deleted

[wefoij123]

deleted deleted

[InvisibleBison]

1) I'm pretty sure the answer is a. The Emulate Ability Score feature of UMD says that it can only be used in conjunction with a scroll, not a staff, so b is not possible. The description of staffs says quite clearly that the user of a staff always uses their own ability score, which rules out c (also, it's not clear that staffs have a minimum required ability score to craft them).

2) Again, I think the answer is a. Staffs are spell trigger items, and so would be activated by the Use A Wand feature of UMD, which doesn't say anything about allowing you to fake having a given caster level. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that rolling a 60 on your UMD check lets you emulate having a caster level of 40, actually. I don't see anything in the SRD's skill description that says you can do this. Is there some sourcebook that I'm not familiar with that expands the use of UMD this way?

[RandomPeasant]

1 is probably a, but there's a colorable argument that the scroll stuff is being used as an example. If you were to imagine a less abusive case, it seems pretty reasonable that you should be able to, for instance, UMD a magic rod that required you to have 17 CON to activate for whatever reason.

2 is absolutely b. The rules for staffs say someone activating one can "use his caster level when activating the power of a staff if it’s higher than the caster level of the staff". That would be a class feature you "use... to activate a magic item", which means it can be emulated, which means if you can cheese your UMD bonus real high you can blow dudes up with a staff of holy word.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Staffs are spell trigger items so they use the same UMD rules as wands.
Activating a spell trigger item with UMD is a flat DC 20 check, you don't get any extras for rolling higher (with the RC-added exception of CL checks, which you can use the "emulate a class ability" function for with any kind of item).

The rogue's save DC's from the staff use either the minimum (which is ability score = 10 + spell level) or his own ability modifier if it's higher.
He uses the CL of the staff since he doesn't have one of his own - for everything but caster level checks, which he can use his UMD check -20 for if it's higher.



Emulate Class Feature
...
You can use the skill in this way to make a caster level
check with an item. Your effective caster level is your check
result –20. See Caster Level Checks, page 31.

Casting a spell is not a caster level check, so you can't use that function to cast spells from a staff at higher CL.
It'd help when using a wand or staff to cast Dispel Magic though.

[Saintheart]

Staffs are spell trigger items so they use the same UMD rules as wands.
Activating a spell trigger item with UMD is a flat DC 20 check, you don't get any extras for rolling higher (with the RC-added exception of CL checks, which you can use the "emulate a class ability" function for with any kind of item).

The rogue's save DC's from the staff use either the minimum (which is ability score = 10 + spell level) or his own ability modifier if it's higher.
He uses the CL of the staff since he doesn't have one of his own - for everything but caster level checks, which he can use his UMD check -20 for if it's higher.

Casting a spell is not a caster level check, so you can't use that function to cast spells from a staff at higher CL.
It'd help when using a wand or staff to cast Dispel Magic though.


Yeah, but what OP's getting at is the SRD rule about staves...


Saving Throws Against Magic Item Powers
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.

Staffs are an exception to the rule. Treat the saving throw as if the wielder cast the spell, including caster level and all modifiers to save DC.

And thus the argument that UMD's capacity to allow you to emulate a given ability score therefore allows you to boost the saving throw. Not saying I've got any solution, but I get why the question comes up.

[sleepyphoenixx]

And thus the argument that UMD's capacity to allow you to emulate a given ability score therefore allows you to boost the saving throw. Not saying I've got any solution, but I get why the question comes up.

The UMD rules are pretty clear that you don't use the "emulate an ability score" function to activate a staff. They're spell trigger items.

Use a Wand

Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill also applies to other spell trigger magic items, such as staffs.
You don't emulate an ability score to activate a staff because activating a staff falls under the "use a wand" function of the skill, which is separate from emulating an ability score and a fixed DC 20 check.

[redking]

UMD and caster level cheese is something that comes up frequently, including with the monk's belt, which some people claim can make you the equivalent of a 20th level monk with a UMD check.

As for RAW, it's uncertain. I think we don't even have to ask what the RAI would be on that. We all know. At my table there is a gentleman's agreement not to try this kind of stuff. You should probably consult your DM before pulling this particular rabbit out of your hat.

[sleepyphoenixx]

UMD and caster level cheese is something that comes up frequently, including with the monk's belt, which some people claim can make you the equivalent of a 20th level monk with a UMD check.

As for RAW, it's uncertain. I think we don't even have to ask what the RAI would be on that. We all know. At my table there is a gentleman's agreement not to try this kind of stuff. You should probably consult your DM before pulling this particular rabbit out of your hat.

You can use the Monk's Belt to get the unarmed damage and AC of a 20th level monk by making a DC 35 UMD check once per hour. That's pretty unambiguously RAW.

Given that that only translates into 2d10 unarmed damage instead of 1d8 (~6.5 extra damage per hit) and a +3 to AC i wouldn't really call that OP.
Especially considering that it'll stop working for 24 hours if you roll a 1 or 2 and you can't take 10 on UMD normally.
So it has a 10% chance to fail and become unusable for 24 hours every hour.

If you're not lawful you'll need to make a separate DC 30 check for alignment 1/hour too, giving you another possible point of failure.
Reliably making DC 35 UMD checks every hour isn't exactly a trivial investment at the levels where that would be any kind of broken, you're allowed to get something out of it.

Considering that it also stops working if you wear any kind of armor UMDing a Monk's Belt is pretty much useless for anyone except an unarmed melee cleric or druid, who could really do something more useful with their build resources than blow most of them on making difficult UMD checks for an unreliable +3 AC and ~7 damage somewhere in the mid-high levels.
Considering that they probably rely on the Wis to AC part for their AC they're arguably even worse off than using the belt without UMD and the associated failure chance if they can't take 10 (which costs yet more build resources).

[Crake]

If you're not lawful you'll need to make a separate DC 30 check for alignment 1/hour too, giving you another possible point of failure.

Minor nitpick, but you don't need to be lawful to use a monk's belt, so there would be no requirement to emulate an alignment.

[RandomPeasant]

I think we don't even have to ask what the RAI would be on that. We all know.

I dunno. The examples in the PHB imply that you can emulate expending class features, not just having them. That's more powerful than typical uses of UMD. I don't doubt they didn't intend for the skill to be abusively powerful, but by that standard any imbalance is outside RAI (which, perhaps, is another reason that RAI is not a terribly valuable standard).

[sleepyphoenixx]

Minor nitpick, but you don't need to be lawful to use a monk's belt, so there would be no requirement to emulate an alignment.

Not to use it normally, but you need to emulate a lawful alignment to emulate being a 15th-level monk.


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).

Monks must be lawful, so you can't emulate being a monk without also being or emulating a lawful alignment.


I dunno. The examples in the PHB imply that you can emulate expending class features, not just having them. That's more powerful than typical uses of UMD. I don't doubt they didn't intend for the skill to be abusively powerful, but by that standard any imbalance is outside RAI (which, perhaps, is another reason that RAI is not a terribly valuable standard).

This one?

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 can see that interpretation being a little nuts with stuff like runestaffs, domain staffs/icons and so on.
With how cheap a runestaff is you could easily double your spell slots per day just by investing a little in UMD at mid-levels.

[Crake]

Not to use it normally, but you need to emulate a lawful alignment to emulate being a 15th-level monk.



Monks must be lawful, so you can't emulate being a monk without also being or emulating a lawful alignment.

Oh nice, I didn't see that part. Makes me wonder though if you can emulate being an ex monk and ignore the lawful requirement, since monks don't lose most of their relevant class features when they become ex monks

[redking]

You can use the Monk's Belt to get the unarmed damage and AC of a 20th level monk by making a DC 35 UMD check once per hour. That's pretty unambiguously RAW.


I gave the example of the Monk's Belt because I consider it one of the most abusive examples of reading out of context.


Belt, Monk’s: This simple rope belt, when wrapped around a character’s waist, confers great ability in unarmed combat. The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. If donned by a character with the Stunning Fist feat, the belt lets her make one additional stunning attack per day. If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk. This AC bonus functions just like the monk’s AC bonus.

Moderate transmutation; CL 10th; Craft Wondrous Item, righteous might or transformation; Price 13,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.

Even by your reading, you'd have to have at least one level of monk to accomplish what you wish.

[sleepyphoenixx]

I gave the example of the Monk's Belt because I consider it one of the most abusive examples of reading out of context.

Yeah, i got that.
I'm just wondering how a small damage bonus and 3 AC for a massive skill investment is abusive. Or how "using UMD to count as a monk for using an item" is reading out of context.

It's not like UMDing it turns you into a 20th level monk. It gives you the AC and unarmed damage of a level 20th monk, which as stated is ~6.5 damage and 3 AC over not UMDing it. Nothing else.
That's not exactly excessive considering how much investment it takes to reliably make those checks.


Even by your reading, you'd have to have at least one level of monk to accomplish what you wish.

If you use UMD to emulate being a monk of 15th level you obviously don't count as "not a monk" for the item you're UMDing.
You're either a monk or not a monk, you can't be both at the same time.

That's the entire point of making the UMD check, if you already have levels in monk you are a monk and don't need to UMD it to count as one.

[RandomPeasant]

Hard cases make bad law. Looking at the "most abusive" example is the wrong way to interpret the rules. Look at a central example and figure out how that works. If the rules as understood that way are broken, you can just change them. That's allowed! I will never understand why people insist on contorting their understanding of what the rules say to try to avoid admitting that the rules have problems when the game has Monk and Wizard in the same book.


This one?

That's the one. Though the real cheese is Knowstones, not Runestaffs, because those have no activation limit. It's unclear whether you can run out of uses of an ability you are emulating, as you are emulating it without having any uses in the first place, so there is a plausible case to be made that a Knowstone of dominate monster and a large enough UMD check allows you to use the spell as often as you'd like.

[AvatarVecna]

{Scrubbed .}

[redking]

You're either a monk or not a monk, you can't be both at the same time.

That's the entire point of making the UMD check, if you already have levels in monk you are a monk and don't need to UMD it to count as one.

The text I quoted did not ask whether you failed to emulate being a monk, just whether you were a monk or not. Since you are saying its not a monk, then it gets 5 levels of the specified monk abilities, nothing else. That's RAW.

As for UMD raw, you can only make a UMD check when a UMD check is needed to activate a device. Monk's Belt requires no activation.

[RandomPeasant]

As for UMD raw, you can only make a UMD check when a UMD check is needed to activate a device. Monk's Belt requires no activation.

Do you have a citation for that? Because no magic item is going to explicitly say "this is an activation that requires a UMD check" or "this isn't an activation and doesn't allow a UMD check". It would seem that the natural conclusion is that doing the thing that causes a magic item to start working on your behalf (in this case, putting on the belt) is "activating" it and allows a UMD check to be made if you so desire.

[redking]

Do you have a citation for that? Because no magic item is going to explicitly say "this is an activation that requires a UMD check" or "this isn't an activation and doesn't allow a UMD check". It would seem that the natural conclusion is that doing the thing that causes a magic item to start working on your behalf (in this case, putting on the belt) is "activating" it and allows a UMD check to be made if you so desire.

Its in UMD description. By the way, why not just create custom items and use the same kind of exploit used by people claiming that UMD can make you a 20th level monk? Why stop there?


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.


You can only use UMD's "Emulate Class Feature" option if you otherwise can't activate the item

Monk's belt isn't such a case, anyone can activate it by wearing it and gaining the AC of a 5th level monk. If you don't need to use the class feature to activate the item, then you can't use this particular UMD option.

[RandomPeasant]

Its in UMD description. By the way, why not just create custom items and use the same kind of exploit used by people claiming that UMD can make you a 20th level monk? Why stop there?

I disagree with your interpretation of that text. "Sometimes you need to" includes not just specific magic items you need to activate with a class feature, but specific usages of magic items that require a class feature to activate. Otherwise we would be forced to conclude that, because a Staff of Power does not require any class features to activate the defensive luck bonuses it provides, you cannot use UMD to activate the spells held with in it. I find that conclusion to be absurd on face. As this applies to Monk's Belts, it means that you need no UMD check to activate the "not a monk" benefits, but can use one to activate the "is a monk" benefits.

[Darg]

Staff of power has different activation methods, specifically the smite and retributive strike abilities. The fact it has a continuous effect too isn't anything strange at that point.

What is absurd is the belief that something that has no class feature requirement should necessitate an unnecessary skill check. By this logic I could simply use a domain staff to gain the spellcasting ability of a cleric of the level specified by the UMD check. Being a monk is not a class feature. It's as simple as that. It'd be like saying that you can secure a grappling hook in air, baseline open locks within sight rather than reach, or heck climb air at this point. Sometimes you just gotta realize that the 20 lbs 100ft diameter toothpick ball cannot be carried with you though a 5ft diameter hole in the ground even with your 30 strength.

[RandomPeasant]

What is absurd is the belief that something that has no class feature requirement should necessitate an unnecessary skill check. By this logic I could simply use a domain staff to gain the spellcasting ability of a cleric of the level specified by the UMD check.

You absolutely can UMD a domain staff to pop out the spells in it, because the PHB explicitly allows you to emulate expending a class feature, and domain staffs operate by allowing you to expend spell slots to cast the spells in them. It doesn't give you full Cleric casting, but no one is arguing that the monk's belt gives you the full benefits of being a Monk. In any case, it's not correct to describe a monk's belt as having "no class feature requirement". It's not worded as "you get +5 to your effective Monk level" (with the implication being that adding that to a Monk level of 0 would get you 5th level Monk abilities). The "yes Monk" and "no Monk" effects are separate things, which suggests that you are in fact using your Monk abilities when you put it on to get an 8th level Monk's AC bonus as a 3rd level Monk, and therefore that there is something to be emulated.

[sleepyphoenixx]

The text I quoted did not ask whether you failed to emulate being a monk, just whether you were a monk or not. Since you are saying its not a monk, then it gets 5 levels of the specified monk abilities, nothing else. That's RAW.
Actually RAW the belt doesn't check if you're a monk, it just gives you the unarmed damage and AC bonus of someone with 5 more monk levels than you.


As for UMD raw, you can only make a UMD check when a UMD check is needed to activate a device. Monk's Belt requires no activation.
How do explain the UMD rules for emulating something in an ongoing fashion then?

You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand. If you are using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner, you need to make the relevant Use Magic Device check once per hour.
If you could only make UMD checks for activating things you wouldn't need to emulate something in an ongoing manner.


Its in UMD description. By the way, why not just create custom items and use the same kind of exploit used by people claiming that UMD can make you a 20th level monk? Why stop there?
See above. Using UMD on continuous items is clearly an intended feature.

And the Monk's Belt still doesn't turn you into a monk, those get a little more than unarmed damage and Wis to AC.
Is that where the outrage at this "exploit" comes from? The (wrong) idea that it lets you emulate a whole class? Because it doesn't.
Emulating a class feature does not let you use that class feature, that's straight from the UMD rules.

Emulating a 15th level monk for the belt doesn't give you Flurry of Blows, it doesn't give you Improved Unarmed Strike or the speed enhancement or bonus feats or any of the other monk abilities.
It gives you some damage and 3 AC for a massive skill investment and a hourly failure chance per quality you emulate. Which will be 2-3 for the Monk's Belt alone.

You need to emulate having a 15th level monks unarmed strike feature to get the 2d10 damage, the AC bonus feature to get the +3 AC and a lawful alignment if you aren't lawful yourself.
Then you need to check once per hour per quality. If you roll a 1 on any one of those checks the item ceases to function for 24 hours.


Being a monk is not a class feature.

That should be obvious. A monks unarmed strike and AC bonus however are.
You use UMD to emulate having the unarmed strike feature of a 15th level monk. The Monk's Belt gives you the unarmed strike damage of a monk 5 levels higher, which is 2d10.
You use UMD to emulate having the AC bonus feature of a 15th level monk. The Monk's Belt gives you the AC bonus of a monk 5 levels higher, which is +3 AC.

[Darg]

That should be obvious. A monks unarmed strike and AC bonus however are.
You use UMD to emulate having the unarmed strike feature of a 15th level monk. The Monk's Belt gives you the unarmed strike damage of a monk 5 levels higher, which is 2d10.
You use UMD to emulate having the AC bonus feature of a 15th level monk. The Monk's Belt gives you the AC bonus of a monk 5 levels higher, which is +3 AC.


Emulate a Class Feature

Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item.


Belt, Monk’s: This simple rope belt, when wrapped around a character’s waist, confers great ability in unarmed combat. The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. If donned by a character with the Stunning Fist feat, the belt lets her make one additional stunning attack per day. If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk. This AC bonus functions just like the monk’s AC bonus.

I really wish people would point out where in the description that it requires a class feature to activate. All I see is requiring a class, requiring a feat, or requiring not being a specific class. The belt doesn't even confer the class feature that it improves. There is literally no connection at all to a class feature to use the item. Seriously, no one has yet to connect the dots where the belt requires Monk AC and monk unarmed damage to function for any part of the benefit. Even a level 0 monk (dead) can technically benefit from the belt more believably than UMD being used to pretend that emulate class feature means emulate class.

Please point out where the item in question needs the unarmed damage feature or the AC bonus feature of a monk to use. A steadfast skarn monk is fully capable of activating the item even without those features.


You absolutely can UMD a domain staff to pop out the spells in it, because the PHB explicitly allows you to emulate expending a class feature, and domain staffs operate by allowing you to expend spell slots to cast the spells in them. It doesn't give you full Cleric casting, but no one is arguing that the monk's belt gives you the full benefits of being a Monk. In any case, it's not correct to describe a monk's belt as having "no class feature requirement". It's not worded as "you get +5 to your effective Monk level" (with the implication being that adding that to a Monk level of 0 would get you 5th level Monk abilities). The "yes Monk" and "no Monk" effects are separate things, which suggests that you are in fact using your Monk abilities when you put it on to get an 8th level Monk's AC bonus as a 3rd level Monk, and therefore that there is something to be emulated.

It says your AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk 5 levels higher. "Treated" means you don't necessarily have to have the features in question. Remove the part about not being a monk and the belt literally functions in the exact same way.

[sleepyphoenixx]

I really wish people would point out where in the description that it requires a class feature to activate. All I see is requiring a class, requiring a feat, or requiring not being a specific class. The belt doesn't even confer the class feature that it improves. There is literally no connection at all to a class feature to use the item. Seriously, no one has yet to connect the dots where the belt requires Monk AC and monk unarmed damage to function for any part of the benefit. Even a level 0 monk (dead) can technically benefit from the belt more believably than UMD being used to pretend that emulate class feature means emulate class.

Please point out where the item in question needs the unarmed damage feature or the AC bonus feature of a monk to use. A steadfast skarn monk is fully capable of activating the item even without those features.
Please point out where the UMD skill restricts you to emulating to meet requirements and forbids doing it to gain a benefit as if you were a member of a different class.

Because according to this:



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).
if i want to use my UMD skill to use the Monk's Belt as if i had the unarmed strike class feature of a 15th level monk that's a valid application of the UMD function to emulate a class feature.

Emulating a class feature is DC = level + 20 so i make a DC 35 UMD check. Because monks are lawful i must also emulate a lawful alignment if i don't have it (DC 30). Let's assume i make both.
As far as magic items are concerned - including the Monk's Belt - i now have the unarmed strike class feature of a 15th level monk.

This simple rope belt, when wrapped around a character’s waist, confers great ability in unarmed combat. The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher.
Since the Monk's Belt thinks i have the unarmed strike feature of a 15th level monk (which includes the unarmed damage) it gives me the unarmed damage of a monk 5 levels higher, or in other words the 2d10 unarmed damage of a 20th level monk.
As long as i want to keep this benefit i have to make a DC 35 UMD check to keep emulating the class feature and a DC 30 UMD check to keep emulating the lawful alignment 1/hour.

If i want to get the AC bonus of a 20th level monk too instead of that of a 5th level monk i'd have to make another DC 35 UMD check to emulate having the AC bonus class feature of a 15 level monk.

[redking]

Since the Monk's Belt thinks i have the unarmed strike feature of a 15th level monk (which includes the unarmed damage) it gives me the unarmed damage of a monk 5 levels higher, or in other words the 2d10 unarmed damage of a 20th level monk.


How is the monk's belt, which was enchanted to confer 5 levels of abilities, going to give you 15 extra levels on top of that? An actual monk that is 15th level can do stuff like a 20th level monk because they have 15 levels on top of that granted by the belt. The belt grants 5 levels, not 20.

What would be even better for you would be a lesser monk's belt. Provides only 1 level of monk abilities and is cheaper to craft. But if you UMD it , you would get the full 20 levels of abilities. Right?

The RAW is that the belt grants 5 levels of monk abilities. Not 10. Not 6. Not 20.

How about a nightstick?


Nightstick
This black rod carved of darkly stained wood is inset with religious symbols of various dieties. Anyone who possesses the rod and is able to turn or rebuke undead gains four more uses of the ability per day.

Moderate necromancy; CL 10th; Craft Rod, Extra Turning, class ability to turn or rebuke undead; Price 7,500gp.

UMD this badboy to gain the turn or rebuke abilities of a 20th level cleric. Just UMD to emulate a 20th cleric, and get all the class features from the magical item, which is somehow able to confer abilities well beyond the scope of its construction.

[sleepyphoenixx]

How is the monk's belt, which was enchanted to confer 5 levels of abilities, going to give you 15 extra levels on top of that? An actual monk that is 15th level can do stuff like a 20th level monk because they have 15 levels on top of that granted by the belt. The belt grants 5 levels, not 20.

What would be even better for you would be a lesser monk's belt. Provides only 1 level of monk abilities and is cheaper to craft. But if you UMD it , you would get the full 20 levels of abilities. Right?

The RAW is that the belt grants 5 levels of monk abilities. Not 10. Not 6. Not 20.

The RAW is that it grants you the unarmed damage of a monk 5 levels higher. As i just quoted.
It still doesn't turn you into a monk. It doesn't give you any other monk abilities. It gives you the unarmed damage of a monk, nothing else.


How about a nightstick?



UMD this badboy to gain the turn or rebuke abilities of a 20th level cleric. Just UMD to emulate a 20th cleric, and get all the class features from the magical item, which is somehow able to confer abilities well beyond the scope of its construction.
Right, because activating a nightstick as a cleric gives you Turn Undead if you don't have it. Oh wait it doesn't.
As was already quoted multiple times UMD does not give you the ability to use class features, just activate items as if you had them.

