Activating Wands without command word?

[Tr011]

Anyone got an idea? Kinda sucks for sneaky chars to use command words :/

[Swooper]

Artificer's Metamagic Spelltrigger class feature combined with Silent Spell.

Complete Mage has Metamagic Wand Grips, which are probably what you're looking for.

[Curmudgeon]

Artificer's Metamagic Spelltrigger class feature combined with Silent Spell.

Complete Mage has Metamagic Wand Grips, which are probably what you're looking for.
This won't do anything. Still Spell modifies a spell to remove the verbal components. The word to trigger a wand isn't a spell component; instead, it's a device requirement.

You can accomplish this with Use Magic Device, but only with Activate Blindly. You have to wave the wand around, but can activate the wand without speaking.

[imneuromancer]

BY the rules of magic item creation in the DMG, you can put metamagic on a wand, it just adds to the cost of the item. So that Wand of Invisibility-- Silent (so you can become invisible without saying something) is like a 3rd level spell, so is spell level x caster level x 50 x 15 = 3 x 5 x 50 x 15 = 11250 gp.

[Keneth]

Like Curmudgeon noted, adding "silent" to a wand won't do anything since the verbal component is not part of "casting the spell", it's the activation method for the wand and metamagics don't have any effect on it.

I'm also pretty sure that activating it blindly won't do anything either since you have to perform an equivalent action to activate it, so speaking a word is obligatory in both cases.

[phlidwsn]

Warforged have the Wand Sheath embedded component(ECS269) for 4k. Enables activating as a mental action(literally described as point and think), but a given wand is stuck in the sheath until you burn it out.

[Swooper]

This won't do anything. Still Spell modifies a spell to remove the verbal components. The word to trigger a wand isn't a spell component; instead, it's a device requirement.

You can accomplish this with Use Magic Device, but only with Activate Blindly. You have to wave the wand around, but can activate the wand without speaking.
Bah. I actually considered this when writing my post, but thought it was a too extreme reading of the RAW to bother mentioning it. :smalltongue: You're right, of course, but as a DM I would personally let it fly. Spending extra charges and paying for the wand grip seems like a fair price for being able to cast silently from a wand.

[Curmudgeon]

I'm also pretty sure that activating it blindly won't do anything either since you have to perform an equivalent action to activate it, so speaking a word is obligatory in both cases.

Activate Blindly

Some magic items are activated by special words, thoughts, or actions. You can activate such an item as if you were using the activation word, thought, or action, even when you’re not and even if you don’t know it. You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate. You will activate the item with some equivalent activity, because that succeeds even when you don't know what the right activity is. So waving a wand about works with your Activate Blindly check even when you're not using the activation word.

[Keneth]

That's a very liberal reading of the skill use. What it says is, that you can use an equivalent action to activate an item even if you don't know what it is. All spell trigger items are activated with a command word, and the only thing equivalent to a word is another word. Activating an item blindly involves you trying different methods, but the item is never gonna activate with a different method than what it's supposed to be activated with. In the end you'll probably end up being a lot louder, trying out different command words, than you would be if you just used the actual command word to begin with.

[Swooper]

...the only thing equivalent to a word is another word.
Aha, but we know that a picture is like a thousand words, so maybe showing the wand 1/1000th of a picture could be equivalent to speaking the command word? :smallbiggrin:

Pro tip: Never argue about RAW with Curmudgeon.

[Wookie-ranger]

creative use of silence as it also blocks all sound traveling rough the area.

You could try to use
Silence+Selective spell MMfeat (from Shining South, p. 21)

you cast (or have someone cast) silence on you with the selective spell feature of not affecting you. you could argue that this would enable you to speack, but anyone beyond 5feet could not hear you.
this is DM dependent and not RAW. as you could argue that then anything outside the area could hear you too.

Or you could use:
silence + Mastery of Shaping (Archmage high arcana)
you cast Silence on a pebble, creating an area that is completely silent, but leaving the square it is in free of the effect. effectively a silence bubble.
Anything holding the pebble can talk normally, activate magic items and cast spells, but nothing outside your square can hear you.
bonus points for making it permanent and storing it in a bag of holding until needed.


also:
Silence + Sculpt spell
Creative spacing of the 4 x 10foot cubes of silence could achieve the same as the one above.

[Curmudgeon]

What it says is, that you can use an equivalent action to activate an item even if you don't know what it is.
Actually it says you can activate an item as if you were using the activation word even when you’re not. You seem to be reading that as saying you can activate an item as if you were using the activation word even when you’re using the wrong word; however, that's not what's in the RAW.

All spell trigger items are activated with a command word, and the only thing equivalent to a word is another word.
You know that a word is required if you use Use a Wand to activate a wand; no such knowledge is stipulated for Activate Blindly.
Activating an item blindly involves you trying different methods, but the item is never gonna activate with a different method than what it's supposed to be activated with.
Again, you seem to be reading something that's not in the RAW, because that skill function says otherwise. No other application of Use Magic Device will activate a magic item when you "wave the item around", but Activate Blindly does activate items in such a fashion. The only remaining constraints for that use of the skill are in the check results, not in the activities you must perform for activation.

