparently requires the Turn Undead class feature to function.

Use Magic Device can emulate class features. This is a given. There's nothing in the text to imply that it can allow you to spend resources you don't have, though.

You could use Use Magic Device to, say, use an item that simply requires you to be able to cast arcane spells (by emulating the Spellcasting class feature of any arcane spellcaster), like an Eternal Wand. Or it could let you use an item that requires you to be able to cast divine spells and spend a Turn Undead use, if you somehow have Turn Undead without the ability to cast divine spells.

[olentu]

This specific example is right out of UMD description in the phb.

Yes you can with use magic device, read your phb.

- Edit: I'd quote it, but I don't think you can quote examples etc from the phb right?

Unfortunately since it does not say that a turn undead use is being expended it can not be assumed to necessarily be so. Thus the example is inconclusive.

[mikau013]

I'd say that actually goes against your claims, because activating the chalice doesn't explicitly expend a turn undead attempt.


a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead.

Really, how explicit do you want it? :smallsigh:

Are you going to argue that using turn undead also doesn't expend charges since it isn't explicitly stated?

[Hirax]

Really, how explicit do you want it? :smallsigh:

Are you going to argue that using turn undead also doesn't expend charges since it isn't explicitly stated?

Yes. For reasons that I've already stated. Do you want people to be able to wildshape as a 20th level druid by getting 40 on a UMD check?

[Yuki Akuma]

But it is explicitly stated. They can attempt it a number of times per day equal to 3 plus their Charisma modifier. That's pretty darn explicit.

There are plenty examples of items that require a specific class feature but don't use any uses of it to function.

[mikau013]

But it is explicitly stated. They can attempt it a number of times per day equal to 3 plus their Charisma modifier. That's pretty darn explicit.

There are plenty examples of items that require a specific class feature but don't use any uses of it to function.

Yes but this isn't one of them.

a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead.
It clearly says that the cleric (or paladin) channels positive energy as if turning. It doesn't say requires the user to be able to turn undead. The chalice is specifically powered by the holy energy.

And I'm fine if you houserule it to say something else, but the RAW is pretty clear.


-Edit:


Yes. For reasons that I've already stated. Do you want people to be able to wildshape as a 20th level druid by getting 40 on a UMD check?
I'm not sure what that has to do with activating magical items :smallconfused:

[Yuki Akuma]

That's not rules text. It's an example. The hint is that it's not in the SRD.

And it's a bad example, too, but many examples in WotC products are.

It also doesn't say that the fictional magic item that doesn't exist in any book and was devised before anyone thought of making magic items that require turn uses to function actually requires turn uses.

[mikau013]

That's not rules text. It's an example. The hint is that it's not in the SRD.

And it's a bad example, too, but many examples in WotC products are.

Yes it is an example, proving what the designers intended with their text. It is not in the SRD because the SRD has no examples in it.

[huttj509]

Fair use, it's fine, especially given that all the crunch of UMD is on the SRD.



I'd say that actually goes against your claims, because activating the chalice doesn't explicitly expend a turn undead attempt. Which is a good thing, from a balance perspective. Otherwise wizards could get wildshape from magic items trivially, use runestaves for free spells every day, use domain staves, etc. Too many terrible ramifications. Loremaster (or any prc that has UMD and +CL at 1st level) would become the best dip ever.

It's vague, since they're using a hypothetical item. "a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead" could easily be flavor for "expend one of your turn undead uses to ..."

If they referenced a specifdic item, we could check the stated details of that item.

[Thurbane]

Well... 3x per spell per day. There's still that restriction. Powerfull, but in an "uber eternal wand" type of manner.
Huh, would you believe I'd never noticed that limitation before - I thought you could use it as many times as you had spell slots to burn. :smallredface:

[Sudain]

Cool; thank you for the info and ensuing flame war. :)

i was really hoping it'd turn out so a warlock could use a runestave to cheaply get 3 extra spells but, ah well. They really do get screwed on a lot of things.

[Nizaris]

To quote the SRD "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 chalice in the example requires Channel Energy, it can be be used with a DC 21 UMD check. If it requires a use of Channel Energy to be spent, you can emulate the ability but cannot actively use Channel Energy to power the chalice.

Otherwise an Expert can emulate the Wizard's spell casting, the Druid's wipldshape, and the Cleric's Channel Energy abilities pulling off all kinds of crazy shenanigans.

[Jasruv Lundux]

Warlocks gain two abilities, Deceive Item at 4th and Imbue Item at 12th that would indicate to me that a warlock could use a Runestaff.

Deceive Iem grants the ability to take 10 on UMD checks and Imbue Item lets a warlock emulate any spell (Arcane or Divine) with a UMD check for the purposes of creating magical items.