UMDing a Monk's Belt doesn't give you the Unarmed Strike class feature.
You don't get Improved Unarmed Strike, you don't get the ability to attack with any part of your body, you don't deal lethal damage with unarmed attacks and your unarmed strike does not count as a manufactured and natural weapon.
All that UMD does is let you use the Monk's Belt as if you had it, and if someone with the unarmed strike feature of a 15th level monk uses a Monk's Belt their unarmed damage is treated as that of a monk 5 levels higher.

So UMDing a nightstick would give you 4 turn undead uses you can't do anything with because you don't have the Turn Undead ability.

What you could do however is emulate the Turn Undead class feature to activate an item that requires Turn Undead uses to fuel, like a Divine Wrath weapon for example.
That use is in fact the very example the PHB uses so it's pretty hard to argue against it being RAW or RAI.

[Gruftzwerg]

How is the monk's belt, which was enchanted to confer 5 levels of abilities, going to give you 15 extra levels on top of that? An actual monk that is 15th level can do stuff like a 20th level monk because they have 15 levels on top of that granted by the belt. The belt grants 5 levels, not 20.

What would be even better for you would be a lesser monk's belt. Provides only 1 level of monk abilities and is cheaper to craft. But if you UMD it , you would get the full 20 levels of abilities. Right?

The RAW is that the belt grants 5 levels of monk abilities. Not 10. Not 6. Not 20.

How about a nightstick?



UMD this badboy to gain the turn or rebuke abilities of a 20th level cleric. Just UMD to emulate a 20th cleric, and get all the class features from the magical item, which is somehow able to confer abilities well beyond the scope of its construction.

I don't get where you see the problem here?

1) "The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher."
The game/DM asks for (effective*) monk levels of your unarmed strike damage and AC, and sets your effective lvl for these 5 lvls higher. (* = since other sources exist that claim to "effectively" stack with your monk levels for this purpose)

2) UMD allows you to fake class abilities by rolling to calculate the effective class lvls emulated. As other said, you get your roll result as "effective monk lvls for dmg and AC", the belt adds 5 more "effective monk lvls" and gives you the values of that lvl. Monk unarmed strike dmg and AC don't have a linear progression for each lvl and is a step based progression. This is the reason why this is so effective in the chase of the Monk's Belt.

3) Nightsticks don't work the same way
Because neither UMD nor Nightsticks give you the ability to turn undead. The Monk's Belt gives you new values for stats that you already have (Unarmed Strike dmg & Armor Class). But the Nightsticks (even with UMD) can't increase a stat that you don't already have.

4) Monk's Tattoo works too
Monk's Tattoo also gives your the bonus to unarmored movementspeed (again a stat that everybody has) but in exchange only gives you "+4 effective levels of monk".

5) Wanna have Wild Shape? UMD a Wild Shape amulet!
This one is a bit more cheesy.

...
It allows a druid to use her wild shape ability as if she were four levels higher. If she has not yet acquired that ability, the amulet allow her the wild shape ability of a 5th-level druid.
...
When first activating the item with UMD, the higher emulated lvl doesn't help us. Since we still lack the ability, we need to rely on the fallback option to count as a 5th lvl druid. But we still make the UMD roll anyway, because it will become later of importance.
Now remember that for UMD-ing an item with ongoing effects the roll has to be resumed every hour to keep it working.
1 hour later, you do your second UMD roll and can profit from it now, since now you have Wild Shape as ability/stat to legally improve.
As said, very cheesy.

___

If you didn't know, UMD breaks the game. This is how a fighter or monk with UMD can compete with T1/T2 builds in the same game and not feel totally useless and can even shine here and there. But take this kind of optimization with care, since it can be still way to much for some tables. Be aware of that pls! ;)
And we haven't even talked about craftlocks, but I don't want to derail the thread to much.

______________

Regarding Staffs, UMD & RAW...

The question here is do we treat this:

Emulate an Ability Score

To cast a spell from a scroll, you need
Is this the sole option given or just the most common example. The general definition at the start doesn't imply any restrictions when each type of roll can be used and Rules Compendium adds to this by providing additional examples for effective caster level as example (which wasn't in the original text).


From a sole textual point it seems RAW says NO, but from the text structure we could argue maybe for a YES. And RAI (RC showing additional example situation where those rolls may apply) implies that it should get YES too.

Dunno if this helps or makes it even worse^^

[sleepyphoenixx]

1 hour later, you do your second UMD roll and can profit from it now, since now you have Wild Shape as ability/stat to legally improve.
As said, very cheesy.

It also doesn't work. The amulet granting wild shape is conditional on you not having it. If you emulate having a wild shape level you don't get that benefit any more.

You can't count as having WS and not having WS at the same time even with UMD so you can only get either benefit, not both at once.

Combining it with a Druid's Vestment won't help either since you don't actually have a WS ability to add uses to, the item just thinks you do. Same thing as with Nightsticks basically.
So you can't UMD cheese your way into high-level wild shaping.

[Gruftzwerg]

It also doesn't work. The amulet granting wild shape is conditional on you not having it. If you emulate having a wild shape level you don't get that benefit any more.

You can't count as having WS and not having WS at the same time even with UMD so you can only get either benefit, not both at once.

Combining it with a Druid's Vestment won't help either since you don't actually have a WS ability to add uses to, the item just thinks you do. Same thing as with Nightsticks basically.
So you can't UMD cheese your way into high-level wild shaping.

Imho the item is poorly written, open for abuse..^^

The amulet has 2 (!) ongoing effects:

1. druids are treated 4 lvls higher for their Wild Shape abiltiy

2. if the druid (!) has not acquired the ability yet, he gets the ability as a 5th lvl druid.
(notice that the item doesn't give Wild Shape to any non-duids by default!!!)

Further, there is no indicator that the 1st effect doesn't stack with the 2nd. Thus imho both effects are ongoing. And since both effects are ongoing, the order of the effects becomes irrelevant. You get the ability and the effective increase in lvl. Even any (non-UMD) druid using this gets a minimum effective Wild Shape lvl of 9 out of it by a strick RAW reading.

[redking]

It also doesn't work. The amulet granting wild shape is conditional on you not having it. If you emulate having a wild shape level you don't get that benefit any more.

The principle is exactly the same. How do you get 20 levels of certain monk abilities out of an item that grants only 5? According to your understanding of this, anything that precedes X is granted, included X.

[Gruftzwerg]

The principle is exactly the same. How do you get 20 levels of certain monk abilities out of an item that grants only 5? According to your understanding of this, anything that precedes X is granted, included X.

As said before, the Monk's Belt doesn't give you the abilities, just the values for "Unarmed Strike" & "Armor Class" from a monk of effective X.th lvl. While the AC bonus claims to function as the monk's AC bonus, there is no claim that you get the unarmed strike ability (no penalty for lethal attacks, no AOO...). Thus you don't qualify for stuff that requires the monk's unarmed strike ability
e.g. you can't use a Monk's Belt to count as 5th lvl monk and use a Monk's tattoo to count as 9th lvl monk (one giving you the ability the other to boost the ability). Because you don't get the ability. The item works perfectly fine without giving you the abilities. It directly increases just 2 stats as if you either
a) are a monk of 5 lvls higher
or
b) are a monk of 5th lvl

[RandomPeasant]

Actually RAW the belt doesn't check if you're a monk, it just gives you the unarmed damage and AC bonus of someone with 5 more monk levels than you.

I really wish people would point out where in the description that it requires a class feature to activate.

The description for the monk's belt, which Darg was kind enough to quote for us, does in fact call out separate use cases for "is a monk" and "not a monk". It does not simply give you stuff as if you had five more Monk levels and assume that applies to people with no Monk levels. It says that "The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher". If that was all it said, you could reasonably argue that the way it works is that you get +5 to your Monk level for this purpose and UMD doesn't do anything. But it says other stuff. Specifically it says "If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk". That clearly implies the first thing is what happens if you are a Monk, and is therefore eligible for emulation. You could make the argument that the second sentence is a clarification of the first, but the fact that there's this whole intervening sentence talking about what Stunning Fist does makes me skeptical of that. Similarly you could make the argument that only things which take an action to use are ever "activated", but I would need a citation for that.


The belt doesn't even confer the class feature that it improves.

It says it is "treated as five levels higher". That means you get it at whatever level you are (or emulate) plus five. This is like saying that a wand doesn't confer the ability to have a spell on your spell list and therefore you can't UMD it. Of course it doesn't confer it, that's the input, not the output.


Remove the part about not being a monk and the belt literally functions in the exact same way.

Or maybe "no monk levels +5 monk levels" is "undefined" and not "5". Certainly that's a valid way for things to work, and if they don't work that way the ability has redundant text, so it seems entirely reasonable to conclude they do work that way. Do you have an example of something you think would be dysfunctional if we defined the result of adding to something you don't have to be still not having that thing?

[sleepyphoenixx]

The principle is exactly the same. How do you get 20 levels of certain monk abilities out of an item that grants only 5?
I already posted a step by step explanation of how it works.


According to your understanding of this, anything that precedes X is granted, included X.
You clearly have not grasped my understanding of UMD or you haven't read through my previous post. So let's do it again, step by step:

- you have a Monk's Belt, an item that treats your unarmed damage as that of a monk 5 levels higher than you already have

- you have the UMD skill which allows you to emulate (pretend to have) a class ability at a certain level

- you emulate the class ability "Unarmed Strike" of a 15th level monk

- for the purpose of using magic items you now have the "Unarmed Strike" feature of a 15th level monk.
You do not get any of the abilities that "Unarmed Strike" grants a monk, you can just activate magic items as if you had that feature

- if someone with the "Unarmed Strike" feature of a 15th level monk puts on a Monk's Belt his unarmed damage is treated as that of a monk 5 levels higher, which is 20.

- the unarmed damage of a 20th level monk is 2d10. Your unarmed strike does 2d10 damage now. You do not get any other benefit of the "Unarmed Strike" feature or of being a monk.

- because a Monk's Belt functions continuously you have to make a DC 35 UMD check every hour to keep emulating the class ability.
If you're also emulating a lawful alignment you need to make a DC 30 UMD check every hour in addition to that.

- if you also want the AC benefit go back to step one and repeat while replacing "Unarmed Strike" with "AC bonus". Every ability you emulate requires its own hourly check.

- the Monk's Belt doesn't grant anything else, so that's all you get no matter how many more UMD checks you make.

Now lets compare to the Wild Shape Amulet:

It allows a druid to use her wild shape ability as if she were four levels higher. If she has not yet acquired that ability, the amulet allows her the wild shape ability as a 5th-level druid.
There are three possible states here:

1. You do not have the wild shape ability, either real or emulated. The amulet gives you the wild shape ability of a 5th-level druid.

2. You are emulating the wild shape ability of an Xth level druid. The amulet lets you use it as if you're four levels higher, but you can't use an ability you're only pretending to have for item activation.
You do not get the wild shape ability of a 5th level druid because as far as the amulet is concerned you already have it (because you're UMDing it).

3. You have the wild shape ability. The amulet increases your effective level for that by four. You don't get the wild shape of a 5th level druid. You don't need UMD for this.

The big difference here to the Monk's Belt is wording - the belt doesn't care if you're a monk, it just sets your unarmed damage to "+5 monk levels of what you already have (or are pretending to have, with UMD)" - and the fact that everyone has unarmed strike damage but not everyone has wild shape.

The amulets benefit is an either/or thing. If you have WS, +4 levels. If you don't have WS, 5th level druid WS. You can't fulfill both conditions at once because they're mutually exclusive.

[redking]

- you have the UMD skill which allows you to emulate (pretend to have) a class ability at a certain level

- you emulate the class ability "Unarmed Strike" of a 15th level monk

- [

No. Emulate a level in order to access the item. The item can't grant you an ability that it does not possess.

[RandomPeasant]

Again, do you have a citation for that? Because the rules say you can emulate "using turning" to activate something that requires turning to activate. Unless we are to infer that the item also magically has turning for some reason, that would seem to directly contradict your position.

[Darg]

The description for the monk's belt, which Darg was kind enough to quote for us, does in fact call out separate use cases for "is a monk" and "not a monk". It does not simply give you stuff as if you had five more Monk levels and assume that applies to people with no Monk levels.

Except the problem with that argument is that it mistakenly conflates being able to use an item and benefiting from the benefit. The belt has 3 benefits. Benefit 1 has no requirement to be a monk. A Rod of Undead mastery doesn't require you to have the ability to control undead to use it. It's not its fault that not everyone is capable of controlling undead. It's like being given 5 dollars in the middle of a desert and being told to spend it. Sometimes you just don't have the capacity to benefit from the things you are given. A steadfast skarn monk can't benefit from a monk's belt. No matter how high of a level they are, it will only be spines and DR. Benefit 2 has a feat requirement. You can't emulate anything to benefit from that. Benefit 3 requires not being a specific class to benefit. Not being a class is definitely not something covered in UMD 101.


Again, do you have a citation for that? Because the rules say you can emulate "using turning" to activate something that requires turning to activate. Unless we are to infer that the item also magically has turning for some reason, that would seem to directly contradict your position.

The point being that you can emulate turning, but it doesn't confer the ability to turn. Likewise, even if you emulate a 20th level monk your AC bonus is still actually 0 and increasing it by 5 levels is only +1 AC.

[RandomPeasant]

Benefit 1 requires you to be a Monk, because it adjusts your Monk level for certain purposes. If it did not require you to be a Monk, benefit 3 would be redundant. If you have some evidence that benefit 3 not being redundant leads to an outcome more compellingly problematic than "Darg is wrong about something", feel free to present it, but the rules for the belt clearly provide a benefit that is based on being a Monk and therefore eligible for capture from class feature emulation.

[Darg]

Benefit 1 requires you to be a Monk, because it adjusts your Monk level for certain purposes. If it did not require you to be a Monk, benefit 3 would be redundant. If you have some evidence that benefit 3 not being redundant leads to an outcome more compellingly problematic than "Darg is wrong about something", feel free to present it, but the rules for the belt clearly provide a benefit that is based on being a Monk and therefore eligible for capture from class feature emulation.

It never says you are treated as a monk of your level but 5 levels higher. It only says you are treated as a monk 5 levels higher. The benefit is +5 levels, not redundantly giving you the benefit you already have while also increasing it 5 more levels. You can pretend to be a 100th level monk all you want, the benefit it provides is only 5 more monk levels. As you actually have 0 you are only ever treated as 5th level.

[Gruftzwerg]

If you're also emulating a lawful alignment you need to make a DC 30 UMD check every hour in addition to that.

*snip*

2. You are emulating the wild shape ability of an Xth level druid. The amulet lets you use it as if you're four levels higher, but you can't use an ability you're only pretending to have for item activation.
You do not get the wild shape ability of a 5th level druid because as far as the amulet is concerned you already have it (because you're UMDing it).


Monk's Belt
I don't get why some are thinking that you need to make alignment roll for the Belt.
The belt itself has no alignment requirements mentioned in its text. The monk doesn't lose his abilities when becoming an ex-monk either. And even it it would be so, since we don't get the abilities but sole stat values in return from the item, there is still no alignment restriction for the user of the belt. No matter how I look at it, I see no reason to emulate the alignment here.

Wild Shape Amulet
Asa said the ability has 2 effects that can interact with each other:
When you emulate to be a high lvl druid, you get increased values for you Wild Shape. But since you don't have the ability, the effect doesn't do anything and is just actively waiting for the ability to apply to (remember that it is an ongoing effect).
Now the 2nd part of the item comes and realizes that you still don't have the ability and kicks in, giving you the required ability.
Since the first effect is still active on you, now it can apply to the ability to boot it.
There is no order given for the effects to apply and they don't exclude each other (as in the chase of the monk's belt).
I have both: "apply bonuses/effects in the most desirable order" and "ongoing effects" to get to the outcome that I want and imho nothing seems to change that.


Again, do you have a citation for that? Because the rules say you can emulate "using turning" to activate something that requires turning to activate. Unless we are to infer that the item also magically has turning for some reason, that would seem to directly contradict your position.


The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher.

"...as a monk of five levels higher..." != "...threat your monk levels five level higher..."
From a pure logical point of view, Benefit 1 could still be applied to any non-monk. If you have 0 monk levels you can still benefit from effective 5 more monk levels, bringing you up to the 5th monk lvl.
Benefit 3 only makes this clear. Benefit 3 is like Enlarge Person calling out that it doesn't stack with other size increasing abilities. Both are just friendly reminders and the actual rule that denies/allows these are buried elsewhere.

[RandomPeasant]

It never says you are treated as a monk of your level but 5 levels higher. It only says you are treated as a monk 5 levels higher. The benefit is +5 levels, not redundantly giving you the benefit you already have while also increasing it 5 more levels. You can pretend to be a 100th level monk all you want, the benefit it provides is only 5 more monk levels. As you actually have 0 you are only ever treated as 5th level.

That is a distinction without a difference. No, the ability doesn't "give you the benefit you already have", because that's not how the benefits work. The higher level one replaces the lower-level one, it doesn't stack with it. Just like when you go from being a 9th level Monk to a 10th level Monk, your AC bonus changes from +1 to +2 rather than you gaining a +2 AC bonus to go with your existing +1 bonus. So with the belt, it looks at your input (Monk class features at a given level) and gives you an output (Monk class features at that level plus five). Obviously you can emulate the input because it is a class feature and you are using your ability to emulate a class feature.


Benefit 3 only makes this clear. Benefit 3 is like Enlarge Person calling out that it doesn't stack with other size increasing abilities. Both are just friendly reminders and the actual rule that denies/allows these are buried elsewhere.

Then show me the rule from elsewhere.

[redking]

Monk's Belt
I don't get why some are thinking that you need to make alignment roll for the Belt.

Because the people claiming this want to say that the belt can confer more than 5 levels of monk abilities and are making stuff up along the way. There is literally nothing in the UMD description that says this is possible.

Is there a list of munchkin strategies somewhere for DMs to consult? It would be handy to have the monk's belt, dragonwrought kobold "true dragon" et al all in the same place and their rationale explained.

[RandomPeasant]

No, the people making things up are the ones talking about "buried" rules and misrepresenting how class features work. It's not even a "munchkin" thing, because the payoff here is that you get like a marginal +3 to AC and 7 points of average damage at most. The munchkin approach to "emulate a class feature" is to emulate the class feature "has a caster level of 40" and then activate a staff of holy word.

And, of course, I at least have said that I see no problem with changing the rules, just the attempts to contort them into knots to assert that they don't work a way that offends people's sensibilities.

[Darg]

No, the people making things up are the ones talking about "buried" rules and misrepresenting how class features work. It's not even a "munchkin" thing, because the payoff here is that you get like a marginal +3 to AC and 7 points of average damage at most. The munchkin approach to "emulate a class feature" is to emulate the class feature "has a caster level of 40" and then activate a staff of holy word.

And, of course, I at least have said that I see no problem with changing the rules, just the attempts to contort them into knots to assert that they don't work a way that offends people's sensibilities.

To use the staff of holy word, you need the spellcasting ability of a cleric. Don't have that? UMD to emulate the spellcasting ability. Add any extra on the roll to your effective class level for the purpose

To use the monk's belt, you think need to have monk levels. Don't have that? Make up a rule that lets you take a UMD action to emulate a class with a DC of "not found on the table."

A steadfast skarn monk does not have the AC Bonus (Ex) or the Unarmed Strike features and yet is fully capable of activating the monk's belt. This fully invalidates any notion that a class feature is required to actually use the belt which is the sole function of the UMD check. Doesn't require a class feature? No emulating a class. UMD checks do not guarantee that you'll benefit from the item.

[Gruftzwerg]

Because the people claiming this want to say that the belt can confer more than 5 levels of monk abilities and are making stuff up along the way. There is literally nothing in the UMD description that says this is possible.

Is there a list of munchkin strategies somewhere for DMs to consult? It would be handy to have the monk's belt, dragonwrought kobold "true dragon" et al all in the same place and their rationale explained.


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).

First, I need to apologize for the alignment confusion. Seems that I have missed the last sentence pointing it out. So we do need alignment rolls.

@redking
1. Monk's increased Unarmed Strike dmg and AC bonus are class features.
2. The belt asks for for"effective monk levels" in those features. (Thus "Emulate a Class Feature" fits perfectly here.)
3. The belt then adds +4 to your "effective monk levels" and gives you the "Unarmed Strike dmg" and the bonus to AC of a monk of that level.
4. You don't need to be a monk to be able to "use" the benefits of the item. Because anybody can use his/her "Unarmed Strike dmg". And a "bonus to AC" can also be used by anyone.

You are seeing restrictions that aren't there, because in these specific chases the class features improve base stats and don't give you something new that others can't use.

Regarding Munchkin strategies
I dunno if there is an ongoing list anywhere for anything. I now I've seen quite a few, but most are more specific (e.g. sole spells). But I can hardly imagine that there is or will be a complete in the new feature for two reasons:

(1) There is still new stuff comming up from time to time. Just look at all the frequent TO stuff in the forums. Sometimes something really new pops up. Same goes for all the board competitions. And this is sole speaking of this forum (which is imho still the best place on the Inet to get reliable rule info for 3.5).

(2) Have a look at all the rule discussion at the board. Some topic are going on for years unsolved. Other topic improve over time. As such, another reason why we will never have a complete list here.

Maybe in another 20years..^^
But we are improving in some topics, so there is hope.



And as friendly reminder:

Imho nobody really plays RAW nor RAI. While some claim that we sole play one way or the other, we all play a mix of it with added houserules. And it's better to be aware of the imperfectness of 3.5 and to focus more on a healthy party/game balance as on RAW or RAI in actual games at table.

"But why all the talk about RAW vs RAI"?
One reason is because the forum doesn't want so answer each "question" that pops up with "ask your DM". While in the end it will be always in the DMs hand, it convenient to use RAW and RAI as discussion base or as base for ruling suggestions. You can view a problem from a RAW and RAI point of view and later try to find a good solution. And everybody can take his own solution after RAW vs RAI has been presented (or even go for houserules if both options are not attractive).
Further we have a bunch of TO fans. TO is kind crashtesting 3.5 RAW. This discipline gets much undeserved hate imho. Because the "haters" are those who are actually profiting from these as anyone else does. If you read some new TO stuff that you "hate", you are now aware of this "problem" and can houserule it away when it comes up (or tell your players to not do such stuff on a gentlemen's agreement). TO helps people to better understand the rules as written and where the authors have failed. As such TO can also help developers to prevent the same mistakes in the future. TO does the same as security experts reporting security issues in programs to make the developers aware. Or when people point of possible exploits in laws. All are theoretically crash testing the system.