[Keneth]

Actually it says you can activate an item as if you were using the activation word even when you’re not. You seem to be reading that as saying you can activate an item as if you were using the activation word even when you’re using the wrong word; however, that's not what's in the RAW. Actually, that is what it says. Yes, you are not required to use the command word specified by the item's creator. But this does not mean that you can use any activation method that you feel like using. You are required to use an equivalent activity to activate it, and the only equivalent activity to speaking words is actually speaking words. Physical gestures are in no way equivalent to command words and if you believe that they are, I would like to see a quote that says so.

[Yuki Akuma]

Keneth, it's best just not to argue with Curmudgeon. You're not going to convince him. :smalltongue:

[ericgrau]

Scroll of a silent spell.

Potions, especially for 1st and 2nd level spells. Cheaper than the above for these two spell levels. Or elixirs (see wondrous items).

Cast silence on the passageway in front of you. It has a 400' plus range which is a -40 or more to the listen check to hear the spell being being cast. Or for close range get a scroll of silent silence, assuming that's cheaper than the scroll(s) of the silent spell(s) you want to cast.

Mundane impediments. It's a DC 0 listen to hear someone talk in a clear strong voice such as activating a command word. +1 per 10 feet. +5 through a door. +15 through a wall.

If you're a high level bard you can cast zone of silence which allows noise within your bubble but doesn't let it leave.

As for UMD:


Activate Blindly
Some magic items are activated by special words, thoughts, or actions. You can activate such an item as if you were using the activation word, thought, or action, even when you’re not and even if you don’t know it. You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate.

The text is not specific on what equivalent activity means but it does give examples
for normal activation: "special words, thoughts, or actions."
for UMD activation: "speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate."

It does not say whether or not there's a direction connection, such as special words <=> speaking, but it might be implied as there is a good connection between the wording. An interpretation either way is valid. But it's absolutely certain that the UMD method must be an equivalent activity to the normal activation. If you can't make an argument for at least some kind of remote similarity between the substitute activity and pointing a wand and saying the command word, I call BS and a DM should call BS too if he doesn't see the similarity even if you try to force one.

[Keneth]

Keneth, it's best just not to argue with Curmudgeon. You're not going to convince him. :smalltongue:
Probably, but I enjoy these arguments nonetheless. :smallbiggrin:

[Psyren]

Use a dorje instead; they are triggered by thought instead of by speaking. Skillmonkeys that get UPD include Factotums and Psychic Rogues, but you can use the skill via other means.

[Curmudgeon]

You are required to use an equivalent activity to activate it, and the only equivalent activity to speaking words is actually speaking words. Physical gestures are in no way equivalent to command words and if you believe that they are, I would like to see a quote that says so. Equivalent (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/equivalent) means equal in value, effect, significance, & c.; it does not require that things be equal in form. Anyway, here's that quote you asked for:
You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate. The very next sentence gives examples of equivalent activities for Activate Blindly activation. No normal device is UMD activated by waving it around, yet the rules stipulate that is an equivalent activity. Similarly, you can blindly activate a scroll of a spell without verbal components by speaking aloud, because that, too, is a listed equivalent activity.

[Keneth]

Speaking a word is not equal in effect as a hand gesture because wands are activated by command words and not gestures. It's not equal in function, value either, or significance either because using a magic device depends on context. The context in this case being a wand which is only activated by a command word.

Basically, what you're saying is, that a rogue with a bunch of ranks in UMD can activate any magical device, no matter how elaborate, simply by sweet talking to it. That's just absurd, imagine there's a magical vehicle (an air ship or so), loaded with explosives or some other threat, that needs a key and a complex combination of fiddling with the controls to activate the proper stopping sequence without causing a catastrophe and a rogue does it by licking it. Because anything falls under "or otherwise attempt to get it to activate" as long as you're actually doing something. Hell, you can just sit around and activate it with your mind since you don't know that it's not activated by thought, but it can be if you roll a 25.

Just because you're trying really hard, it doesn't mean it's gonna happen. Try convincing any half-decent DM that you activated a device with a button on it by yelling sylvan words at it and see what happens. The listed methods of activation are examples but physical, verbal, and mental activation methods will never be equivalent.

[Curmudgeon]

Basically, what you're saying is, that a rogue with a bunch of ranks in UMD can activate any magical device, no matter how elaborate, simply by sweet talking to it.
I'm saying that's what the RAW text of the skill says. To disprove that statement (i.e., to show that only activities similar in form can be considered equivalent), then you have to show where in the rules "waving an item around" is either a listed activation method, or unambiguously similar in form to such a method. Because Activate Blindly does work (for at least some items) when you "wave the item around"; it says so.

If you can't make an argument for at least some kind of remote similarity between the substitute activity and pointing a wand and saying the command word, I call BS and a DM should call BS too if he doesn't see the similarity even if you try to force one.
You're adding a house rule right there.
Spell Trigger

Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Gesturing with the wand might be an equivalent activity for Activate Blindly, but it's not part of the normal activation by a member of a spellcasting class, or by the Use a Wand function of UMD.

I'd prefer to avoid house rules, and stick with the actual RAW.

[tyckspoon]

You're adding a house rule right there. Gesturing with the wand might be an equivalent activity for Activate Blindly, but it's not part of the normal activation by a member of a spellcasting class, or by the Use a Wand function of UMD.


No he's not. Wands (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wands.htm) specifically have some requirements above those of general 'spell trigger' items. To wit,


To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the general direction of the target or area.

[Curmudgeon]

No he's not. Wands (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wands.htm) specifically have some requirements above those of general 'spell trigger' items.
I stand corrected. Thanks for pointing that out.