Use UMD to satisfy the spell list requirement and shape the arcane energy that is normally formed into an Invocation into something the Runestaff can work with, and the Runestaff can then produce the actual spell/effect.

A Runestaff can convert prepared spells or raw energy from a spontanous caster into a set spell, why not a sufficiently powerful Invocation?

A warlock would have to jump thru a few hoops to use a runestaff though.

If the spell has a verbal component, this still has to be performed. (Magic Item Comp. PG 224). So the Warlock would have to either make a Spellcraft check or get tutored by a wizard to do this.

Somatic components are the same way

Material components, Expensive Foci, and XP costs all must be carried or provided for.

Any other requirements must be met (Alignment, Racial, etc... ) Although this can done with the UMD check, it would probably add to the difficulty.

At 12th level a Warlock with right feats could actually make Runestaves, so trying to say they can't actually use them seems somewhat wrong to me.

Ultimately, it up to the individual GM to decide.

[hymer]

At 12th level a Warlock with right feats could actually make Runestaves, so trying to say they can't actually use them seems somewhat wrong to me.

A Wizard with the right feat can make a nice suit of magical full plate, but wouldn't be caught dead wearing one. You could turn it around and say that it's not really fair they can't craft one, just because they can't use one. :)

[Nerd-o-rama]

Deceive Iem grants the ability to take 10 on UMD checks and Imbue Item lets a warlock emulate any spell (Arcane or Divine) with a UMD check for the purposes of creating magical items.

Emphasis mine.

And as stated before by others, Warlocks do not have spells to expend to activate a Runestaff.

[Hirax]

Wizards can craft domain staves, but can't use them. There are tons of examples of characters being able to craft things they can't use.

Also, remember that examples are not RAW (see: the numerous sample prestige class characters that break entry rules), and therefore because the example with the chalice is unclear at best, it doesn't really mean anything. If you want to call RAW ambiguous based on the example, that's reasonable. But in the act of interpreting that ambiguity, I find it completely unreasonable to go with an interpretation that would basically give any wizard that boosted UMD tons of free spells per day, the ability to wild shape as a 20th level (or higher!) druid, and all the other terrible ramifications of UMD actually granting you the ability to use something you don't have.

@below, you're the one ignoring RAW, which is why the OP ignored you and nobody is taking you seriously.

[mikau013]

Wizards can craft domain staves, but can't use them. There are tons of examples of characters being able to craft things they can't use.

Also, remember that examples are not RAW (see: the numerous sample prestige class characters that break entry rules), and therefore because the example with the chalice is unclear at best, it doesn't really mean anything. If you want to call RAW ambiguous based on the example, that's reasonable. But in the act of interpreting that ambiguity, I find it completely unreasonable to go with an interpretation that would basically give any wizard that boosted UMD tons of free spells per day, the ability to wild shape as a 20th level (or higher!) druid, and all the other terrible ramifications of UMD actually granting you the ability to use something you don't have.

So you ignore RAW because you read things into it that are specifically ruled out?
Well that is fine for your houserules, you should in fact houserule things you find gamebreaking.

[Nizaris]

So you ignore RAW because you read things into it that are specifically ruled out?
Well that is fine for your houserules, you should in fact houserule things you find gamebreaking.

Look at my post 5 above yours for the SRD UMD entry, UMD specifically states that you can be treated as having a class ability but you do not gain the ability to use it. That's RAW, the example given in the book conflicts with RAW and therefore is null. There's a fine difference between being able to say I have Channel Energy but I can't use it, and I can use Channel Energy, especially since it opens up some cheese with losing the ability after you stop emulating it and then "regain" the ability for extra uses.

[pbdr]

So, I know this is an older post, but it has come up in my group and I just want to post how I handled it.

So, I house ruled that it would work for the warlock, but with limitations.

First, the warlock needs to make the appropriate UMD check each time they use the staff, but can "power" the spell with an invocation of the appropriate level (i.e. if the invocation is equivalent to a 3rd level spell, it can power a 3rd level spell in the staff). Flavor-wise, this seemed reasonable to me since, while the invocation is not a true spell, it is powered by the arcane energies.

In addition, the warlock has to spend time attuning themselves to the staff, using spell craft over a few days and can only attune a single staff at a time. This is to keep a warlock from carrying a dozen of the things duck-taped together....

I think since the staff is limited to 3 uses per spell per day, it shouldn't be too broken this way. feel free to let me know if this is reasonable and/or if you think it breaks the warlock too much.

[Miranius]

In my opinion warlocks definitively can use some more versatility without getting broken for a long long time.
Having a singular runestaff definitively is a small thing compared to, for example, persisted divine power or doing quintuple damage on a charge.

[8wGremlin]

Halfling Warlock + Nosomatic Chirurgeon + Runestaff + UMD = usable?

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Wonder uses Turn Undead! It's very effective!