[RandomPeasant]

"No one plays RAW" is, in fact, an argument to accept that you can emulate class features even when they are Monk class features and just change it if it offends you so deeply that someone can use a skill check to marginally improve a magic item. The point of RAW is that by utilizing the plain meaning of the rules to understand them we can arrive at a baseline from which people may vary. The thing where people tie themselves into knots to try to prove that this or that thing they don't like isn't really RAW is baffling. No elimination like that you make is ever going to be worth the hash you create from rules interpretation.


A steadfast skarn monk does not have the AC Bonus (Ex) or the Unarmed Strike features and yet is fully capable of activating the monk's belt.

Do you have a rules citation to that effect? Wouldn't want to go around making things up.


Doesn't require a class feature?

But the belt does in fact require a class feature. It improves you "AC and unarmed damage". Those are Monk class features, and you are required to have them to benefit from the first ability.

[sleepyphoenixx]

No. Emulate a level in order to access the item. The item can't grant you an ability that it does not possess.
Which i wrote literally in the next sentence. If you can't even be bothered to read what i write i'm done arguing with you.


It never says you are treated as a monk of your level but 5 levels higher. It only says you are treated as a monk 5 levels higher.
The belt never says "you're treated as a monk" period. Of any level. Read it again.

The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher.



To use the staff of holy word, you need the spellcasting ability of a cleric. Don't have that? UMD to emulate the spellcasting ability. Add any extra on the roll to your effective class level for the purpose
Wrong. A staff uses the spell trigger activation method, so to use a staff you only need to have the spell you're trying to use on your class spell list, that's all. You don't even need to know it.
And as staffs are spell trigger items and not scrolls they explicitly use the "activate a wand" function of UMD. Any extra on your roll does absolutely nothing because it's a flat DC 20.


To use the monk's belt, you think need to have monk levels. Don't have that? Make up a rule that lets you take a UMD action to emulate a class with a DC of "not found on the table."
Also wrong. See the rules about emulating class abilities:

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.
You emulate a class feature, you get an effective level in that class for purposes of item activation.


This fully invalidates any notion that a class feature is required to actually use the belt which is the sole function of the UMD check.
It's not. See the second sentence of the UMD description:

Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.
The function of UMD is to use magic items as if you had a class feature, race or alignment you don't actually possess.
It does not specify that those have to be requirements to use the item at all.

[Gorthawar]

It's not. See the second sentence of the UMD description:

The function of UMD is to use magic items as if you had a class feature, race or alignment you don't actually possess.
It does not specify that those have to be requirements to use the item at all.

This is slightly misquoted. Neither the second nor the third or any sentence in the UMD skill description in the PHB starts with the function of UMD is".

The reason I'm bringing this up as in my opinion the first sentence of the UMD description summarizes in a simple sentence what the skill is about: "Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate."

Following that baseline all the explanations under checks are just explaining on how you do the relevant checks. Stuff like the monks belt becomes a non-issue as you can use it just fine without UMD. Same for staffs that work at the minimum caster level and no emulated ability score.

Just my 2p.

[sleepyphoenixx]

This is slightly misquoted. Neither the second nor the third or any sentence in the UMD skill description in the PHB starts with the function of UMD is".
You're correct - i got the quote from the SRD, though the PHB has the exact same sentence under "check:"


The reason I'm bringing this up as in my opinion the first sentence of the UMD description summarizes in a simple sentence what the skill is about: "Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate."
Your opinion is that the text that doesn't fit your interpretation should just get discarded?


Following that baseline all the explanations under checks are just explaining on how you do the relevant checks. Stuff like the monks belt becomes a non-issue as you can use it just fine without UMD. Same for staffs that work at the minimum caster level and no emulated ability score.

Your interpretation is actually directly contradicted by one of the examples given in the PHB:


Emulate a Race: Some magic items work only for members of
certain races, or work better for members of those races. You can use
such an item as if you were a race of your choice. For example,
Lidda, a halfling, could attempt to use a dwarven thrower (see page
226 of the Dungeon Master’s Guide) as if she were a dwarf. If she failed
her Use Magic Device check, the hammer would work for her as it
normally would for a halfling, but if she succeeded, it would work
for her as if she were a dwarf. You can emulate only one race at a
time.
It's for race, but i think this makes it clear that you can use UMD even on an item you could use without it.
I see no reason why this would be different between emulating a race, an alignment or a class ability.

[Darg]

Do you have a rules citation to that effect? Wouldn't want to go around making things up.

I didn't think being monk required a rule to say that you are in fact a monk? Or do you mean about not benefiting from the belt? It's simple logic. A monk is a monk. Therefore giving more levels to a steadfast skarn monk who does not improve AC or unarmed damage does nothing for them. Zero plus zero still equals zero.


But the belt does in fact require a class feature. It improves you "AC and unarmed damage". Those are Monk class features, and you are required to have them to benefit from the first ability.

Exactly. You have to have the abilities to benefit from the first ability even if you fake it. It's the exact reason I mentioned the Rod of Undead Mastery. Your ability to control undead is doubled. In order to benefit from the rod you have to have the ability to control undead in the first place. Using UMD to fake being a 20th level monk to gain the 20th level version of those features is exactly like granting UMD user of the rod the cleric's ability to control undead. It simply doesn't work.


Your interpretation is actually directly contradicted by one of the examples given in the PHB:

It's for race, but i think this makes it clear that you can use UMD even on an item you could use without it.
I see no reason why this would be different between emulating a race, an alignment or a class ability.

It's an example specifically for race, not class features. Not only that, if an item's benefit said "the wearer's expansion and invisibility psi-like abilities are treated as a duergar of 5 levels higher" you wouldn't say that even if you do emulate the race that it grants you the expansion and invisibility PLAs of a duergar. Or would you?

[Gruftzwerg]

Exactly. You have to have the abilities to benefit from the first ability even if you fake it. It's the exact reason I mentioned the Rod of Undead Mastery. Your ability to control undead is doubled. In order to benefit from the rod you have to have the ability to control undead in the first place. Using UMD to fake being a 20th level monk to gain the 20th level version of those features is exactly like granting UMD user of the rod the cleric's ability to control undead. It simply doesn't work.



It's an example specifically for race, not class features. Not only that, if an item's benefit said "the wearer's expansion and invisibility psi-like abilities are treated as a duergar of 5 levels higher" you wouldn't say that even if you do emulate the race that it grants you the expansion and invisibility PLAs of a duergar. Or would you?



I agree with your "Rod of Undead Mastery" and "duergar item" examples. But imho Monk Belt differs here and thus is not ruled the same way:

Both the Rod and the theoretical duergar item boost a "stat/ability" that not everybody has.
But the Monk's Belt gives you a value for your Unarmed Strike dmg and bonuses to your AC back.

Now tell me why would anyone need extra permission to use his Unarmed Strike dmg or a "bonus to AC".
The belt does never improve the abilities, not even for a real monk. It exchanges a single stat (that you already have) and gives you 2 bonuses to AC

AC bonus(es): The first is the WIS bonus to AC and the second is the flat bonus by level.

You don't need to use monk abilities to profit from the effects the Belt gives. These kind of stuff are specific chases where the ability/item boosts something that already everybody can use.

Turn Undead is a special action that you need to "use" to activate it.
But Unarmed dmg and AC bonuses are for everyone free to use.

[RandomPeasant]

I didn't think being monk required a rule to say that you are in fact a monk? Or do you mean about not benefiting from the belt? It's simple logic. A monk is a monk. Therefore giving more levels to a steadfast skarn monk who does not improve AC or unarmed damage does nothing for them. Zero plus zero still equals zero.

Then isn't that an argument against your position? If you need to have the abilities to activate the function, that would suggest you can emulate them when you attempt to activate it.


You have to have the abilities to benefit from the first ability even if you fake it.

Which is why you emulate them! It's like saying "you couldn't activate an item that required you to have an INT of 24 if your INT was only 13, you don't have the INT required to activate it". Activating items you don't meet the requirements to activate is the entire point of UMD as a skill.


Your ability to control undead is doubled. In order to benefit from the rod you have to have the ability to control undead in the first place.

Your ability to control undead is not a class feature. It is a function of the animate dead spell. The rod talks about a "caster" and everything. I don't understand why you think this example is relevant, and even if it were relevant I don't understand why "there is another thing that works the same way" has to mean that both things work the way you want.

[Darg]

You don't need to use monk abilities to profit from the effects the Belt gives.

We are agreeing on this fundamental level and the outcome is the same even if the way we get there differs. The point I was making was that UMD doesn't grant you the ability of an X level monk +5 levels. The benefit is only +5 levels or it gives you 5 levels if you are at 0. As there isn't a class feature necessary to activate the belt to it's fullest capacity, UMD doesn't do anything in the first place.


Then isn't that an argument against your position? If you need to have the abilities to activate the function, that would suggest you can emulate them when you attempt to activate it.

You don't have to have the abilities for the item to function...that is what everyone differing from your side is saying. Function and benefit are two separate concepts that are seeming to be conflated.


Which is why you emulate them! It's like saying "you couldn't activate an item that required you to have an INT of 24 if your INT was only 13, you don't have the INT required to activate it". Activating items you don't meet the requirements to activate is the entire point of UMD as a skill.

Entirely irrelevant when there is no requirement. Your example would be more accurate if the item had no int requirement, but you UMD anyway to emulate a class feature to fake being a Y level X class to abuse it's ability to scale with level.


Your ability to control undead is not a class feature. It is a function of the animate dead spell. The rod talks about a "caster" and everything. I don't understand why you think this example is relevant, and even if it were relevant I don't understand why "there is another thing that works the same way" has to mean that both things work the way you want.

Your unarmed damage and AC are aren't class features either you know... every one has ac and unarmed damage (minimum of 1). The argument about the "caster" in the description is grasping at straws. The only "caster" is a single example of how the item works. Hell, rebuke commanded doesn't even require caster levels and you can still benefit from the rod.

[sleepyphoenixx]

It's an example specifically for race, not class features. Not only that, if an item's benefit said "the wearer's expansion and invisibility psi-like abilities are treated as a duergar of 5 levels higher" you wouldn't say that even if you do emulate the race that it grants you the expansion and invisibility PLAs of a duergar. Or would you?

Everyone already has unarmed damage. Everyone already has AC.
UMD doesn't let you use abilities just because you emulate them, but a Monk's Belt doesn't add any abilities you don't already have.
It does not give you any class features or racial abilities. It increases your unarmed damage and AC, which you already have and can use.

[RandomPeasant]

You don't have to have the abilities for the item to function...that is what everyone differing from your side is saying. Function and benefit are two separate concepts that are seeming to be conflated.

Yes, you do need to have those things for the item to function. Otherwise they cannot be "treated as a monk of five levels higher". It doesn't say "your monk level is treated as five higher for X", it says "your X is as if your monk level was five higher", which is clearly using X to determine the function.


Your unarmed damage and AC are aren't class features either you know...

Yes, but the bonuses you get to them from Monk levels, which is what the item is modifying, are.


Hell, rebuke commanded doesn't even require caster levels and you can still benefit from the rod.

So lets say it does work that way. Why can't I emulate having rebuke undead to increase my control pool for it? At base, your assertion is "these things work the same way, therefore they both work the way I want". There's no argument for them working the way you want there, just the assumption that they must.

[Darg]

Everyone already has unarmed damage. Everyone already has AC.
UMD doesn't let you use abilities just because you emulate them, but a Monk's Belt doesn't add any abilities you don't already have.
It does not give you any class features or racial abilities. It increases your unarmed damage and AC, which you already have and can use.

Exactly. Every character can use the belt. You are not prevented from using the belt. You can use it to it's maximum effectiveness no matter who you are. No matter the character you get +5 levels of monk AC and unarmed damage. Everyone benefits equally, quite literally. Well, except for monks. They don't get more of a boost to wis AC.


There's no argument for them working the way you want there, just the assumption that they must.

The same could be said for the way you want it to work.


Yes, you do need to have those things for the item to function. Otherwise they cannot be "treated as a monk of five levels higher". It doesn't say "your monk level is treated as five higher for X", it says "your X is as if your monk level was five higher", which is clearly using X to determine the function.

Not true, the belt is giving you parts of the benefits of class features; specifically the AC and unarmed damage. Even with 0 levels in monk, being treated as a monk 5 levels higher would mean that your AC and unarmed damage is treated as a 5th level monk. The item gives you virtual monk status from the get go with the words "treated as" like anywhere else you hear those words.


Yes, but the bonuses you get to them from Monk levels, which is what the item is modifying, are.

And the item is already giving you "treated as" status without a requirement.


So lets say it does work that way. Why can't I emulate having rebuke undead to increase my control pool for it?

...because you don't need to emulate anything to use the item.

[redking]

Get a ring of wizardry and use UMD to emulate a 20th level wizard. Now that you are considered a 20th level wizard by the ring, it confers upon you 4 spells + bonus spells of the level specified by the ring of wizardry, then doubles them.

Exactly the same principle as the monk's belt. You could apply this to a multitude of items.

The monk's belt confers only that for which it was crafted, which is 5 levels of some monk abilities. An actual 15th level monk provides his own 15 levels of monk abilities, then gets +5 to that with the monk's belt.

This isn't remotely the same situation as a staff that requires you to be a cleric if you want to use raise dead and therefore to do so you must UMD to emulate a cleric.

The description of monk's belt even tells you exactly what happens if you aren't a monk, which is 5 levels of some monk abilities.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Get a ring of wizardry and use UMD to emulate a 20th level wizard. Now that you are considered a 20th level wizard by the ring, it confers upon you 4 spells + bonus spells of the level specified by the ring of wizardry, then doubles them.
UMD doesn't actually give you abilities, it just lets you use items as if you had them. You have no spell slots, so doubling them does nothing.


Exactly the same principle as the monk's belt. You could apply this to a multitude of items.
It's the exact opposite. The Monk's Belt improves things every character already has (unarmed damage and AC). It doesn't give any new abilities like Flurry of Blows.



The monk's belt confers only that for which it was crafted, which is 5 levels of some monk abilities. An actual 15th level monk provides his own 15 levels of monk abilities, then gets +5 to that with the monk's belt.
The Monk's Belt still doesn't confer any monk abilities. It's literally in the first sentence of the item description.
It increases your unarmed damage and AC as if you were a monk, but unarmed damage and AC are not monk abilities.



This isn't remotely the same situation as a staff that requires you to be a cleric if you want to use raise dead and therefore to do so you must UMD to emulate a cleric.
It's not the same situation because you don't emulate being a cleric to use a staff of raise dead, you emulate having raise dead on your spell list - a different function of the UMD skill.


The description of monk's belt even tells you exactly what happens if you aren't a monk, which is 5 levels of some monk abilities.
And the description of the UMD skill tells you that you can use a magic item as if you were a member of a class you're not.

[Darg]

The Monk's Belt still doesn't confer any monk abilities. It's literally in the first sentence of the item description.
It increases your unarmed damage and AC as if you were a monk, but unarmed damage and AC are not monk abilities.

Yes, and you believe that if you UMD the belt you have the AC and damage of an X level monk. We believe that the belt merely provides the benefit of 5 more levels of monk, or +1 AC and +1 step of damage from a base of 1d6.


And the description of the UMD skill tells you that you can use a magic item as if you were a member of a class you're not.

No. It allows you to use the item as if you had the class feature of a class only if it were needed to use the item. AC and unarmed damage are not class features and therefore do not need to be emulated to use the item.

[sleepyphoenixx]

No. It allows you to use the item as if you had the class feature of a class only if it were needed to use the item.
Your belief is not RAW. The rules directly contradict that statement:

Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.

That's about as plain as it gets. It's not "just fluff text".
One of the PHB examples for using UMD has a character use a Dwarven Thrower - an item that functions for everyone but works better for a dwarf - as a dwarf would.

You can believe whatever you like, but the rules leave zero doubt that you're also wrong on this one.

[JNAProductions]

Your belief is not RAW. The rules directly contradict that statement:

That's about as plain as it gets. It's not "just fluff text".
One of the PHB examples for using UMD has a character use a Dwarven Thrower - an item that functions for everyone but works better for a dwarf - as a dwarf would.

You can believe whatever you like, but the rules leave zero doubt that you're also wrong on this one.

The effect of a Monk's Belt is "+5 effective Monk levels".
The effect of a Dwarven Thrower is "+2 warhammer, ups to +3 Returning warhammer that deals an extra 2d8 damage to giants when thrown or an extra 1d8 otherwise when thrown if you're a dwarf".

You can pretend to be a Monk of level 15+ all you like, but it doesn't grant you Monk abilities outside what the belt gives. Which is +5 to your Monk level, of 0.

[Darg]

Your belief is not RAW. The rules directly contradict that statement:


That's about as plain as it gets. It's not "just fluff text".
One of the PHB examples for using UMD has a character use a Dwarven Thrower - an item that functions for everyone but works better for a dwarf - as a dwarf would.

You can believe whatever you like, but the rules leave zero doubt that you're also wrong on this one.

Except you are ignoring the fact that racial emulation =/= class feature emulation. Not to mention


or work better for members of those races.

The belt doesn't even work better for anyone else but the UMD users so you can't even use that argument.


Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.


Emulate a Class Feature: Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item

These aren't fluff either. Anyone can activate the belt, and you don't need a class feature to activate it either. Depending on how you read the description, you might need the class features to benefit, but nothing says or implies that you need them to activate the item. Activate is the key word here. There is no mention of "benefit."

[sleepyphoenixx]

The effect of a Monk's Belt is "+5 effective Monk levels".

Except it's not. It's "The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher."

Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class
If you emulate a class ability "your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20."

I'm using the Monk's Belt as if i had the Unarmed Strike feature of a monk.
That does not give me the unarmed strike feature or any of its benefits. It just makes the belt think i have it, because that's what "as if you had" means.
If someone who has the unarmed strike feature of a 15th level monk wears a Monk's Belt his unarmed damage gets treated as that of a 20th level monk.

If you disagree provide a source. "THIS CANNOT BE!" is not a rules argument.

[Darg]

If you emulate a class ability "your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20."

I'm using the Monk's Belt as if i had the Unarmed Strike feature of a monk.
That does not give me the unarmed strike feature or any of its benefits. It just makes the belt think i have it, because that's what "as if you had" means.
If someone who has the unarmed strike feature of a 15th level monk wears a Monk's Belt his unarmed damage gets treated as that of a 20th level monk.

If you disagree provide a source. "THIS CANNOT BE!" is not a rules argument.
You're the one failing to prove that you need a class feature to activate the item. Show in what way the item requires the unarmed strike feature to activate. Show in what way the item needs the AC bonus feature to activate. As far as I can see, the item doesn't have valid UMD action choice to activate the item with.

[RandomPeasant]

But again, those quotes also "prove" that you can't UMD a staff of power. Your answer to that is that it "isn't anything strange", but that doesn't resolve the issue. You would agree, I assume, that you could emulate having a Paladin's smite or a Cleric's turn undead or a Druid's wild shape to activate an item who's only function was to activate based on one of those abilities. And you agree that the ability to activate something with UMD is severable in the staff of power case. So what distinguishes the monk's belt?

[Gruftzwerg]

You're the one failing to prove that you need a class feature to activate the item. Show in what way the item requires the unarmed strike feature to activate. Show in what way the item needs the AC bonus feature to activate. As far as I can see, the item doesn't have valid UMD action choice to activate the item with.

1. Class feature/race/bla don't need to be requirements to make use of UMD. It is enough if any of those get more or other benefits.

Check

You can use this skill to read a spell or to activate a magic item. Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.

2. The Monk's Belt is "activated" at the moment you donne it.

Using Items

To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly. In most cases, using an item requires a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. By contrast, spell completion items are treated like spells in combat and do provoke attacks of opportunity.

3. The belt asks for your "effective monk lvl" in the monk's Unarmed Strike and AC bonus abilities. But it doesn't really improve or add to those. What it does is , that it directly targets the relevant stats. In case of Unarmed Strike the value gets exchanged and your AC gets a bonus to it.

4. While the Monk's Belt works better for those with "monk abilities", it doesn't improve those abilities. It gives you similar effects, as a monk effectively 5 lvls stronger, to stats that anybody can use. Unarmed Strike dmg and an AC bonus. You are having a hard time to realize this important difference. And as long as you ignore this important argument, we won't get to a conclusion here.

[redking]

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).

If UMD does not let you use the class feature, and monk's belt only give +5 whether you are a monk or not, from whence comes this extra +15?

Also, if the +20 (for a character with zero monk levels) is coming from the monk's belt, how can it be that this remarkable ability is not priced into the monk's belt?

[RandomPeasant]

Because the belt is not giving you "+5". It is giving you the feature as if you were five levels higher. It doesn't give you five additional levels that stack with your existing levels, it gives "your level plus five" levels that overlap with them.

[Gruftzwerg]

Emulate a Class Feature


If UMD does not let you use the class feature, and monk's belt only give +5 whether you are a monk or not, from whence comes this extra +15?

Also, if the +20 (for a character with zero monk levels) is coming from the monk's belt, how can it be that this remarkable ability is not priced into the monk's belt?

excuse me, but are you reading the arguments at all?

1) without UMD
As said several times, the Monk's Belt does not increase the monk abilities! It just gives better results as if you would have more (effective) monk levels (for the US and AC bonus abilities).

It EXCHANGES your Unarmed Strike dmg (a stat everybody has) and gives you an AC bonus (something everybody can use). "The target value is that of monk five levels higher", but that does not target/affect the monk's ability. And in both cases (US and AC) the stuff the belt gives overlaps the stuff you maybe already have from being a monk.

2) with UMD
UMD allows to you to pretend to have class levels to emulate class abilities to activate a target magic item. The item does not need to require this. It's enough if it produces better or other results. And this is the case for the Monk's Belt. It's a magic item that work better if you have (effective) monk levels.
The UMD roll gets a -20 penalty for emulation a class feature. If you still managed to get a 15 as result, you are now treated as having 15 lvls of monk features for the belt.
The Belt now looks up the Unarmed Strike dmg value of a 20th lvl monk and gives you this value to your Unarmed Strike dmg stat. It does not give you the ability, nor does it improve the ability (not even for a real monk)
Then it makes the same for the AC bonus of the monk. It asks for your effective monk lvls for the AC ability and gives you a separate ability that overlaps any possible original ability. It calls out that it works like the monks AC, as such it can't be improving the monk's ability, nor do you need the monk's ability to benefit form it.

3) item prices
The item is intended to scale with your (effective) monk levels. Under "normal" circumstances the item would "effectively" increases your monk's unarmed strike a step and adds +1 to AC (not the real mechanics here, just the "effective" gain in simplified non-rule words). That is included in the items price. The item is imho totally balanced. The one thing being OP here is UMD, and this is known since the early days of 3.5. Even the oldest guides always praise UMD (those guides where it is relevant) and how broken it is.
The stuff mentioned in this thread are just things that have been discovered later till more recently. But they are totally within the RAW power-spectrum of UMD. If you wanna blame something, blame UMD's power. The items are just the victims here...^^

[redking]

2) with UMD
UMD allows to you to pretend to have class levels to emulate class abilities to activate a target magic item. The item does not need to require this. It's enough if it produces better or other results. And this is the case for the Monk's Belt. It's a magic item that work better if you have (effective) monk levels.

Assuming 0 levels of monk class, where are the extra 15 levels higher coming from on addition to the five levels. Are you saying that the item is doing this?


Because the belt is not giving you "+5". It is giving you the feature as if you were five levels higher. It doesn't give you five additional levels that stack with your existing levels, it gives "your level plus five" levels that overlap with them.

Sure. So you emulate a monk class feature of X level, and if you are successful the item believes you to be a monk of that level. After that you get your monk level, which is zero, plus the five levels higher. UMD can't give you a class feature, just allow you to activate the item.

To get these extra 15 levels higher, you are insisting that UMD grants the class feature. It does not. Another example would be an item that requires turn undead to activate. That's fine. But just because you can activate an item that requires turn undead with UMD, it doesn't follow that you can then power the item with turning attempts. You are not able to use the class features that you are emulating.

It's also worth noting that monk's belt doesn't work better for the monk but rather exactly the same. Both use cases provide for the 5 levels higher.

[sleepyphoenixx]

But again, those quotes also "prove" that you can't UMD a staff of power. Your answer to that is that it "isn't anything strange", but that doesn't resolve the issue. You would agree, I assume, that you could emulate having a Paladin's smite or a Cleric's turn undead or a Druid's wild shape to activate an item who's only function was to activate based on one of those abilities. And you agree that the ability to activate something with UMD is severable in the staff of power case. So what distinguishes the monk's belt?
Why wouldn't you be able to UMD a staff of power? It works the same as any other staff. It has nothing to do with emulating a class feature.
It's a spell trigger item, so you use the "use a wand" function of UMD, same as for any other spell trigger item.

And yes, you can emulate having a paladin's smite or cleric's turn undead to activate an item which is activated by the ability in question.
That's literally straight from the example on emulating class abilities in the PHB.
Still not sure what you mean about the staff of power. It's a staff. It doesn't have any requirements for use aside from the usual "have the spell on your class list" that all staffs have.

What distinguishes the Monk's Belt from items like the Wilding Clasp is that it doesn't grant any abilities you don't already have. Everyone has unarmed damage and AC.
The key is the wording of the belt. It doesn't give you the Unarmed Strike and AC Bonus class features (in which case it wouldn't work with UMD because you don't have those).
It just increases your damage and AC as if you had them.


Emulate a Class Feature


If UMD does not let you use the class feature, and monk's belt only give +5 whether you are a monk or not, from whence comes this extra +15?

Also, if the +20 (for a character with zero monk levels) is coming from the monk's belt, how can it be that this remarkable ability is not priced into the monk's belt?
Unarmed damage is still not a class feature. Neither is AC.

I'm also not sure why ~6.5 average damage and +3 AC (over just using the belt without UMD) - for a massive skill investment and with a non-negligible failure chance every hour unless you have one of the few options to take 10 on UMD - is somehow remarkable. Because that's all you get from it over using it without UMD. It's not exactly a gamebreaker.
As for being priced in i assume the designers didn't account for UMD when pricing items, but that's just an educated guess. Different builds getting different value out of items isn't exactly new.

For the record, i'm arguing that it's allowed by RAW, not that i think it's a good idea to actually do it ingame.
If you're relying on the Monk's Belt for AC - as most characters who wear one do - you can hardly afford to lose it for 24 hours because one of your hourly rolls failed.
What little you get simply isn't worth it.

You're also unlikely to use unarmed strike for the simple reason that the belt does not give you IUS, so you'd have to get that separately.



Another example would be an item that requires turn undead to activate. That's fine. But just because you can activate an item that requires turn undead with UMD, it doesn't follow that you can then power the item with turning attempts. You are not able to use the class features that you are emulating.
The PHB example on emulating a class feature does exactly that though.

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.
The PHB comes right out and tells you "yes you can do this despite not having turn undead uses to expend".
You can't actually turn undead, but if an item requires spending a TU use it tells you straight out "yep, go ahead, DC 21".

You might argue that it's too powerful to allow at your table, but it's RAW.
Though i can't actually recall any items that would break the game with this either. The real power options tend to be feats, not items, and you can't UMD a feat.

[RandomPeasant]

To get these extra 15 levels higher, you are insisting that UMD grants the class feature.

No I'm not. The item grants the class feature. It grants it at the level you activate it with plus five. You're trying to assert that there is some separate step between "activate the item" and "get the benefit", but there is really clearly not. It is one sentence. The input is that you have the class feature at a specific level, and the output is that you get it at a higher level. If you can emulate anything at all, you can get a really big bonus out of it by emulating hard enough.


It's also worth noting that monk's belt doesn't work better for the monk but rather exactly the same. Both use cases provide for the 5 levels higher.

It does in fact work differently for the Monk. There is a "you are a Monk" clause and a "you are not a Monk" clause.


Why wouldn't you be able to UMD a staff of power? It works the same as any other staff. It has nothing to do with emulating a class feature.

I was responding to Darg, who has since edited his post. His assertion seems to be that if you don't need to UMD to activate one of an item's features, you can't UMD to activate any of them. I think the staff of power, among other things, suggests this is probably not how it works, and he doesn't have an adequate answer.

[Gemini476]

Some things of note:


UMD does not let you emulate a class, it lets you emulate a class feature.

Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class[.]
[...]
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. [Example of Lidda emulating the Turn Undead class feature, requiring DC21.]
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.
The Monk's AC Bonus (Ex) (PHB p.40) is obviously a class feature (extraordinary, at that). I don't see a convincing argument that the Monk's Unarmed Strike (PHB p.41) is not - while it lacks a descriptor, that's kind of default for a lot of class features. Cf. Spells, Bonus Feats, Illiteracy. When in doubt, the PHB's Glossary (p.306) helps:

class feature: Any special characteristic derived from a character class.
The Monk's Belt does not require a class feature, it requires a class:

The wearer's AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. [...] If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk. This AC bonus functions just like the monk's AC bonus.
Note that the Monk's Belt assumes that Monks have those class features, and does not grant the class features a second time.


From this, IMHO we get five scenarios:

You are not a monk. You use the item normally. You get unarmed damage and AC as a fifth-level monk. (Notably this does not give you the other benefits of Unarmed Strike, like the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.) Your effective monk level is 5.
You are a monk. You use the item normally. Your unarmed damage and AC is treated as five levels higher. Your effective monk level is 6+.
You are not a monk. You use UMD to emulate Unarmed Strike, a second check to emulate AC Bonus, and a third check to emulate the Lawful alignment. The item buffs your emulated class features, but "[UMD] does not let you actually use the class features of another class". Your effective monk level is zero (0).
Alternatively: You are not a monk. You use UMD to emulate all those things above. The Monk's Belt does not care about class features, so it just sees that you're not a monk. Your effective monk level is 5.
You are a monk. You have swapped away your AC Bonus for Skarn Monk's Defensive Insight, and your Unarmed Strike for Skarn Monk's Spine Strike. The Monk's Belt sees that you are a monk, and therefore just buffs your effective level without granting you those class features (because it's assumed that you'd have them). You do not gain Unarmed Strike and AC Bonus, and the Belt does not buff your Spine Strike and Defensive Insight. Your effective monk level is zero (0).


If you're off the opposing opinion that a DC45 check gets you the +6 AC Bonus of a 30th-level Epic Monk, however, then these other items from the DMG might interest you:

Holy Avenger: Gets stronger in the hands of Paladins, but more importantly give spell resistance 5 + Paladin level to the user and anyone adjacent and at-will Greater Dispel Magic (area dispel only) with a caster level of your Paladin level.
Candle of Invocation:

A cleric whose alignment matches the candle’s operates as if two levels higher for purposes of determining spells per day if he burns the candle during or just prior to his spell preparation time. He can even cast spells normally unavailable to him, as if he were of that higher level, but only so long as the candle continues to burn. Except in special cases (see below), a candle burns for 4 hours.
Golem Manual: You get an increase to your caster level when creating golems of certain types. The manuals also include the feat, required spells, and required XP. You still need the GP, but if you get around that issue then you can craft a Greater Stone Golem at level 1 with a DC32 check.
Phylactery of Undead Turning:

This item is a boon to any character able to turn undead, allowing him to do so as if his class level were four levels higher than it actually is.

[bekeleven]

You absolutely can UMD a domain staff to pop out the spells in it, because the PHB explicitly allows you to emulate expending a class feature
This got lost, but could someone walk me through it?

As for the topic at hand: UMD allows you to


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.Ignoring every other issue listed in this thread, and there are plenty I have feelings about, UMB states right there in black and white that it allows you to emulate class features when activating magical items. While the DMG was written before the magic item block templates were standardized, it's incontrovertible that it would read thusly:


Belt, Monk's
Price: 13,000 gp
Body Slot: Waist
Caster Level: 10th
Aura: Moderate Transmutation
Activation: —
Weight: 1 lb
A monk's belt can't be activated so you can't roll UMD for it. Once again, this is not my only objection to the plan, but it certainly cuts it off at the start.

[Gemini476]

This got lost, but could someone walk me through it?

Emulating expending a class feature:

Emulate a Class Feature: Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item. In this case, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20. 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.

Emphasis mine. There's some extrapolation that needs to be made here regarding "does this imply that the magic chalice requires the class feature or actually expending a Turn Undead usage?", but that's honestly par for the course when you get this far into the weeds.

As far as I can tell there's no magic item in the DMG that actually cares about Turn Undead either way, so who knows what they intended.

EDIT: As for using this to cast spells from a domain staff, however, I'd need to double-check the wording on that item.

[Gruftzwerg]

Assuming 0 levels of monk class, where are the extra 15 levels higher coming from on addition to the five levels. Are you saying that the item is doing this?



If we sole assume 0 levels of monk class the benefit is that of a 5th lvl monk.

If you are referring to a UMD roll with a 15 as endresult, the Belt treats you as it would treat any other 15th lvl monk. It looks up the Unarmed Strike dmg and AC bonus of a 20th lvl monk and gives you these as benefits.

Let me remind you again: The Belt does not improve the monk abilities, nor does it give em to you (even if the AC bonus works like the monk's ability). It gives you 2 effects, one affecting your Unarmed Strike dmg, the other gives you a bonus to AC. So a real 15th lvl monk's unarmed strike and AC bonus class features would still be that of a 15th lvl monk. His Unarmed Strike dmg is that of a 20th lvl monk (not his class feature). And he gets another AC bonus that works the same as his monk's class feature, thus they don't stack and overlap. Since the Belt offers the better bonus, it overshadows the bonus from the class feature.

The belt is theoretically capable of giving you the same benefits of infinite levels. Because it scales with levels, there is no limit what the benefits of the belt can be. And for the same reason (scaling with levels) it can be abused with UMD.

Imho the problem here is that you are under a misconception what the following sentence does mechanically:

The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher.
1. It targets the stats "AC" and "Unarmed Damage" for its benefits, both not monk specific.
2. It asks for the "effective" level of your monk's Unarmed Strike and AC bonus abilities
3. It then gives you benefits from a theoretical monk with 5 more monk levels than you. The targets for the benefits are mentioned in 1.
While the belts asks for effective levels in a class feature, it does target em. It targets a plain stats that everybody has (Unarmed Damage) and gives a bonus (AC bonus) that anyone can use.



This got lost, but could someone walk me through it?

As for the topic at hand: UMD allows you to

Ignoring every other issue listed in this thread, and there are plenty I have feelings about, UMB states right there in black and white that it allows you to emulate class features when activating magical items. While the DMG was written before the magic item block templates were standardized, it's incontrovertible that it would read thusly:


A monk's belt can't be activated so you can't roll UMD for it. Once again, this is not my only objection to the plan, but it certainly cuts it off at the start.

I've addressed this already in an earlier post. We have general rules for 3.5 that enforce that items with ongoing effects are activated at the time when you donne em. The "Activation:"-line is sole handling any possible related actions needed to activate the item. It does not prevent an item from being activated.


To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly.

[sleepyphoenixx]

EDIT: As for using this to cast spells from a domain staff, however, I'd need to double-check the wording on that item.

That's a pretty firm no. You need to attune the staff as part of your daily spell preparation, similar to a runestaff. No attunement, no use.
You can't emulate being attuned and you can't emulate preparing divine spells either.

A divine caster could conceivably UMD one to save on spellslots though. At least i don't see why it wouldn't work, though i just glanced over the domain staff rules just now.
Or emulate having a spell on his class list, but that's a little iffy because they're not spell trigger items.
Emulating the "spells" ability of a cleric might work for that, but you're definitely in houserule territory with that imo.

I'm pretty sure the UMD rules were not made with rune- or domain staffs in mind.

[Darg]

I was responding to Darg, who has since edited his post. His assertion seems to be that if you don't need to UMD to activate one of an item's features, you can't UMD to activate any of them. I think the staff of power, among other things, suggests this is probably not how it works, and he doesn't have an adequate answer.

Yeah, not what I said at all. I said that if the item feature doesn't have a requirement posed by the UMD skill, THEN you can't use the skill. You don't need AC Bonus (Ex) and Unarmed strike to use the item to full capacity and therefore can't use the skill because there is nothing to fake. I mean, I guess a cleric could still UMD a wand of restoration, climb check for climbing a pebble as a giant, or some other uncommon sense ruling.


It does in fact work differently for the Monk. There is a "you are a Monk" clause and a "you are not a Monk" clause.

You argue this "is a monk"/"not a monk" idea when that invalidates a UMD check. You should be arguing "has AC Bonus (Ex) and Unarmed Strike" and "has not AC Bonus (Ex) and Unarmed Strike." Of course that is not what the item says so it's harder to back up, if not impossible.


1. Class feature/race/bla don't need to be requirements to make use of UMD. It is enough if any of those get more or other benefits.

Except you are missing the purpose of the skill. The context it is supposed to work under.


Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.

The SRD has many missing rules functions because of overzealous cropping for the OGL. It literally tells you that you use the skill for things you can't activate. It also doesn't provide a check DC for emulating a class.



3. The belt asks for your "effective monk lvl" in the monk's Unarmed Strike and AC bonus abilities. But it doesn't really improve or add to those. What it does is , that it directly targets the relevant stats. In case of Unarmed Strike the value gets exchanged and your AC gets a bonus to it.

4. While the Monk's Belt works better for those with "monk abilities", it doesn't improve those abilities. It gives you similar effects, as a monk effectively 5 lvls stronger, to stats that anybody can use. Unarmed Strike dmg and an AC bonus. You are having a hard time to realize this important difference. And as long as you ignore this important argument, we won't get to a conclusion here.

The belt doesn't give you missing levels. All it does is increase what levels you have by 5. It does not say that "your AC Bonus (Ex) and Unarmed Strike abilities are treated as 5 levels higher." It never asks for your levels in monk. It only allows you to treat yourself 5 levels higher.


That's a pretty firm no. You need to attune the staff as part of your daily spell preparation, similar to a runestaff. No attunement, no use.
You can't emulate being attuned and you can't emulate preparing divine spells either.

A divine caster could conceivably UMD one to save on spellslots though. At least i don't see why it wouldn't work, though i just glanced over the domain staff rules just now.
Or emulate having a spell on his class list, but that's a little iffy because they're not spell trigger items.
Emulating the "spells" ability of a cleric might work for that, but you're definitely in houserule territory with that imo.

I'm pretty sure the UMD rules were not made with rune- or domain staffs in mind.

Spell preparation is part of your spellcasting feature. What can't be emulated are the components and the spell slot use. The turn undead example in the PHB does not say that using the item would have normally expended a use of turn undead.

[redking]

I love this thread, because now we can come up with all the silly ways UMD can be used if you allow it to let you use a class feature (which it specifically prohibits).

Emulate the Artificer abilities Metamagic Spell Trigger (Su) or Metamagic Spell Completion (Su). Now you can apply unlimited metamagic feats to certain magical items. Yay.

[RandomPeasant]

The Monk's Belt does not require a class feature, it requires a class:

I'm not convinced that is the case. The item is pretty clearly talking about those specific features.


The item buffs your emulated class features, but "[UMD] does not let you actually use the class features of another class". Your effective monk level is zero (0).

I don't understand why people think UMD would need to be giving you the class features. The item gives you the class features. It can't be enhancing the class features you have, because the way you go from "Monk 10 unarmed strike" to "Monk 15 unarmed strike" isn't by getting some kind of additional marginal damage bonus, it's by getting an entirely new 2d6 unarmed strike that replaces your existing 1d10 unarmed strike.


I said that if the item feature doesn't have a requirement posed by the UMD skill, THEN you can't use the skill.

Then the hell do the quotes have to do with anything? If your position is "you can UMD individual features of an item that does not require UMD for all uses", you still have yet to supply a citation by which activating a monk's belt to get the benefits that go to someone who already has the class features is not emulate-able.


You don't need AC Bonus (Ex) and Unarmed strike to use the item to full capacity

Yes you do. The capacity of "give you 15th level Monk Unarmed Strike damage" and the capacity of "give you 5th level Monk Unarmed Strike damage" are different capacities. The idea that they are "the same" capacity of "give you +5 Monk levels to your Unarmed Strike damage" is both contrary to the text (as it describes them separately) and, as I noted earlier, simply not how class features work.


Of course that is not what the item says so it's harder to back up, if not impossible.

Well, what the item says is in the middle. It has a "not a monk" and a "has these class features" section, which I abbreviated to "monk"/"not monk". That setup is exactly what it would need to work with UMD, because it works with UMD.


The turn undead example in the PHB does not say that using the item would have normally expended a use of turn undead.

It says you channel positive energy into it as if turning undead. What could that possibly mean other than expending a use of turn undead? It's like looking at something that says "expends arcane energy into it as if casting a spell" and saying "clearly I can activate this as often as I want without expending spell slots".


Emulate the Artificer abilities Metamagic Spell Trigger (Su) or Metamagic Spell Completion (Su). Now you can apply unlimited metamagic feats to certain magical items. Yay.

If there were a magic item that said "you can use Metamagic Spell Trigger to activate this item for half the normal charge expenditure", you could in fact totally emulate Metamagic Spell Trigger to activate it with metamagic for half as many charges as Metamagic Spell Trigger requires. You would still need metamagic feats to do so. No one's position is "you can UMD a ring of wizardry to gain unarmed strike", so the idea that you can gain arbitrary class features through UMD is completely disconnected from the argument at hand.

[redking]

If there were a magic item that said "you can use Metamagic Spell Trigger to activate this item for half the normal charge expenditure", you could in fact totally emulate Metamagic Spell Trigger to activate it with metamagic for half as many charges as Metamagic Spell Trigger requires. You would still need metamagic feats to do so. No one's position is "you can UMD a ring of wizardry to gain unarmed strike", so the idea that you can gain arbitrary class features through UMD is completely disconnected from the argument at hand.

The bolded part is exactly what you are doing with monk's belt. The monk's belt merely increases some abilities to 5 levels higher, that's it. Following your own logic, a character should be able to UMD Metamagic Spell Trigger (Su) or Metamagic Spell Completion (Su) as an artificer, and gain the benefits.

[RandomPeasant]

The bolded part is exactly what you are doing with monk's belt. The monk's belt merely increases some abilities to 5 levels higher, that's it.

As I have said repeatedly, it does not work that way, because that is not a coherent way for it to work. When you go from being a 7th level Monk to an 8th level Monk, your unarmed strike does not get a damage bonus. It gets a new damage die that replaces its old damage die. That is the class feature the belt gives you when you put it on as a 3rd level Monk (or someone emulating the unarmed strike ability of a 3rd level Monk).

[redking]

As I have said repeatedly, it does not work that way, because that is not a coherent way for it to work. When you go from being a 7th level Monk to an 8th level Monk, your unarmed strike does not get a damage bonus. It gets a new damage die that replaces its old damage die. That is the class feature the belt gives you when you put it on as a 3rd level Monk (or someone emulating the unarmed strike ability of a 3rd level Monk).

Fun with knowstones. Emulate a class ability, cast spells as if you were a sorcerer. Unlimited spells. Or get an item keyed of uses of turn undead, and fire off your (emulated) unlimited uses of turn undead via UMD to fuel the item.

Where you are getting it wrong is that UMD just gets you in the door. If you present yourself as a "class features = monk 15" to the monk's belt, then the belt considers you that but then the benefits have to be applied, which is 0 + 5 levels higher.

In relation to staffs, which was the question in the OP, the same principle applies. If a staff has an activation requirement of caster level 15 (in addition to the spell trigger spell requirement), emulating a caster level higher than 15 doesn't mean that you actually have a caster level, and can use it to obtain a higher caster level from the staff. What happens is that emulating the caster level higher than 15 gives you access to the staff. If you got a UMD result of effective caster level 20, and the staff's caster level is set at 15, then you use the staff at caster level 15 (the default). You emulate a caster level. You don't have a caster level.

[Darg]

because that is not a coherent way for it to work

Which is exactly how we see your interpretation.

[RandomPeasant]

If you present yourself as a "class features = monk 15" to the monk's belt, then the belt considers you that but then the benefits have to be applied, which is 0 + 5 levels higher.

Here is the sentence we are arguing about: "The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher". There is no provision there for a separate "level activated at" and "level used to calculate benefits". There is one variable, and if UMD allows you to input a value of 15 for it, the output is 20, because the only operation that happens is "add five", and 20 is what you get when you add 5 to 15.


Which is exactly how we see your interpretation.

Yes, because you are wrong. Unarmed strike does not stack. It overlaps. The only way for you to get it at a higher level is to be granted it at that higher level. That means you can get it by emulating an input and receiving it as an output. Any assertion to the contrary is simply not consistent with how the rules work, and therefore definitionally incorrect.

[redking]

Any assertion to the contrary is simply not consistent with how the rules work, and therefore definitionally incorrect.

If a rogue with mega UMD got an item that requires turn undead to use, then he's good to go. If the item requires the rogue to expend uses of turn undead, the rogue is out of luck.

Likewise for smite. If an item requires smite to use, then then the UMD rogue can do that. But the rogue can't expend uses of smite. He doesn't have uses of smite and neither UMD or the item confers that ability.

Why? "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".

When you emulate an ability score, same thing. It lets you use the scroll, for example, but not set DC via Intelligence or Charisma scores that you do not have. That's why you are told that if you have a high enough ability score to use the scroll, you don't need to make the check. Because there is no secondary effect of emulating an ability score. That's something you've conjured up all by yourself.

[RandomPeasant]

If a rogue with mega UMD got an item that requires turn undead to use, then he's good to go. If the item requires the rogue to expend uses of turn undead, the rogue is out of luck.

Except that the rules for UMD use "expend a use of turn undead" as an example of at thing you can do. Is that example just wrong? Were the designers lying to themselves when they asserted that a successful UMD check would allow you to use an item that activates when someone "channels positive energy into it as if turning undead"? The distinction you appear to be missing is that, while UMD does not allow you to simply go out and use Turn Undead or Unarmed Strike, it absolutely and explicitly does allow you to activate items that require those abilities as inputs. Like the hypothetical item that is made to go by expending turning, or the very real monk's belt that gives you unarmed strike at a larger level if you have unarmed strike at a smaller level.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Spell preparation is part of your spellcasting feature. What can't be emulated are the components and the spell slot use. The turn undead example in the PHB does not say that using the item would have normally expended a use of turn undead.

You can emulate the "spells" feature, but that doesn't attune a domain staff to you.
You have to attune it as part of spell preparation. You actually have to perform the act, because "is attuned" is not something UMD can emulate.

Emulating spellcasting does not actually give you spellcasting. You can't prepare spells no matter how high you roll on your UMD check, so you can't attune a domain staff.

[redking]

You can emulate the "spells" feature, but that doesn't attune a domain staff to you.
You have to attune it as part of spell preparation. You actually have to perform the act, because "is attuned" is not something UMD can emulate.

Emulating spellcasting does not actually give you spellcasting. You can't prepare spells no matter how high you roll on your UMD check, so you can't attune a domain staff.

You could do a dip in a spellcasting class and then benefit from unlimited spells via domain staff.


Domain staffs from Complete Champion (Pg 143).
"A domain staff of allows you to cast any of the following spells (each once per day) by expending a prepared divine spell or divine spell slot of the same level or higher."
And all cost 36,000 gp


Any objections along these lines are easily overcome.

Anyway, when it comes to DCs and caster level, the designers are usually very careful to point that out. If there was any intention to allow UMD to replace caster levels or produce an ability score for the purposes of spell DC, it would be in the description of the UMD skill. It is not. What you guys are doing is plucking stuff out of context and trying to make inferences in inapplicable contexts.


Except that the [I]rules for UMD use "expend a use of turn undead" as an example of at thing you can do. Is that example just wrong? Were the designers lying to themselves when they asserted that a successful UMD check would allow you to use an item that activates when someone "channels positive energy into it as if turning undead"? The distinction you appear to be missing is that, while UMD does not allow you to simply go out and use Turn Undead or Unarmed Strike, it absolutely and explicitly does allow you to activate items that require those abilities as inputs. Like the hypothetical item that is made to go by expending turning, or the very real monk's belt that gives you unarmed strike at a larger level if you have unarmed strike at a smaller level.


Here it what the PHB says.


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 she 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.

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.

The check here is to see if Lidda can pretend to have turn undead. That's what she is making the check for. The introductory fluff text is a huge fail and there is no indication that she can actually emulate a use of turn undead. The fluff text is contradicted right after in the next paragraph.

[sleepyphoenixx]

You could do a dip in a spellcasting class and then benefit from unlimited spells via domain staff.

Any objections along these lines are easily overcome.

Anyway, when it comes to DCs and caster level, the designers are usually very careful to point that out. If there was any intention to allow UMD to replace caster levels or produce an ability score for the purposes of spell DC, it would be in the description of the UMD skill. It is not. What you guys are doing is plucking stuff out of context and trying to make inferences in inapplicable contexts
The UMD skill was written before domain and runestaffs were a thing. Spell trigger and completion items explicitly use different UMD functions so they don't have this issue.
You basically have to houserule how UMD interacts with domain and runestaffs because the rules don't cover it.


The check here is to see if Lidda can pretend to have turn undead. That's what she is making the check for. The introductory fluff text is a huge fail and there is no indication that she can actually emulate a use of turn undead. The fluff text is contradicted right after in the next paragraph.
"Channeling Energy" means expending a turn undead use. If she can activate the item with UMD she has to emulate channeling energy by definition or the item wouldn't activate.

[redking]

Here's another one.


Vestment, Druid’s: This light garment is worn over normal clothing or armor. Most such vestments are green, embroidered with plant or animal motifs. When this item is worn by a character with the wild shape ability, the character can use that ability one additional time each day.

From this comment here (https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2r49z?FAQ-Use-Magic-Device-and-Staves#19).


I am a fighter with high UMD, and find a Druid's Vestment.

The fighter does a UMD check to make the item believe she actually has Wild shape from a 12th level druid. What does happen ?

Does this allow the fighter to :
1 - wildshape once per day (the once per day being the one from the shirt) ?
2 - wildshape six times per day (as a 12th level druid with that shirt) ?
3 - have a beautiful shirt that have a nice aura and a once per day ability to do nothing ?

I think the answer 3 is the right one. It doesn't give you class features.

You guys say that the answer is 2, or should given that this is the exact same interpretation as what you two have been saying about monk's belt.

There aren't that many items like these, so a hilarious way for a player with a DM that takes your approach would be to make a custom item of +1 to X class feature, UMD to emulate a class feature, then get the 20th level ability or 20 levels of abilities via this mistaken reading of UMD. Or an item of X powered by uses of turn undead, powered instead by unlimited UMD. Very amusing really.

[sleepyphoenixx]

You guys say that the answer is 2, or should given that this is the exact same interpretation as what you two have been saying about monk's belt.
It's completely different from the Monk's Belt. Wording matters. Why would it be 2?

The item doesn't give you wild shape. UMD can't give you wild shape unless you UMD an item that specifically gives you the wild shape ability.
If you UMD a Druid's Vestment you get one extra use of an ability you do not have. It does nothing.

It's the same thing with the Wild Shape Amulet we had a few pages back.
The item is conditional. It either gives you the WS ability of a 5th level druid OR +4 to WS level. You can't get both.
You either don't UMD it and get WS of a 5th level druid or you UMD it and get +4 to the level of an ability you do not have.

Same thing with the Nightstick. It adds 4 uses of Turn Undead, not the ability to turn undead.
If you do not have Turn Undead you have 4 uses of an ability you do not have. They do nothing.

The Monk's Belt is one of the very few items you can effectively UMD because what it gives doesn't require a specific class ability to use.
It increases two abilities everyone has (unarmed damage and AC). That's the only reason UMDing it does anything.

[redking]

Another one.


Caduceus bracers

Caduceus bracers allow you to convert your innate healing powers into other forms of restorative magic. By sacrificing 5 points of healing (derived from lay on hands, wholeness of body, or any similar ability that measures your ability to heal as a daily limit of points), you can remove 1 point of ability damage or remove the dazed, fatigued, or sickened condition from one creature. Using these bracers in this manner follows all the normal limitations of your healing ability.

For example, a paladin using caduceus bracers must touch the target to be affected (just as with lay on hands), while a monk wearing these bracers can affect only herself (since she can’t use wholeness of body on another creature). You can spend extra points for cumulative effect, For example, you could spend 15 points of healing to remove both the fatigued condition and 2 points of ability damage.

You can also combine normal healing with the bracers’ effect. For instance, you could spend 25 points to produce the effects in the previous example and heal 10 points of damage as well.

Unlimited healing via UMD, and not even a difficult check. Heck, even a Paladin should try to UMD it.



It increases two abilities everyone has (unarmed damage and AC). That's the only reason UMDing it does anything.

UMD can't give you 15 levels above what the item is supposed to do, no matter how many times you say it. UMD doesn't really give you the class feature or ability.

[RandomPeasant]

Yes, you can totally emulate the Caduceus Bracers, because the activation is "spend this resource" and the example explicitly shows that you can emulate spending a resource. I would certainly support changing the rules to say that UMD can't emulate expending resources, but the RAW clearly allows it to do that.


You guys say that the answer is 2, or should given that this is the exact same interpretation as what you two have been saying about monk's belt.

No we don't. That item doesn't give you Wild Shape, it gives you an additional use of Wild Shape. The appropriate analogy would be if the monk's belt doubled your unarmed strike damage, which I don't believe would be at all amenable to emulation with UMD. If the clasp said something like "you can channel energy from the wilding clasp to assume a form you could with wild shape", that would be emulate-able.

[Darg]

"Channeling Energy" means expending a turn undead use. If she can activate the item with UMD she has to emulate channeling energy by definition or the item wouldn't activate.

You say that, but you have no proof that it does expend an attempt.


Yes, you can totally emulate the Caduceus Bracers, because the activation is "spend this resource" and the example explicitly shows that you can emulate spending a resource. I would certainly support changing the rules to say that UMD can't emulate expending resources, but the RAW clearly allows it to do that.

Where does it say you can expend resources? The only quote says


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.

It doesn't say anything about expending, using, or any other action word used to definitively say an ability was used. "As if" is usually completely descriptive. He was dripping wet as if he jumped into a lake. Being dripping wet doesn't require actually jumping into a lake. In fact UMD actively refutes that a feature was used


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.

You don't USE the feature, you only PRETEND you HAVE the feature. You can pretend to have LoH all you want, but can't use it to fuel the cost of the item because you can't actually use the feature to get a healing pool. If you didn't have to sacrifice something you don't have, you could use the bracers all day.

[redking]

You don't USE the feature, you only PRETEND you HAVE the feature. You can pretend to have LoH all you want, but can't use it to fuel the cost of the item because you can't actually use the feature to get a healing pool. If you didn't have to sacrifice something you don't have, you could use the bracers all day.

Correct. It also doesn't say that the UMD user is given a real ability score or real caster level so as to set a DCs , damage, or caster levels. All emulation does is get you through the front door. After that it's your own ability scores, or alternatively the base caster level of an item like a staff.

Imagine the absurdity of melee weapon which is magically limited to users with a Strength of 25. These guys claim that if you use UMD to qualify to use the weapon, you are also granted a Strength score based on the outcome of the UMD check when using the weapon to attack. "Look at me, the weapon gave me 25 strength".

The elephant in the room is that their misunderstanding (lack of comprehension) of what is written in UMD is what is causing UMD to break. Weird that under one interpretation UMD works perfectly, is consistent, and leaves no questions unanswered, and their "interpretation" leads to all kinds of breaking, questions about how many uses of Turn Undead they should have (answer for them is same as cleric or unlimited), and so on.

Once it's accepted that you don't get to use any actual abilities using UMD, it makes sense. Same with monk's belt. It grants 5 levels higher. It can't grant 20 levels, no matter what your UMD check because UMD emulates, doesn't grant, levels. It's a fake ID, not a license to practice medicine.

[sleepyphoenixx]

You say that, but you have no proof that it does expend an attempt.
You want me to prove that turning undead expends turn undead uses? :smallconfused:

[Darg]

You want me to prove that turning undead expends turn undead uses? :smallconfused:

Considering the example in the PHB doesn't say they do: "when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead." The term "as if" is used to describe a possible comparison cause. It doesn't necessitate the use of turn undead, just the channeling of positive energy. "Lidda jumped around as if a rabbit." It doesn't mean Lidda was actually a rabbit. The point of the phrase is to invoke a mental image to describe what happened; not to tell you it actually happened.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Considering the example in the PHB doesn't say they do: "when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead." The term "as if" is used to describe a possible comparison cause. It doesn't necessitate the use of turn undead, just the channeling of positive energy. "Lidda jumped around as if a rabbit." It doesn't mean Lidda was actually a rabbit. The point of the phrase is to invoke a mental image to describe what happened; not to tell you it actually happened.

Channeling energy to turn undead expends a turn undead use. "Channeling energy" is turning or rebuking undead. They're the same thing.


Good clerics and paladins and some neutral clerics can channel
positive energy, which can halt, drive off (rout), or destroy undead

It's clearly an active action. It doesn't say "the ability to channel energy", it says "channeling energy", as in actually performing the act.

[Darg]

Channeling energy to turn undead expends a turn undead use. "Channeling energy" is turning or rebuking undead. They're the same thing.



It's clearly an active action. It doesn't say "the ability to channel energy", it says "channeling energy", as in actually performing the act.

We are talking about activating an item. Channeling energy as if turning undead does not imply there was an expenditure of an attempt. In fact it implies the opposite. Channeling energy to actually turn undead expends a use, but channeling energy and not turning undead is dubious that it expends a use. Channeling energy is not the same thing as turning or rebuking undead on a mechanical level. If it were, when activating the chalice it would actually use the turning ability and turn the undead around you.

[sleepyphoenixx]

We are talking about activating an item. Channeling energy as if turning undead does not imply there was an expenditure of an attempt. In fact it implies the opposite. Channeling energy to actually turn undead expends a use, but channeling energy and not turning undead is dubious that it expends a use. Channeling energy is not the same thing as turning or rebuking undead on a mechanical level. If it were, when activating the chalice it would actually use the turning ability and turn the undead around you.

So your argument is that a cleric can channel energy at-will as long as he's not using it to turn undead?

[redking]

So your argument is that a cleric can channel energy at-will as long as he's not using it to turn undead?

The point is that we have no idea what Lidda was actually doing. As a result, Lidda's emulation of turn undead did not appear in the Rules Compendium.

In any case, we know that Lidda cannot do that, since they cannot actually make use of any abilities. Once you accept this, UMD works perfectly and nothing weird happens. Which is the most likely scenario?

[Darg]

So your argument is that a cleric can channel energy at-will as long as he's not using it to turn undead?

If channeling energy is required to activate something and there is no requirement to actually expend an attempt, yes. If you have to expend a class feature, you are actually using that class feature and therefore can't be UMD'd because you can't actually use the feature.

[Gruftzwerg]

Imagine the absurdity of melee weapon which is magically limited to users with a Strength of 25. These guys claim that if you use UMD to qualify to use the weapon, you are also granted a Strength score based on the outcome of the UMD check when using the weapon to attack. "Look at me, the weapon gave me 25 strength".


1)
Sorry but I don't think such items exist in 3.5 and as such, assuming a virtual item that breaks the game is a weak argument against UMD. Unless you can present such an items, we lack precise mechanics to come to a real conclusion.

2)
Even if such an item would exist, it would be still questionable if the STR requirement is magical or mundane. If the weapon is so heavy (in its non magical version), UMD won't help you here at all. And I don't see why added Magic would imply a STR requirement. Sorry but your analytic logic failed to impress me here.
__________________

Back to the Belt:

Imho you are still misinterpreting the benefit the item gives. It doesn't add anything to your Unarmed Strike dmg, nor does it add anything to you AC bonus.

It looks up the values for a monk of five more level and gives em directly on the relevant target stats (Unarmed Strike dmg and AC). The benefit does not target the monk abilities. Those are sole relevant as input to determine the values the belt will give back in return.

To give you a better analogy example:
Let's say everybody who is older than 20 gets a gold coin for each year beyond that (21+). We use ID age checking devices (magic item) to verify the age:
a) a regular person (non UMD) of the age of 25 would get five coins.
b) a kid with a fake ID (UMD user) pretending to be 30 years old (UMD roll 50 - 20 = 30) would get 10 coins.

While the Belt effectively brings a normal user sole to the next "step" of those abilities, it's not what the real mechanics behind it do. The item looks up the scores of a monk of 5 lvl higher than you (pretend) and gives you these.

You are still confused that the item scales with monk abilities and the fact the the benefits don't target/improve those abilities. You are still claiming that the UMD user doesn't has the "monk ability". He doesn't need em.
A non monk non UMD user does not need those abilities to benefit from the effect of the belt. As such an UMD user doesn't need the abilities either to profit from the item.

And let me ask you this:
Do you have a problem with a UMD user using a 9th lvl scroll (clvl 17)?
I mean he is pretending to have the ability of a 17th lvl caster which is a very strong ability, but it is clearly an intentional use of the ability.
Now, where in your sense for balance does pretending to be a 17th or 20th lvl monk break that in comprehension?
UMD breaks class boundaries and enables you with the right magic items to do stuff that otherwise only other classes/races/... could do. That is the intention here. You pretend to be of X lvls of monk and the belt gives you values according to that.
If UMD can fuel a "Turn Undead" item by pretending to use that class feature, why would it prevent you from pretending to fuel the belt with the monk's "Unarmed Strike" and "AC bonus" features?
Because "UMD doesn't let you use those abilities" does not prevent this kind of use, since otherwise the Turn Undead example wouldn't work at all. Same can be said about using scrolls. UMD provides you with the ability to use the scroll. As you can see, the sentence you are referring to is not that almighty as you pretend it to be. As long as its part to activate the item "you can do it!". Its just that you can't do it outside of the item activation. See the fine difference here.


edit: Off topic @ sleepyphoenixx
Your avatar seems buggy to me. It causes the page tab to load for about 10-30 seconds (compared to 1-3 seconds normal). And when the page finally stops to load, only the text "sleepyphoenixx Avatar" appears instead of a picture.
Dunno if anybody else has this problem or if it is sole me? (Firefox latest build with a bunch of Addons here).

[Darg]

And let me ask you this:
Do you have a problem with a UMD user using a 9th lvl scroll (clvl 17)?
I mean he is pretending to have the ability of a 17th lvl caster which is a very strong ability, but it is clearly an intentional use of the ability.
Now, where in your sense for balance does pretending to be a 17th or 20th lvl monk break that in comprehension?

Possession and using an ability are two separate things. Just because something is a requirement, doesn't mean they are using that ability to use an item. Using a scroll only requires that the spell be on their class list and having the requisite ability score. They are not emulating caster level at all, it's just what the check DC is based on.


If UMD can fuel a "Turn Undead" item by pretending to use that class feature, why would it prevent you from pretending to fuel the belt with the monk's "Unarmed Strike" and "AC bonus" features?

because the belt doesn't require the feature to work. That's where the disconnect is coming into play. The belt has no requirement to function which is the basis for the UMD skill to come into play. Anyone can already use the belt.

Also, the chalice example doesn't require the use of turn undead, just the possession of the ability.


that you could not otherwise activate.

It's very self explanatory. If you can already use the item then you don't use the skill. 0+5 is equal to being given 5. As both benefits are as a 5th level monk and bonuses from the same source don't stack, they cancel each other out.

[redking]

1)
Sorry but I don't think such items exist in 3.5 and as such, assuming a virtual item that breaks the game is a weak argument against UMD. Unless you can present such an items, we lack precise mechanics to come to a real conclusion.

2)
Even if such an item would exist, it would be still questionable if the STR requirement is magical or mundane. If the weapon is so heavy (in its non magical version), UMD won't help you here at all. And I don't see why added Magic would imply a STR requirement. Sorry but your analytic logic failed to impress me here.



Emulate an Ability Score
To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard spells, Wisdom for divine spells, or Charisma for sorcerer or bard spells). Your effective ability score (appropriate to the class you’re emulating when you try to cast the spell from the scroll) is your Use Magic Device check result minus 15. If you already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability, you don’t need to make this check.

Although this references scrolls, there are people in this thread that claim that emulating an ability score, caster level and so on actually grants you that ability score or caster level, at least as it relates to that item. Ditto the stuff with the monk's belt.

UMD checks only give access to the device, not custom ability scores or caster levels.


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)

Some claim this gives you a caster level in relation to setting the caster level of the staff. They claim that by using this on a staff, they can get high caster levels based on UMD checks. Yet there is no indication whatsoever that is permitted. If you need to activate an item, you can use this feature. But you do not get any additional caster levels from it, only the caster level provided by the item. "It just lets you activate items as if you had that class feature". Not "it lets you activate items better than someone that actually has that class feature". People are inferring things from a wafer thin pretext, and it is neither RAW nor RAI.

In the same vein, monk's belt UMD doesn't allow you to arbitrarily set a level of monk so that you can take advantage of 20 levels worth of monk stuff. Even though you don't need to activate monk's belt, since there is no barrier to activation (just wear it), let's say you tried and spoofed a 15th monk class features. OK, the item believes you are 15th level monk and you are in the door. Since you don't really get to use any class features via UMD, the next thing is to calculate your real levels of monk plus 5. 0 + 5 = 5.

[Darg]

Some claim this gives you a caster level in relation to setting the caster level of the staff. They claim that by using this on a staff, they can get high caster levels based on UMD checks. Yet there is no indication whatsoever that is permitted. If you need to activate an item, you can use this feature. But you do not get any additional caster levels from it, only the caster level provided by the item. "It just lets you activate items as if you had that class feature". Not "it lets you activate items better than someone that actually has that class feature". People are inferring things from a wafer thin pretext, and it is neither RAW nor RAI.

UMD specifically says you use the "use a wand" check for spell trigger items like staves. So, it's impossible to use UMD to abuse caster level for staves even with a liberal reading. Of course one can ignore the text in front of them, but that isn't reading.

[Gruftzwerg]

Possession and using an ability are two separate things. Just because something is a requirement, doesn't mean they are using that ability to use an item. Using a scroll only requires that the spell be on their class list and having the requisite ability score. They are not emulating caster level at all, it's just what the check DC is based on.



because the belt doesn't require the feature to work. That's where the disconnect is coming into play. The belt has no requirement to function which is the basis for the UMD skill to come into play. Anyone can already use the belt.

Also, the chalice example doesn't require the use of turn undead, just the possession of the ability.



It's very self explanatory. If you can already use the item then you don't use the skill. 0+5 is equal to being given 5. As both benefits are as a 5th level monk and bonuses from the same source don't stack, they cancel each other out.
UMD Scrolls:
Can you provide any Rule why the scrolls DC should be the minimum possible? The general rules for using scrolls uses your total effective ability modifier. They don't care if you have that ability modifier naturally, or with magic items/buffs, or via UMD emulation. Unless you can show any UMD rule that enforces the use of the minimum ability modifier for some reason, you have to use the full emulated ability modifier for the scrolls DC.


UMD Monk's Belt:
The Monk's Belt doesn't need to require those features. You can UMD as soon as you can produce different results with it:

Check

You can use this skill to read a spell or to activate a magic item. Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.

You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand. If you are using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner, you need to make the relevant Use Magic Device check once per hour.

You must consciously choose which requirement to emulate. That is, you must know what you are trying to emulate when you make a Use Magic Device check for that purpose. The DCs for various tasks involving Use Magic Device checks are summarized on the table below.
UMD does not demand requirements to be usable. You just decide what you wanna emulate and make the roll(s).
To give you an example, you could UMD a wand of Alter Self to pretend to be another race (and thus type). Alter Self doesn't have any race requirements, but works different depending on your race/type. Perfect for UMD abuse.
I have provided this argument multiple times now. Would be nice if it wouldn't get ignored.
Thus, we can pretend to have monk class features to get other/better results. This is the (maybe overpowered; not arguing about that here) intentional design of UMD.


Although this references scrolls, there are people in this thread that claim that emulating an ability score, caster level and so on actually grants you that ability score or caster level, at least as it relates to that item. Ditto the stuff with the monk's belt.

UMD checks only give access to the device, not custom ability scores or caster levels.



Some claim this gives you a caster level in relation to setting the caster level of the staff. They claim that by using this on a staff, they can get high caster levels based on UMD checks. Yet there is no indication whatsoever that is permitted. If you need to activate an item, you can use this feature. But you do not get any additional caster levels from it, only the caster level provided by the item. "It just lets you activate items as if you had that class feature". Not "it lets you activate items better than someone that actually has that class feature". People are inferring things from a wafer thin pretext, and it is neither RAW nor RAI.

In the same vein, monk's belt UMD doesn't allow you to arbitrarily set a level of monk so that you can take advantage of 20 levels worth of monk stuff. Even though you don't need to activate monk's belt, since there is no barrier to activation (just wear it), let's say you tried and spoofed a 15th monk class features. OK, the item believes you are 15th level monk and you are in the door. Since you don't really get to use any class features via UMD, the next thing is to calculate your real levels of monk plus 5. 0 + 5 = 5.

UMD scrolls:
see above

"UMD checks only give access to the item":
And the items produces an effect according to the stuff you have emulated. I repeat the same thing as I said to Darg: Can you provide any rule text that supersedes the general rules? If not, stick to the general rules how the effect of the item scales/varies with the things you effectively emulate. If you emulate an ability score for the item, the item provides an effect with the strength of that modifier (unless you can provide rules that say otherwise as said).

UMD Staffs:
We have the permission to UMD Staffs like we can UMD wands. And as I mentioned above, you are always free to UMD if it produces different results. If the magic item scales with your ability score, we can emulate an ability score of a UMD-15 roll. No rule tells you to only use the minimal ability score for the effect of an staff. The general rules make use of your full ability modifier. Thus the emulated ability score determines the strength of the effect as it is normal for using staff.

UMD Monk's Belt:
see above.

-----
You are pretending as if it would be to easy to achieve those required UMD roll on a reliable base. And even if you have enough ranks and buffs for UMD, you still have to deal with a 5% chance (either per use or per h) to be unable to use the item for the next 24h (not next day, 24 hours!). Warlocks may have an edge here with their take 10 ability, but that a feature/problem of the warlock and not UMD overall.
Sure you can make UMD very strong, if you dedicate a high amount of character resources to it. And that justifies it to some degree. You can get into tier 3 power level with some UMD investment. And with a totally focused build you can get into T1-T2 range maybe. But a UMD user is still something a DM can easily control. He can limit the accessibility of items or even limit downtimes (for crafting). Thus, a real T1 character build is still stronger than UMD (in most chases. We ignore TO here,because it is TO..^^).

[redking]

UMD Scrolls:
Can you provide any Rule why the scrolls DC should be the minimum possible? The general rules for using scrolls uses your total effective ability modifier. They don't care if you have that ability modifier naturally, or with magic items/buffs, or via UMD emulation. Unless you can show any UMD rule that enforces the use of the minimum ability modifier for some reason, you have to use the full emulated ability modifier for the scrolls DC.

Please pay attention to the parts in bold in particular. Try to understand the paragraph as a whole, rather than isolating bits and pieces.


Emulate an Ability Score
To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard spells, Wisdom for divine spells, or Charisma for sorcerer or bard spells). Your effective ability score (appropriate to the class you’re emulating when you try to cast the spell from the scroll) is your Use Magic Device check result minus 15. If you already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability, you don’t need to make this check.

This function of UMD let's you meet the requirements for an ability score for casting a spell from a scroll. You don't get the ability score, you get an effective ability score to meet the requirements. If you already have a high enough ability score, you don't need to make the check because there are no additional benefits. For example, if you are trying to cast a 9th level spell off a scroll and you are trying to meet the minimum ability score, you need a UMD of at least 34 (34 - 15 = 19). Now you have the ability to cast the spell from the scroll. But you don't get any ability scores from that. If the spell DC of a spell cast by a scroll is modified by a relevant ability score, it is modified by your own score, not the UMD check result that qualified you to cast it. Note that UMD says nothing about using a UMD check for creating mock ability score that can be used, and doesn't even imply it.


UMD Monk's Belt:
The Monk's Belt doesn't need to require those features. You can UMD as soon as you can produce different results with it:

UMD does not demand requirements to be usable. You just decide what you wanna emulate and make the roll(s).
To give you an example, you could UMD a wand of Alter Self to pretend to be another race (and thus type). Alter Self doesn't have any race requirements, but works different depending on your race/type. Perfect for UMD abuse.
I have provided this argument multiple times now. Would be nice if it wouldn't get ignored.
Thus, we can pretend to have monk class features to get other/better results. This is the (maybe overpowered; not arguing about that here) intentional design of UMD.

Thank you for this. You are taking what Sleepy and Random upthread refuse to to take to it's logical conclusion.

No, UMD can't do this nor can the item of Alter Self. You emulate a race to activate (the abilities of) an item, but you yourself are not that race. I gave a very similar example following the same principle that you could use UMD to emulate an Artificer, and thereby gain huge benefits from items reserved for high level Artificers. Of course, the exploit doesn't work because it is based on a misunderstanding.


"UMD checks only give access to the item":
And the items produces an effect according to the stuff you have emulated. I repeat the same thing as I said to Darg: Can you provide any rule text that supersedes the general rules? If not, stick to the general rules how the effect of the item scales/varies with the things you effectively emulate. If you emulate an ability score for the item, the item provides an effect with the strength of that modifier (unless you can provide rules that say otherwise as said).check.

Answered above. You don't have the ability score and can't make use of it. You emulate an ability score to use the item.


UMD Staffs:
We have the permission to UMD Staffs like we can UMD wands. And as I mentioned above, you are always free to UMD if it produces different results. If the magic item scales with your ability score, we can emulate an ability score of a UMD-15 roll. No rule tells you to only use the minimal ability score for the effect of an staff. The general rules make use of your full ability modifier. Thus the emulated ability score determines the strength of the effect as it is normal for using staff.

UMD just lets you activate the item. It doesn't give you secondary abilities, like ability scores or caster levels or class features.


You are pretending as if it would be to easy to achieve those required UMD roll on a reliable base.

I am not bothered by UMD being overpowered, because when properly understood, it works perfectly well. Cool, interesting and not broken at all.

[Darg]

UMD Scrolls:
Can you provide any Rule why the scrolls DC should be the minimum possible? The general rules for using scrolls uses your total effective ability modifier. They don't care if you have that ability modifier naturally, or with magic items/buffs, or via UMD emulation. Unless you can show any UMD rule that enforces the use of the minimum ability modifier for some reason, you have to use the full emulated ability modifier for the scrolls DC.

The rules say that the DC is 20 plus the caster level of the spell in the scroll. If that scroll of invisibility is created with a caster level of 15 you need to beat a DC of 35, not 23.


UMD Monk's Belt:
The Monk's Belt doesn't need to require those features. You can UMD as soon as you can produce different results with it:

UMD does not demand requirements to be usable. You just decide what you wanna emulate and make the roll(s).
To give you an example, you could UMD a wand of Alter Self to pretend to be another race (and thus type). Alter Self doesn't have any race requirements, but works different depending on your race/type. Perfect for UMD abuse.
I have provided this argument multiple times now. Would be nice if it wouldn't get ignored.
Thus, we can pretend to have monk class features to get other/better results. This is the (maybe overpowered; not arguing about that here) intentional design of UMD.

UMD does say, "Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate." The stated purpose of the skill is to use things you don't already have the ability to use. And you can already use the monk's belt because it has no requirement to fully benefit, other than the feat of course. That means you simply don't use the skill.


UMD Staffs:
We have the permission to UMD Staffs like we can UMD wands. And as I mentioned above, you are always free to UMD if it produces different results. If the magic item scales with your ability score, we can emulate an ability score of a UMD-15 roll. No rule tells you to only use the minimal ability score for the effect of an staff. The general rules make use of your full ability modifier. Thus the emulated ability score determines the strength of the effect as it is normal for using staff.

Using UMD on a staff doesn't have you emulate an ability score.


Use a Wand: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill also applies to other spell trigger magic items, such as staffs. The Dungeon Master’s Guide has more information on such items.

Nothing there. You don't emulate an ability score for a staff because A) it doesn't tell you to and B) the skill doesn't actually give you the ability score.


You are pretending as if it would be to easy to achieve those required UMD roll on a reliable base. And even if you have enough ranks and buffs for UMD, you still have to deal with a 5% chance (either per use or per h) to be unable to use the item for the next 24h (not next day, 24 hours!). Warlocks may have an edge here with their take 10 ability, but that a feature/problem of the warlock and not UMD overall.
Sure you can make UMD very strong, if you dedicate a high amount of character resources to it. And that justifies it to some degree. You can get into tier 3 power level with some UMD investment. And with a totally focused build you can get into T1-T2 range maybe. But a UMD user is still something a DM can easily control. He can limit the accessibility of items or even limit downtimes (for crafting). Thus, a real T1 character build is still stronger than UMD (in most chases. We ignore TO here,because it is TO..^^).

It's not about how hard or easy it is to abuse, it's just thinking about it reasonably. It's reasonable to assume that an item gives a fixed benefit. That unless the item gives permission otherwise, a skill roll will not change the outcome of the item. Consistency breeds credibility. The combo of monk's belt and UMD to provide a variable benefit is not consistent with any other magic item and breaks the magic item economy. Both of those reasons make it so incredibly unlikely that this was the intended outcome.

[Gruftzwerg]

Please pay attention to the parts in bold in particular. Try to understand the paragraph as a whole, rather than isolating bits and pieces.



This function of UMD let's you meet the requirements for an ability score for casting a spell from a scroll. You don't get the ability score, you get an effective ability score to meet the requirements. If you already have a high enough ability score, you don't need to make the check because there are no additional benefits. For example, if you are trying to cast a 9th level spell off a scroll and you are trying to meet the minimum ability score, you need a UMD of at least 34 (34 - 15 = 19). Now you have the ability to cast the spell from the scroll. But you don't get any ability scores from that. If the spell DC of a spell cast by a scroll is modified by a relevant ability score, it is modified by your own score, not the UMD check result that qualified you to cast it. Note that UMD says nothing about using a UMD check for creating mock ability score that can be used, and doesn't even imply it.
I did read the bold part and I do not see any problems with my humble interpretation of RAW. Since your opinion seems to wary here from mine, I can only say what the bold stuff say/does imho:

1: "To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability ... when you try to cast the spell from the scroll"
Repeats the general rules for using scrolls. Nothing new here

2: "If you already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability, you don’t need to make this check."
You don't need to roll for it if you ability score is high enough. Just because you don't need to, doesn't take the option given in the general rules for UMD that you still can if you want. You can roll for UMD if you want and decide for what (aspect of UMD) you wanna roll. No requirements needed and its an act of free will, nothing more, nothing less.
"don't need" != "may not"
You are either seeing restrictions here that are not there or forget more general UMD rules.



Thank you for this. You are taking what Sleepy and Random upthread refuse to to take to it's logical conclusion.

No, UMD can't do this nor can the item of Alter Self. You emulate a race to activate (the abilities of) an item, but you yourself are not that race. I gave a very similar example following the same principle that you could use UMD to emulate an Artificer, and thereby gain huge benefits from items reserved for high level Artificers. Of course, the exploit doesn't work because it is based on a misunderstanding.

...
...
I guess now I get where you are struggling here.

You miss the fine difference that:
"You emulate a race to activate (the abilities of) an item and produce an effect as if you where that race"
"You activate an item and produce an effect as if you would use Turn Undead"
"You activate an item and produce an effect as if you would be "evil"

UMD is not sole "activating an item as if would be using an ability or having a stat that you don't have", it "activates an item as if would be using an ability or having a stat that you don't have, and produces an effect as if you would had that ability/stat/whatsoever".

If you pretend to be "evil" to use an evil item that hurts "non-evil-people" who try to use it, you don't get hurt. Because the item works as if you would be "evil" (what you emulated with UMD). It doesn't say, "Sorry, you activated the item but you are still not evil".

Finally, if you activate a scroll and fake you Ability Score, the scroll produces an effect as if you would had that emulated ability score. Anything else doesn't follow the pattern presented in the examples.



The rules say that the DC is 20 plus the caster level of the spell in the scroll. If that scroll of invisibility is created with a caster level of 15 you need to beat a DC of 35, not 23.
Sorry I guess that was a bit misleading. I meant the "DC for the Spell" from the Scroll here and not the UMD DC to activate the scroll. My bad, but I hope you now get what I meant there.




UMD does say, "Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate." The stated purpose of the skill is to use things you don't already have the ability to use. And you can already use the monk's belt because it has no requirement to fully benefit, other than the feat of course. That means you simply don't use the skill.

...
..
Regarding the part I did bold out:
I have already provided (multiple times..) that this is not the case! You are either misremembering the general UMD rules here or forget to apply the Primary Source Rule (that the general UMD rules still apply to the examples, since none of em explicitly denies the general rules about how and when you can use UMD):

Use this skill to activate magic
Check

You can use this skill to read a spell or to activate a magic item. Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.

You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand. If you are using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner, you need to make the relevant Use Magic Device check once per hour.

You must consciously choose which requirement to emulate. That is, you must know what you are trying to emulate when you make a Use Magic Device check for that purpose. The DCs for various tasks involving Use Magic Device checks are summarized on the table below.

Nowhere does UMD talk about the item requiring something. It does talk about how you pretend to have or do something and that the items produces an effect as if you would have that stat or have used that abiltiy or whatsoever..

You can FREELY DECIDE WHEN AND FOR WHAT YOU CAN USE "UMD"!
(sorry but I am repeating this multiple times now and it gets ignored. Hopefully you won't miss it now) ;)

You could even make an UMD roll for a Longsword + 3 that you are a monk of effectively 28th lvl. It won't change the outcome in for using the Longsword in this overexaggerated example, but UMD doesn't stop you from doing this.

Thus, when activating a magic item, I can pretend to have an Ability Score if I want (UMD scroll) and I can pretend to have monk levels if I want (Monk's Belt). If I want to pretend to have an abiltiy score of X for activating a Staff, UMD allows it.

UMD allows this and the different examples how UMD can be used don't limit the general rule in any way.






It's not about how hard or easy it is to abuse, it's just thinking about it reasonably. It's reasonable to assume that an item gives a fixed benefit. That unless the item gives permission otherwise, a skill roll will not change the outcome of the item. Consistency breeds credibility. The combo of monk's belt and UMD to provide a variable benefit is not consistent with any other magic item and breaks the magic item economy. Both of those reasons make it so incredibly unlikely that this was the intended outcome.
While I get that a reasonable outcome is preferable, RAW is not always reasonable (from a common sense perspective).
Further, I disagree that the UMD + Monk's Belt combo is an unintended outcome. For me the interaction is clear. And the investment needed to get UMD that high, together with the 5% fail chance every hour that prevents further use for 24h ,justifies the power.

Imho UMD is intended as tool primary to help mundane classes to compete with spellcasting classes (T1-T2).
And as with everything else you take in a 3.5 build to the extreme (optimization), UMD can become pretty powerful and even shine in some "niches" when you build around it. And that is imho to be expected for an optimized "magic user" build in 3.5.

[Nelfin]

From my understanding, the major contention between

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.
and the other part of the Use Magic Device skill description is

what takes precedence over what?

since the general skill description and the check description are contradictory (at least for the Monk's belt):
1. If the general skill description has precedence, then the Monk's Belt cannot be emulated at all. Well, I guess someone could always argue that if you are not a monk, you cannot fully activate the belt but that's not Rules As Written from my perspective;
2. If the Check description has precedence, then the monk's belt can be UMD.

Is there something that says that the skill description is just some fluff and should not be considered mechanically? Shouldn't the general skill description be taken as to when to make a check, that is itself described in the check description?

The skill description PHG, p 66 says

The skill name line is followed by a general description of what using the skill represents. After the description are a few other types of information:
Check: What a character (“you” in the skill description) can do
with a successful skill check and the check’s DC.
The check description part seems to be less important to me than the general description in view that it is another type of information.

[bekeleven]

The "Emulate a Class Feature" rules state that you can use Check - 20 to emulate a class feature in order to activate a magic item you can not otherwise activate: "Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item. In this case..."

The short, vague blurb at the start of the description states in generalities that you can use it to emulate "class features of another class."

Where are the rules explaining how you do so, when the class feature is not required to activate the item? I don't see them in the general overview section, the Activate Blindly section, Decipher a Written Spell, Emulate and Ability Score, Emulate an Alignment, Emulate a Race, Use a Scroll, or Use a Wand. Nor do I see them under Action, Try Again, Special, or Synergy.

[Nelfin]

My point is what do you cares about how to make a roll (and its results) when you don't make a roll at all? Someone already brought that point. So I guess the question is still pendant: should the general skill description be looked at? (Edit: I mean in a RAW sense).

[sleepyphoenixx]

So I guess the question is still pendant: should the general skill description be looked at? (Edit: I mean in a RAW sense).

If you're basing an argument on exact wording ignoring half the skill description because it doesn't fit your interpretation generally isn't very convincing.
Same goes for the examples in the PHB.

[Nelfin]

I mean:
if condition
some long description
In some cases, yes you discard long description. Now it was a question: "should the general skill description be looked at?" Or is it just some fluff description?

[Darg]

"You activate an item and produce an effect as if you would use Turn Undead"

UMD is not sole "activating an item as if would be using an ability or having a stat that you don't have", it "activates an item as if would be using an ability or having a stat that you don't have, and produces an effect as if you would had that ability/stat/whatsoever".

I have already provided (multiple times..) that this is not the case! You are either misremembering the general UMD rules here or forget to apply the Primary Source Rule (that the general UMD rules still apply to the examples, since none of em explicitly denies the general rules about how and when you can use UMD):

Nowhere does UMD talk about the item requiring something. It does talk about how you pretend to have or do something and that the items produces an effect as if you would have that stat or have used that abiltiy or whatsoever..

You can FREELY DECIDE WHEN AND FOR WHAT YOU CAN USE "UMD"!
(sorry but I am repeating this multiple times now and it gets ignored. Hopefully you won't miss it now) ;)

You could even make an UMD roll for a Longsword + 3 that you are a monk of effectively 28th lvl. It won't change the outcome in for using the Longsword in this overexaggerated example, but UMD doesn't stop you from doing this.


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.

The rules are specifically only allowing you to emulate a class feature when you need it to activate an item. Even if you don't believe that is the case, the bolded words "in this case" preclude any scenario other than "need to use a class feature to activate a magic item" to have an effective level. You don't need to emulate a class feature to activate any part of the monk's belt. Specific beats general here. The general check rules must bow to the specific conditions of a specific check. So no, you can't use the skill to randomly pretend to be a monk to use a +3 longsword.


If you're basing an argument on exact wording ignoring half the skill description because it doesn't fit your interpretation generally isn't very convincing.
Same goes for the examples in the PHB.

And ignoring the conditions presented at the beginning of the check type because it doesn't fit your interpretation generally isn't very convincing either.


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.

The words "In this case" are very specifically referring to the condition of "need to use a class feature to activate a magic item" because that is how english works. One can't ignore the preceding sentence when none of the rules give permission to ignore it. You don't need monk features to activate the belt, any part of it either. Nor does the check allow you to pretend to have the feature to have the item "work better." The rules are permissive. You can't take the condition of emulating a race and apply it to emulating a class feature.

[sleepyphoenixx]

And ignoring the conditions presented at the beginning of the check type because it doesn't fit your interpretation generally isn't very convincing either.


Your interpretation that you can only use UMD when you couldn't use the item otherwise is directly contradicted twice - both by the text under "check" and by the examples in the PHB.
As both Gruftzwerg and i have pointed out, multiple times.

It simply doesn't work that way unless you ignore half the text.

[Darg]

Your interpretation that you can only use UMD when you couldn't use the item otherwise is directly contradicted twice - both by the text under "check" and by the examples in the PHB.
As both Gruftzwerg and i have pointed out, multiple times.

It simply doesn't work that way unless you ignore half the text.

You say it's contradicted twice, and yet it is confirmed twice. I literally quoted them both in this thread, multiple times. Your interpretation simply does not work unless you ignore the conditions presented within the check types themselves and in the ability plain text.

You have only pointed to the early UMD text as if it could not be limited further in scope when it is in fact further limited in scope when one arrives to the check types. Earlier you posited that the conditions for emulating a race apply to emulating a class feature. The syntax of how the rules were written completely contradict that. You only emulate an ability score when are casting from a scroll. You only emulate an alignment when an item has a positive or negative effect based on alignment. You only emulate a race when an item works only for members of certain races, or works better for members of those races. As such, you only emulate a class feature when a class feature is needed to activate an item.

[redking]

It simply doesn't work that way unless you ignore half the text.

You don't think it's at all odd that under your interpretation, UMD has all kinds of strange interactions, whereas under mine (and Darg's), UMD works perfectly.

Since you mentioned Gruftzwerg, I trust that you agree with him that UMD allows racial emulation of an outsider for an item of Alter Self, and that this confers the ability to Alter Self as an outsider. And also that UMD can allow a character to use Artificer class features like metamagic spell trigger, by emulating that class feature and using on a relevant magic item.

UMD isn't broken, only your interpretation of it. It's actually very straightforward.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Since you mentioned Gruftzwerg, I trust that you agree with him that UMD allows racial emulation of an outsider for an item of Alter Self, and that this confers the ability to Alter Self as an outsider. And also that UMD can allow a character to use Artificer class features like metamagic spell trigger, by emulating that class feature and using on a relevant magic item.


Stop putting words in my mouth. I have repeatedly explained why UMD does not let you do those things and how they're different from emulating a Monk's Belt.
I don't mind disagreement, but if you can't be bothered to argue in good faith i'm simply going to ignore you from now on.

[redking]

Stop putting words in my mouth. I have repeatedly explained why UMD does not let you do those things and how they're different from emulating a Monk's Belt.

They are the same thing in principle, which makes Gruftzwerg erroneous but consistent. Gruftzwerg uses the exact same rationale as you, and comes to the logical conclusion based on it.


I don't mind disagreement, but if you can't be bothered to argue in good faith i'm simply going to ignore you from now on.

You could have just said no and that you don't agree with Gruftzwerg despite him having the same rationale as you.

So basically what you are saying is that monk's belt is unique in the entire game, and UMD interacts with monk's belt in a way different to every other magical item. Is that right?

[sleepyphoenixx]

They are the same thing in principle, which makes Gruftzwerg erroneous but consistent. Gruftzwerg uses the exact same rationale as you, and comes to the logical conclusion based on it.



You could have just said no and that you don't agree with Gruftzwerg despite him having the same rationale as you.

So basically what you are saying is that monk's belt is unique in the entire game, and UMD interacts with monk's belt in a way different to every other magical item. Is that right?

I explained all of that - multiple times - a few pages back. Read it or don't, but there's no point in repeating myself here.

[Nelfin]

Another one.
Caduceus bracers allow you to convert your innate healing powers into other forms of restorative magic. By sacrificing 5 points of healing (derived from lay on hands, wholeness of body, or any similar ability that measures your ability to heal as a daily limit of points), you can remove 1 point of ability damage or remove the dazed, fatigued, or sickened condition from one creature. Using these bracers in this manner follows all the normal limitations of your healing ability.

For example, a paladin using caduceus bracers must touch the target to be affected (just as with lay on hands), while a monk wearing these bracers can affect only herself (since she can’t use wholeness of body on another creature). You can spend extra points for cumulative effect, For example, you could spend 15 points of healing to remove both the fatigued condition and 2 points of ability damage.

You can also combine normal healing with the bracers’ effect. For instance, you could spend 25 points to produce the effects in the previous example and heal 10 points of damage as well.
Shouldn't the Cadeus bracers be emulable? Unlike the Monk's belt for which it is not so clear that a roll is allowed at all, you need a class feature to activate these bracers so a UMD should be allowed. As I understand the UMD class feature emulation, it let you use a class feature with a level given by (roll - 20) for the sole purpose of activating the Cadeus bracers. Why are you saying that it is not emulable?

I am not interested here about what silly thing you can get out my reading.

[Darg]

Shouldn't the Cadeus bracers be emulable? Unlike the Monk's belt for which it is not so clear that a roll is allowed at all, you need a class feature to activate these bracers so a UMD should be allowed. As I understand the UMD class feature emulation, it let you use a class feature with a level given by (roll - 20) for the sole purpose of activating the Cadeus bracers. Why are you saying that it is not emulable?

I am not interested here about what silly thing you can get out my reading.

Well, using the bracers require sacrificing something you don't have. Even if we ignore the UMD debate at the moment, it doesn't make logical sense for the bracers to work. The bracers normally require you to give up something to power its abilities. Saying UMD allows you to bypass that is like saying you smashed two rocks together to create a perpetual motion machine. Even if one believes by RAW one can use UMD in this fashion, sometimes one has to use some common sense. It's a lot like the carry weight rules. By RAW you can carry anything up to your weight limit like having a video game inventory. Unlike a video game, the rpg is trying to emulate reality to an extent so common sense is that you can't actually fight and move like normal when carrying a volume 4 times your size in your hands.

Going back to the RAW debate, a reading can also be that you can use the item and you use it like a paladin. You just don't have any healing to sacrifice because you don't actually have the feature. There is a lot of RAW silliness that exists because words on a page can have multiple different ways to be read. One of the most egregious cases of this is how WotC uses the word "any" as in certain contexts it can be read to mean the exact opposite of what was intended. Most of the time our brains fill in for the likely intention without us even really being aware. However, not everyone is the same and they believe the likely outcome is for it to break convention and logical flow of the setting by focusing solely on the mechanics.

Is either side correct? That's for the DM to decide how they want the game to be played. Do they want their players to have extremely cheap items that have the potential to scale infinitely with infinite uses? Or, do they want a realistic understanding of the mechanics with logical outcomes?

[redking]

Shouldn't the Cadeus bracers be emulable? Unlike the Monk's belt for which it is not so clear that a roll is allowed at all, you need a class feature to activate these bracers so a UMD should be allowed. As I understand the UMD class feature emulation, it let you use a class feature with a level given by (roll - 20) for the sole purpose of activating the Cadeus bracers. Why are you saying that it is not emulable?

Well, what does UMD say about this?


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 Caduceus bracers required only the class feature to be emulated passively, that is, you have lay on hands therefore you can use the item, no problem. But in this case, to use Caduceus bracers, you must "actually use the class feature of another class", which is a no no.

Here's the thing. If we take your reading, UMD breaks in all kinds of places, like staffs. But there is no direct information in UMD that allows for any of that, only deductive logic.

The alternative reading is sticking firmly to this skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class. When you don't that, UMD works perfectly without any need for houseruling or conjecture.

[Gruftzwerg]

The rules are specifically only allowing you to emulate a class feature when you need it to activate an item. Even if you don't believe that is the case, the bolded words "in this case" preclude any scenario other than "need to use a class feature to activate a magic item" to have an effective level. You don't need to emulate a class feature to activate any part of the monk's belt. Specific beats general here. The general check rules must bow to the specific conditions of a specific check. So no, you can't use the skill to randomly pretend to be a monk to use a +3 longsword.

Imho "Emulate a Class Feature: Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item." indicates a non-exclusive example. And in that specific example it is a requirement.

Now comes the Primary Source Rule joker (sry, but I just woke up and my jokes are in bad mood^^)
The general rules that are set in "Check" aren't changed. There is no explicit call out that "you can't UMD when you want anymore for using this aspect of UMD". Thus, it still obeys the general rules set in "Check".

Rules Compendium even added further examples of use (without any changes to the original examples wording) , which imho is a strong indicator the roll example are just the most common examples and non-exclusive.



You don't think it's at all odd that under your interpretation, UMD has all kinds of strange interactions, whereas under mine (and Darg's), UMD works perfectly.

Since you mentioned Gruftzwerg, I trust that you agree with him that UMD allows racial emulation of an outsider for an item of Alter Self, and that this confers the ability to Alter Self as an outsider. And also that UMD can allow a character to use Artificer class features like metamagic spell trigger, by emulating that class feature and using on a relevant magic item.

UMD isn't broken, only your interpretation of it. It's actually very straightforward.

Wait, I sole said half of that. You are still under a misconception about my interpretation here. And it is a very important distinction here. I hope I can showcase the difference between the 2 examples here to clear up the misunderstanding ;)

Alter Self:
When I UMD a race for an Alter Self wand, the wand's magic works accordingly to that input and produces an effect in the normally available effect range of that item.

UMD Artificer for a magic item:
As I said earlier, you can always UMD if you want. But that doesn't always mean that it changes the outcome. Artificer abilities alter the effect of the item and produce different results then normally possible for that item. UMD doesn't allow you to "use" the class features of a class. The Artifices abilities that affect magic items produce a different effect due to that ability and not because of the magic item. But UMD only gives you access to effect that a magic item (source) can produce. You don't get the effects of the emulated ability (unless it is explicit part of the magic items effect, like with the Monk's Belt's AC bonus and the Wild Shape Amulet's Wild Shape ability).
You would need to find Artificer specific items that work different or sole for em (because of the magic item and not because of Artificer class features being used). UMD is overpowered but not that much overpowered. To much is to much ;)

_____
PS: Sorry for my infrequent responses lately, but I'm still short on forum time these days.. And I like to take my time with these discussion not to respond to hasty. I mean, I wanna make sure I take my time to read your arguments and think about them before I respond. So, don't heat up the discussion to much in my absence.. that's just more to read when I come back.. ^^

[Nelfin]

@Darg @redking

Well, I totally agree with semantics and common sense. That's why I added at the end of my post something about disregarding the impacts of the reading.

About that, "This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class." can be read as a reminder that the effect of UMD only applies when trying to activate a magic item. Your reading is that it applies also when trying to activate an item. I can see why there is a difference here and the potential consequences that that has.

Now applying common sense, I find it makes more sense that you can "bluff" the item to be something or to have something, but... yeah bluffing to provide a resource you don't have... Basically meaning that an item that needs an external resource to produce its effects cannot be emulated. That seems quite normal.

The difficulty about this reading is the example given in the PHB about that calice that was already brought up by the way. Given the description I would say that this calice does not seem to have the power to transform water into holy water by itself, lacking the positive energy. The channeling positive energy seems to be the resource needed and does not seem to be only a key to unlock the calice ability. Even if the "channeling positive energy" is interpreted as a way to check that the user is legitimate, it would still require a positive energy resource to be used.

I don't know if there are any other example in the numerous books, especially a negative example as in "you can't emulate this item", that could make things clearer. Do you have some (other) examples of item that can not be emulated with your reading? And does it still leave items that can be emulated that would need having a class feature without using it? (Remember, I have a low knowledge of DnD).

Also, maybe I dreamed it because I can't find it back, but I was sure I read something about "abilities derived from class features are class features".

@Gruftzwerg

Your interpretation about "you can't UMD when you want anymore for using this aspect of UMD" is really weird to me. If I understand well, what you are saying is that even when a roll is not needed, you can still roll because it is not compulsory to roll but it is not forbidden.

I don't know if such an effect exists, but let's say you are under an effect that gives a malus to your next save. Under your interpretation, you can still make a save roll because nothing formally forbids that, negating the malus at no cost. That would be weird. What I think about the "you don't need to roll" part of the UMD description is that it is a figure of speech for "just don't roll".

Concerning,

Imho "Emulate a Class Feature: Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item." indicates a non-exclusive example. And in that specific example it is a requirement.
it is not so clear that there is any requirement at all to use the belt. There is "you are a monk" case and the "you are not a monk" case. There is no other alternative. Whatever you are, one of its power is activated the moment you don it and a user can never benefit from both the abilities of the belt. That's why I think that there is no requirement at all for the belt.

I was thinking about something while typing, but I forgot...

Ah, yes about the general skill description that nobody seems to care about when talking RAW. That's also weird to me. During a game, the player will say "I try to use the Cadeus bracers" and, hopefully, not "I make an emulate class feature check". I mean that there is a need for a descriptive text that should tell you to what the skill applies to because this is a role playing game and not an Excel sheet. Really, that's weird to me that the "Check" part seems to be the only thing that matters.

Edit: and I have no idea about the difference you are trying to explain.

[Zanos]

If the Caduceus bracers required only the class feature to be emulated passively, that is, you have lay on hands therefore you can use the item, no problem. But in this case, to use Caduceus bracers, you must "actually use the class feature of another class", which is a no no.
The SRD cuts it out but the actual book includes an example of using umd on an item that normally requires expending turn undead attempts to activate.

[redking]

The SRD cuts it out but the actual book includes an example of using umd on an item that normally requires expending turn undead attempts to activate.

The infamous Lidda. It's been mentioned in this thread (including by me) a number of times. Here it is.


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 she 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.

If we want to be pedantic about it, it doesn't say that Lidda expends a use of turn undead, just that she emulates the class ability. Lidda never made it into the Rules Compendium.

We get more clarification on the next paragraph -


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 you follow UMD to the letter and do not use deductive reasoning (for example, assuming your check to emulate an ability score to activate an item actually grants you an ability score when using the item), UMD works just fine. Otherwise all kinds of weird things happen with UMD, people complain about the skill being broken and so on.

[Zanos]

She doesn't expend a use, but she does emulate the ability to expend a use. The criteria for activating the item in the example is to "channel positive energy, as though turning undead", which would include expending an attempt.

I think it's pretty clear from that example that its intended that UMD works with items that requires class features to be expended. I'd agree she doesn't actually have turn undead, of course.

[Gruftzwerg]

@Gruftzwerg

Your interpretation about "you can't UMD when you want anymore for using this aspect of UMD" is really weird to me. If I understand well, what you are saying is that even when a roll is not needed, you can still roll because it is not compulsory to roll but it is not forbidden.
What I meant there is that the sentence is not part of "emulating a class feature". It would be needed to suppress the general rules in "Check". And those general rules allow you to "UMD when you want". Just mentioning an example that is restricted (due to requirements) ain't a rule that enforces the restriction on all possible examples.
"You don't need to roll" doesn't equal to "You can't roll". You just don't have to, but that still doesn't stop you from doing so, since the general rules in "Check" aren't suppressed in any way so far.




Concerning,

it is not so clear that there is any requirement at all to use the belt. There is "you are a monk" case and the "you are not a monk" case. There is no other alternative. Whatever you are, one of its power is activated the moment you don it and a user can never benefit from both the abilities of the belt. That's why I think that there is no requirement at all for the belt.
And the magic item doesn't needs any "requirements" to UMD it. As said, you can UMD whenever you want. Even if the results doesn't change.
"activation requirements" is not a requirement for UMD. (somehow this sound more confusing than helping to me but yeah...)


I was thinking about something while typing, but I forgot...
Sorry, my Crystal Ball is malfunctioning atm, I can't help you there^^


Ah, yes about the general skill description that nobody seems to care about when talking RAW. That's also weird to me. During a game, the player will say "I try to use the Cadeus bracers" and, hopefully, not "I make an emulate class feature check". I mean that there is a need for a descriptive text that should tell you to what the skill applies to because this is a role playing game and not an Excel sheet. Really, that's weird to me that the "Check" part seems to be the only thing that matters.
The "Check" part sets the general rules and tells you "when" you can UMD. It even refers to a table where each possible UMD roll type is listed. Thus the table is part of the general rules presented!
This is important to note because due to this, "Text Trumps Table" sole applies for the rules presented in "Check".
The sub-rules provided in the examples are more specific rules and thus would need to make a clear call out to make an exception. Those example would need to rely on "Specific Trumps General" to make any changes to the general rules presented in "Check".
And since those call outs are missing, the general rule that "you can UMD when you to" is still in effect.



Edit: and I have no idea about the difference you are trying to explain.
There is a difference between those two examples.

UMD Alter Self wand (does work)
This produces an effect that the wand could have already done by itself given the right user. The "source" of the altered Alter Self effect is still fully the wand.

UMD a magic item as if you would be "using" Artificer abilities (does not work)
If we make an UMD roll to emulate the class features of an Artificer (the roll is still legal), we don't benefit from it. Because here the Artificer's ability is the "source" alters the effect of the item here. It is not a default effect the magic item can produce. This is what the rules mean with "you can't use class features", while still claiming that you can pretend the "use" of class features (e.g. pretend to use a Turn Undead charge).


The infamous Lidda. It's been mentioned in this thread (including by me) a number of times. Here it is.



If we want to be pedantic about it, it doesn't say that Lidda expends a use of turn undead, just that she emulates the class ability. Lidda never made it into the Rules Compendium.
The Rules Compendium is not a "rewrite of rules". It works like an ERRATA. It primary adds to the rules. If it wants to delete rules, it either needs to make contradicting new rules (Trumping the older rules due to the Rule Supremacy given at the start of the book) or an explicit call out to delete/ignore text passages (like ERRATA does sometimes). If that doesn't happen (contradiction or call out), the rules presented in the core books are still intact.

The Lidda examples aren't listed in the RC, but RC does nothing to trump em. Thus they still count.
Or are you gonna argue that your can't emulate a race because Lidda's example in the PHB to emulate a dwarf didn't make it into the RC too? I hope not ;)




We get more clarification on the next paragraph -



If you follow UMD to the letter and do not use deductive reasoning (for example, assuming your check to emulate an ability score to activate an item actually grants you an ability score when using the item), UMD works just fine. Otherwise all kinds of weird things happen with UMD, people complain about the skill being broken and so on.

I tried to explain this to "Nelfin" in this post. I hope the explanation works for you too. If questions should remain, just ask and I'll try to address em.
It's a question about the source of the effect. You can emulate the "use of an ability to activate an item", but you can't emulate "the effect of an ability to activate an item". There is an important difference here. One is legal, the other not. One is pretending the "use" to activate the item (legal), the other is "trying to use an ability" to alter the effect of an item (illegal).

[Darg]

Imho "Emulate a Class Feature: Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item." indicates a non-exclusive example. And in that specific example it is a requirement.

Now comes the Primary Source Rule joker (sry, but I just woke up and my jokes are in bad mood^^)
The general rules that are set in "Check" aren't changed. There is no explicit call out that "you can't UMD when you want anymore for using this aspect of UMD". Thus, it still obeys the general rules set in "Check".

Rules Compendium even added further examples of use (without any changes to the original examples wording) , which imho is a strong indicator the roll example are just the most common examples and non-exclusive.

You are quite right that the phrase, "Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item," is open ended. However, the word "sometimes" is being used to denote that you don't always need to use UMD to activate an item. The next sentence then specifically references the times the example does happen. In the English language another way to write the two sentences is as a single sentence with commas enclosing the reference: "In this case, needing to use a class feature to activate a magic item, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20." It very much is limiting when you can emulate.


She doesn't expend a use, but she does emulate the ability to expend a use. The criteria for activating the item in the example is to "channel positive energy, as though turning undead", which would include expending an attempt.

I think it's pretty clear from that example that its intended that UMD works with items that requires class features to be expended. I'd agree she doesn't actually have turn undead, of course.

It doesn't say that at all. It says "channels positive energy into it as if turning undead." Or inserting the definition of the phrase "as if": "channels positive energy into it as would be the case if turning undead." It's fairly obvious that in the example channeling positive energy =/= actually expending a turn attempt. It's simply a description of something that similarly leads to the same result. "He was soaked as if he jumped in a lake." The phrase does not require that he had actually jumped into a lake. The same happens with the example in the PHB.

[Zanos]

It doesn't say that at all. It says "channels positive energy into it as if turning undead." Or inserting the definition of the phrase "as if": "channels positive energy into it as would be the case if turning undead." It's fairly obvious that in the example channeling positive energy =/= actually expending a turn attempt. It's simply a description of something that similarly leads to the same result. "He was soaked as if he jumped in a lake." The phrase does not require that he had actually jumped into a lake. The same happens with the example in the PHB.
The example requires someone to channel positive energy into it to activate it. You could argue that the "as if" criteria doesn't establish that turn undead is the only criteria that meets the channeled undead prerequisite, but you're not at all denying that turn undead is channeled positive energy, and can therefore activate the item, or that Liddia emulates turn undead to do so. The full example:

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. 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. 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:
The item can be activated by channeled positive energy.
Turning undead is channeled positive energy("as if")
Turning undead requires expending daily attempts in order to activate for every class in the PHB.
Liddia emulates the ability of a cleric to channel positive energy, by turning undead, which is done by expending turn undead attempts, to activate this item.

Last I checked, clerics cannot channel positive energy with turn undead without expending daily uses. And the item in this case clearly isn't passively activated by anyone who has the ability to turn undead, it explicitly needs to be activated "when [class] channels positive energy into it". All your "as if" argument does is establish that you could, perhaps, also activate the item by casting cure light wounds on it, should you find text to support that it that qualifies as channeled positive energy.

TL;DR: You're using your analogy about someone being able to get wet in things other than lakes to argue that someone didn't get wet in a lake when they just got out of a lake.

[Darg]

The example requires someone to channel positive energy into it to activate it. You could argue that the "as if" criteria doesn't establish that turn undead is the only criteria that meets the channeled undead prerequisite, but you're not at all denying that turn undead is channeled positive energy, and can therefore activate the item, or that Liddia emulates turn undead to do so. The full example:

So:
The item can be activated by channeled positive energy.
Turning undead is channeled positive energy("as if")
Turning undead requires expending daily attempts in order to activate for every class in the PHB.
Liddia emulates the ability of a cleric to channel positive energy, by turning undead, which is done by expending turn undead attempts, to activate this item.

Last I checked, clerics cannot channel positive energy with turn undead without expending daily uses. And the item in this case clearly isn't passively activated by anyone who has the ability to turn undead, it explicitly needs to be activated "when [class] channels positive energy into it". All your "as if" argument does is establish that you could, perhaps, also activate the item by casting cure light wounds on it, should you find text to support that it that qualifies as channeled positive energy.

TL;DR: You're using your analogy about someone being able to get wet in things other than lakes to argue that someone didn't get wet in a lake when they just got out of a lake.

You can activate the item if you HAVE turn undead. It doesn't say you have to EXPEND turn undead to activate it. "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." You aren't turning undead, at all.

Of course, the chalice example in the book isn't even a real item so there's nothing to even verify for either side of the argument. Which is why we all keep going round in circles.

[Zanos]

You can activate the item if you HAVE turn undead.
It doesn't say that at all.

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.
Tell me, how do you propose that a cleric or experienced paladin channels positive energy into an object, as if turning undead, without expending a turn undead attempt?

[Darg]

It doesn't say that at all.

Tell me, how do you propose that a cleric or experienced paladin channels positive energy into an object, as if turning undead, without expending a turn undead attempt?

And it says nothing about expending an attempt. We can argue all we want about an item that doesn't exist and the extremely poor example.

The way I see it is that it works like the Badge of Glory:


When you activate a badge of glory, the next melee attack you make on the same turn against an evil creature deals an extra 1 point of damage per two character levels. A badge of glory functions two times per day.

If you have the smite evil class feature, the extra damage granted by a badge of glory is instead equal to that granted by your smite evil ability (or 1 point per two levels, whichever is greater).

You are using the Badge of Glory, not your smite evil ability. Even though the ability powers it up, it's not expending a use of your ability. UMD all you want because it doesn't require you to actually use the ability.

[Zanos]

And it says nothing about expending an attempt. We can argue all we want about an item that doesn't exist and the extremely poor example.
Using turn undead to channel energy requires expending an attempt. It's only an extremely poor example if you read it already assuming that UMD can't be used to replicate expending something.


You are using the Badge of Glory, not your smite evil ability. Even though the ability powers it up, it's not expending a use of your ability. UMD all you want because it doesn't require you to actually use the ability.
I agree that the badge doesn't require you to expend a use of smite. I don't agree that it is at all similar to the item described in the UMD example, which explicitly is only activated "when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead."

[redking]

The chalice used by Lidda doesn't say that it expends uses of turn undead. You deduce that from the vague fluff at the beginning. What we know of the mechanics is that Lidda rolls to emulate having turn undead. We know nothing of expending a virtual turn undead because the text doesn't say that happens. We know it can't happen because of the very next paragraph.

UMD being broken or not hinges on this interpretation.

[Zanos]

The chalice used by Lidda doesn't say that it expends uses of turn undead. You deduce that from the vague fluff at the beginning.
It's not vague at all, people just don't like the implications of a fairly clear example so they throw out words like "vague" or "pointless" or "imaginary" or "it didn't get reprinted in the rules compendium". None of which changes the fact that for a cleric or paladin to channel energy as if turning undead, they must expend a turning attempt. If that language was in, for example, the activation of a feat, nobody would be the slightest bit confused about what it means. But because it's being used to set an unpopular precedent for UMD mechanics it invites scrutiny.

[Gruftzwerg]

You are quite right that the phrase, "Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item," is open ended. However, the word "sometimes" is being used to denote that you don't always need to use UMD to activate an item. The next sentence then specifically references the times the example does happen. In the English language another way to write the two sentences is as a single sentence with commas enclosing the reference: "In this case, needing to use a class feature to activate a magic item, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20." It very much is limiting when you can emulate.


Sorry but imho my PSR rule argument still hold water.

1) It's still just one possible example, and it happens to be that "this example has a requirement" and ain't one of those items "that just can work different depending on the user" without requirements. Nowhere does the text limit the statements made in "Check".

2) It still lacks the language to trump the permissions given in the general rules under "Check". I still have the permission to roll for UMD whenever I want and for whatsoever UMD roll I want and decide how many UMD rolls I wanna roll. None of these permissions are touched by the example. Just because the single example has a limitation, doesn't create a new rule that can trump general rules. That is not how the PSR works.

The entire UMD rule is in "Check". That paragraph handles the permissions when you can roll for UMD and for what you can roll for UMD. These are the general rules to be followed.
Anything below doesn't create any more specific situation/option than those already mentioned in "Check" and its "table" (!). They just try to give examples and give explanations of the things handled in "Check and its table". They don't create new rules due to the lack of permission (no more specific situation was created and no explicit call out about topic supremacy). The PSR has spoken (sorry, my jokes aren't getting better today..I had some booze recently..^^).

[Darg]

Using turn undead to channel energy requires expending an attempt. It's only an extremely poor example if you read it already assuming that UMD can't be used to replicate expending something.

I agree that the badge doesn't require you to expend a use of smite. I don't agree that it is at all similar to the item described in the UMD example, which explicitly is only activated "when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead."

Here is where we fundamentally disagree. The example makes no mention of actually turning undead, only as if turning undead. The rules make no mention that channeling positive energy is exclusively the possession of the action of turning or destroying undead.

From a literal perspective of your perspective as we see it, as the example does not require a sacrifice of an attempt, one must conclude that they don't activate the item, but rather use their ability which automatically powers the item. Meaning they turn and get holy water at the same time. Therefor, UMD cannot be used to activate the item because there is nothing to activate. Yet, this contradicts the context that the example is presented in. When you say the ability is being used to activate an item it means you are actually using the ability and must lead to the conclusion the ability works as described unless stated otherwise.

A similar example would be, "Lidda finds a mace that creates chocolate when striking foes with righteous fury as if smiting them." Nothing about it implies that you use up any of your smite attempts.


It's not vague at all, people just don't like the implications of a fairly clear example so they throw out words like "vague" or "pointless" or "imaginary" or "it didn't get reprinted in the rules compendium". None of which changes the fact that for a cleric or paladin to channel energy as if turning undead, they must expend a turning attempt. If that language was in, for example, the activation of a feat, nobody would be the slightest bit confused about what it means. But because it's being used to set an unpopular precedent for UMD mechanics it invites scrutiny.

The very fact we are having this discussion is what makes it vague. To me and others it very clearly denotes a case where turn undead is not expended as it does not say that it would normally be so. The rules are permissive. If it doesn't say that normally an attempt is expended, then it doesn't.


Sorry but imho my PSR rule argument still hold water.

We just disagree on how the PSR rule should apply. I say the PSR should denote that emulating a class feature should have primacy over the check rules which only says how you use the check, not when. You say the PSR should apply to the check rules only and any conditions presented under the subtopics should be ignored in favor of the limitless bounds presented.

It's just a difference in philosophy and understanding of what the PSR is saying.

[Gruftzwerg]

We just disagree on how the PSR rule should apply. I say the PSR should denote that emulating a class feature should have primacy over the check rules which only says how you use the check, not when. You say the PSR should apply to the check rules only and any conditions presented under the subtopics should be ignored in favor of the limitless bounds presented.

It's just a difference in philosophy and understanding of what the PSR is saying.

I realize that our interpretation of the PSR differs here. And it is not my intention to force my interpretation of it on to you. But I hope that you can at least see on what my argumentation is based on.

The topic "each UMD roll type" is already handled in the more general "Check" rules.

The DCs for various tasks involving Use Magic Device checks are summarized on the table below.
None of the examples mentioned create more specific situations. As such they have to obey the general rules in "Check".


The main question here boils down to what is a topic and what is not a topic in 3.5?

Since no further guideline/restrictions have been set, anything that creates a new or more specific situation creates a new (sub)topic. And this is the hidden logic/rule behind:
"Specific Trumps General"
If you every wanted to know where the rule for "Specific Trumps General" is, I have presented it to you. It's called "Topic precedence" and is hidden in the Primary Source Rule, which has hidden itself in the ERRATA..
*sorry I feel like I could puke thinking about all the mess they caused with the late implementation of the PSR and its bad editing...*

Can you show me how any of the explanations of the UMD roll types create a more specific situation to create a new sub-topic? If not, we have to assume that they are just explanatory examples with no permission to change more global rules (as mentioned in "Check" and its table).

[redking]

A Rogue rolled 60 on all required UMD checks. If UMDing a staff
1. Is the save DC
a. The Rogue's ability score
b. The Rogue's emulated ability score which is 45
c. The minimum ability score required to make the staff?

2. Is the caster level
a. The minimum required for the staff
b. The emulated CL so CL40?

The UMD check is to check if you can use the staff, not grant you any additional benefit. The answers are:

1A: Use the appropriate ability score from the rogue. So depending on the staff, either wisdom or intelligence/charisma.

2A: The caster level of the staff.

In relation to the UMD check, you don't get an ability score, just emulate an ability score to make use to the item. UMD check then the rogue's real ability score. Ditto the caster level.

[Nelfin]

The entire UMD rule is in "Check".
That's the thing I don't understand where it comes from. I already said it before but no one answered.

The description of the skill description says.
The skill name line is followed by a general description of what using the skill represents. After the description are a few other types of information:
Check: What a character (“you” in the skill description) can do
with a successful skill check and the check’s DC.
Where in the rules does it says you can discard the general description. The description of the "Check" part does not say when to make a check. It tells the DCs of the check and the outcomes. I guess that with a pure RAW mindset, it is never formally written when to perform a check. So I guess that the "when" part is interpretation or, if no intepretation is allowed, you never make any skill roll at all...

[Darg]

That's the thing I don't understand where it comes from. I already said it before but no one answered.

The description of the skill description says.
Where in the rules does it says you can discard the general description. The description of the "Check" part does not say when to make a check. It tells the DCs of the check and the outcomes. I guess that with a pure RAW mindset, it is never formally written when to perform a check. So I guess that the "when" part is interpretation or, if no intepretation is allowed, you never make any skill roll at all...


USE MAGIC DEVICE
(CHA; TRAINED ONLY)
Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.

What do you mean it doesn't tell you when you use the skill? The SRD has cut a lot of content, even content paramount to how something works. It's always good to double check with the PHB if you can. A lot of people like to ignore the plain text because sometimes it can be easily termed fluff, but the rules don't tell you to ignore the plain text and even puts valuable rules info in it such as the weapon focus feat as a blatant example. Sadly, ignoring plain text can lead to major dysfunction and easily rectified confusion.

And the SRD cut of the plain text of UMD is just so obviously egregious as it even cuts out the word "devices."


Use Magic Device (Cha; Trained Only)

Use this skill to activate magic

Like ok, gotta roll a UMD to cast a prepared spell.

[Gruftzwerg]

That's the thing I don't understand where it comes from. I already said it before but no one answered.

The description of the skill description says.
Where in the rules does it says you can discard the general description. The description of the "Check" part does not say when to make a check. It tells the DCs of the check and the outcomes. I guess that with a pure RAW mindset, it is never formally written when to perform a check. So I guess that the "when" part is interpretation or, if no intepretation is allowed, you never make any skill roll at all...
&

What do you mean it doesn't tell you when you use the skill? The SRD has cut a lot of content, even content paramount to how something works. It's always good to double check with the PHB if you can. A lot of people like to ignore the plain text because sometimes it can be easily termed fluff, but the rules don't tell you to ignore the plain text and even puts valuable rules info in it such as the weapon focus feat as a blatant example. Sadly, ignoring plain text can lead to major dysfunction and easily rectified confusion.

And the SRD cut of the plain text of UMD is just so obviously egregious as it even cuts out the word "devices."



Like ok, gotta roll a UMD to cast a prepared spell.

WARNING:
Make yourself comfortable pls, because the answer is not easy to chew and might upset you...
But I will try to explain it step by step.

This...

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate
..is not rule text!
(If this did upset you, take pls a break and if you calmed down, proceed to read)

1). If that would be rule text, we would have a partially dysfunctional UMD ability that can't do the things it claims to be able to do. A good person can "activate" an evil item (facing the penalty), thus following that rule he couldn't UMD it. Rolling UMD for alignment would be impossible. So thx god, that this is not rule text.

2). The "Skill Descriptions" are defined (starting at p66 in the PHB). These are "general" rules for all skills and thus UMD has to follow em too. The "line" you are referring to "lacks any definition to count as part of the rules for skills at all". Thus you lack the "permission" to use that "line" as "rules".
"Skill Descriptions" tells you what is important and where the rules for the skills are and it newer talks about that "line".
I would like to point out the similarity of the format with other things like "Feats" where the equivalent of that "line" is defined as "Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language."
Plain language != rule language
It's meant as oversimplified short description in non-technical language and thus may contradict the actual rules on a more careful view.

As said, it's about source and hierarchy. The PSR solves almost anything. The question is just, do you like the outcome?

[redking]

UMD whatever and whenever you like. It's only when someone has a strange interpretation of the abilities that UMD confers that it even matters.

[Nelfin]

Eh I have no problem with the potential outcomes of the reading. I already know how I would rule UMD if I were to be DM. Here I just want to understand how the RAW community read the books from a RAW point of view.


1). If that would be rule text, we would have a partially dysfunctional UMD ability that can't do the things it claims to be able to do. A good person can "activate" an evil item (facing the penalty), thus following that rule he couldn't UMD it. Rolling UMD for alignment would be impossible. So thx god, that this is not rule text.
OK. I don't know if it would be the only thing which is dysfunctional in the rules though. It there is another thing which is dysfunctional, I don't think that you can use this argument to discard the general description.

Your answer about the general description is really confusing to me. In the Check, Emulate a class feature, the word activate is used so this means that the word activate has a rule meaning also? Whatever, the same word is used is the general description and in the check section. So I don't see why the general description is not applicable as a rule, especially the general UMD description is really straightforward (OK, you can always debate on what is a magical item or what activate would mean although for this last one it should be the same meaning for both the general description and the check section). Maybe it is a Primary Source Rule thing?

Also, if a rule (here "This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class.") and an example (here Lidda and her chalice) contradicts each other, how is this resolved?

@Darg I was answering to Gruftzwerg. I was reading the rules without the general description and with the fact that "Check" is meant to describe the check DC and outcomes. So as I understand it, you infer when to make a check from the outcomes of the Check descriptions.

[redking]

Also, if a rule (here "This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class.") and an example (here Lidda and her chalice) contradicts each other, how is this resolved?

The jury is out about what was meant by Lidda and the chalice. Unfortunately, the chalice is not detailed anywhere. Lidda's use of UMD has Lidda emulating Lidda having the turn undead class feature. It doesn't say that Lidda expended a use of turn undead. The assumption is that Lidda did not expend a use of turn undead because of the very next paragraph.

Unfortunately, everything about UMD is at stake based on this interpretation. If Lidda was able to make use of the class feature (as opposed to just emulating having it), then there are vast implications for the other uses of UMD, whether that be activating staffs, wands, emulating an ability or emulating a race. You could emulate an ability score to gain massive DCs. You could even emulate a strength score to hit harder with weapons. These are the implications.

If you can use the class feature like Lidda, then you can use Artificer metamagic spell trigger and similar abilities on items, so long as you can make the UMD check. You can set the caster level of a staff despite having no caster level. you can do weird things with knowstones (potentially), such as cast spells without spell slots by emulating (and using) the class feature of spellcasting.

If Lidda can expend a use of turn undead, then she can do all of the above and more using UMD. If Lidda can't expend a use of turn undead, then all of the ancillary debates about UMD, such as when you are allowed it use UMD, is rendered moot because there will be no change in the outcome whether UMD is used or not.

When Lidda cannot expend a use of turn undead, UMD just works. When it is ruled that Lidda did expend a use of turn undead, UMD gets very weird and requires extensive DM adjudication. Which is the most likely scenario?

[Nelfin]

@Gruftzwerg


Your answer about the general description is really confusing to me. In the Check, Emulate a class feature, the word activate is used so this means that the word activate has a rule meaning also? Whatever, the same word is used is the general description and in the check section. So I don't see why the general description is not applicable as a rule, especially the general UMD description is really straightforward (OK, you can always debate on what is a magical item or what activate would mean although for this last one it should be the same meaning for both the general description and the check section). Maybe it is a Primary Source Rule thing?
Maybe I should try to clarify this and put it in more general terms. So the argument for discarding the general description is that it is plain text and plain text is different of rule text. Ok, I understand that, at least in a conceptual way. The difficulty is that there are also plenty of plain text in the Check description, well at least as I see it. For example, there was a discussion about

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.
First, tell me if you consider this quote as a rule text and not plain text. But I need to understand why then because it is plain text to me, especially the first sentence. It seems that plain text holds some rule value in some context. I guess that my underlying interrogation is

How is it distinguished plain text that hold rule value and plain text that does not hold rule value.

The example I took about the word "activate" is actually an example of this underlying question. I guess it is the same kind of question I have about the potential contradiction between a rule and an example. And actually, I am more interested in the process of decision rather than the results themselves. But surely it is easier to explain with an example though.

Edit : or should I understand that the quote is a rule text because it is the Check description and the Check description holds rule value because of the Primary Source Rule ?

[Nelfin]

I may, or may not, have finally understood something about RAW reading. I end with some different conclusions though so you tell me what is a RAW reading and what is not, and why. I only look at the UMD skill here but I guess that I could generalize the reading rules to another context.


The Primary Source Rule is
When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the DUNGEON MASTER's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The DUNGEON MASTER's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell- like abilities.
and the UMD skill description is
Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not
otherwise activate.

Check: You can use this skill to read a spell or to activate a magic item. Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.

You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand. If you are using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner (to emulate a neutral evil alignment in order to keep yourself from being damaged by a book of vile darkness you are carrying when you are not evil, for example), you need to make the relevant Use Magic Device check once per hour.

You must consciously choose which requirement to emulate. That is, you must know what you are trying to emulate when you make a Use Magic Device check for that purpose. The DCs for various tasks involving Use Magic Device checks are summarized on the table below.

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 get a special +2 bonus on your Use Magic Device check if you’ve activated the item in question at least once before.

If you fail by 9 or less, you can’t activate the device. If you fail by 10 or more, you suffer a mishap. A mishap means that magical energy gets released but it doesn’t do what you wanted it to do. The DM determines the result of a mishaps, as with scroll mishaps. The default mishaps are that the item affects the wrong target or that uncontrolled magical energy is released, dealing 2d6 points of damage to you. This mishap is in addition to the chance for a mishap that you normally run when you cast a spell from a scroll that you could not otherwise cast yourself (see the Dungeon Master’s Guide).

Decipher a Written Spell: This usage works just like deciphering a written spell with the Spellcraft skill, except that the DC is 5 points higher. Deciphering a written spell requires 1 minute of concentration.

Emulate an Ability Score: To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard spells, Wisdom for divine spells, or Charisma for sorcerer or bard spells). Your effective ability score (appropriate to the class you’re emulating when you try to cast the spell from the scroll) is your Use Magic Device check result minus 15. If you already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability, you don’t need to make this check.

Emulate an Alignment: Some magic items have positive or negative effects based on the user’s alignment. Use Magic Device lets you use these items as if you were of an alignment of your choice. For example, a book of vile darkness damages nonevil characters who touch it. With a successful Use Magic Device check, Lidda could emulate an evil alignment so that she could handle a book of vile darkness safely. You can emulate only one alignment at a time.

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. 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.

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).

Emulate a Race: Some magic items work only for members of certain races, or work better for members of those races. You can use such an item as if you were a race of your choice. For example, Lidda, a halfling, could attempt to use a dwarven thrower (see page 226 of the Dungeon Master’s Guide) as if she were a dwarf. If she failed her Use Magic Device check, the hammer would work for her as it normally would for a halfling, but if she succeeded, it would work for her as if she were a dwarf. You can emulate only one race at a time.

Use a Scroll: If you are casting a spell from a scroll, you have to decipher it first. Normally, to cast a spell from a scroll, you must have the scroll’s spell on your class spell list. Use Magic Device allows you to use a scroll as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. The DC is equal to 20 + the caster level of the spell you are trying to cast from the scroll. For instance, to cast web (a 2nd-level wizard spell) from a scroll, you would need a Use Magic Device check result of 23 or better, since the minimum caster level for web is 3rd level. See the Dungeon Master’s Guide for more information on scrolls.

In addition, casting a spell from a scroll requires a minimum score (10 + spell level) in the appropriate ability. If you don’t have a sufficient score in that ability, you must emulate the ability score with a separate Use Magic Device check (see above).

This use of the skill also applies to other spell completion magic items. The Dungeon Master’s Guide has more information on such items.

Use a Wand: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list.

This use of the skill also applies to other spell trigger magic items, such as staffs. The Dungeon Master’s Guide has more information on such items.

Action: None. The Use Magic Device check is made as part of the action (if any) required to activate the magic item. (See Activate Magic Item, page 142, and the Dungeon Master’s Guide for discussions of how magic items are normally activated.)

Try Again: Yes, but if you ever roll a natural 1 while attempting to activate an item and you fail, then you can’t try to activate that item again for 24 hours.

Special: You cannot take 10 with this skill.

You can’t aid another on Use Magic Device checks. Only the user of the item may attempt such a check.

If you have the Magical Aptitude feat, you get a +2 bonus on Use Magic Device checks.

Synergy: If you have 5 or more ranks in Spellcraft, you get a +2 bonus on Use Magic Device checks related to scrolls.

If you have 5 or more ranks in Decipher Script, you get a +2 bonus on Use Magic Device checks related to scrolls.

If you have 5 or more ranks in Use Magic Device, you get a +2 bonus to Spellcraft checks made to decipher spells on scrolls.



The only part of the PSR that may be useful in the context of UMD is

An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.
For the spell Dancing Lights, the "short description in the beginning of the spells chapter" would be

Creates torches or other lights.
that is found at p. 181 of PHB while the "individual spell description" would be the whole spell description found at p. 216 of PHB. This suggest that the "short description in the beginning of the spells chapter" has rule value but the "individual spell description" has precedence if there is a disagreement between those two. Basically, both are rules but there is also a rule for precedence between them.

(By the way, this precedence rule is much like the "Specific trumps general" rule I read on the forum. Is this "Specific trumps general" rule is a generalization of the PSR or something else?)

For skills there is no separate "short skill description at the beginning of the chapter". But it is possible to generalize the idea given for the spells to the skills by saying that the "short skill description" for UMD is

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.
and that the "individual skill description" is everything else, including the Check part. This generalization could still be argued on because it is performed on the basis of one single example (oof, hopefully I am not doing this at my lab...) but I will go on with this generalization.

Reading the skill as above does not create any inconsistency, except for the hard part -- "Emulate class feature" -- because the description of "Emulate class feature" can be read as inconsistent internally. I mean by internally, that the description inside the "Emulate class feature" description can be read as being inconsistent. And because it is inside, at the same level, and that the potential inconsistency comes from text (even though one is an example), the PSR does not help. There is nothing remotely close to this case in it.

Emulating an alignment to use a magic device is allowed. The "Emulate an alignment" says

Some magic items have positive or negative effects based on the user’s alignment. Use Magic Device lets you use these items as if you were of an alignment of your choice.
This specifically allows the emulation of an alignment even if you could use the magic item while taking the penalty and there is nothing in the rest of the description that contradicts it. The same holds for "Emulate a race" and the example of the Dwarven thrower. The description says

Some magic items work only for members of certain races, or work better for members of those races. You can use such an item as if you were a race of your choice.
Again, it is specifically allowed and nothing else contradicts it. This is in contradiction with the "short skill description" but both "Emulate an alignment" and "Emulate a race" descriptions have precedence over the "short skill description".


Now the case of "Emulate a class feautre"... At the moment, I don't have a clear view of why RAW should say that the Monk's belt and the Cadeus bracers can be activated by emulation. I end to the conclusions: 1) the Monk's belt is not emulable and 2) the Cadeus bracers could potentially be emulable but this heavily depends on the interpretation of the description. Visibly, this is not what the RAW community is saying... So the question is why?

The Monk's belt does not allow an UMD check at all: actually, this is based on an argument that was already raised and on the reading of

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.
First, I think that "Sometimes ..." here should be read as "For some magic devices ..." as it is written for "Emulate a race" and "Emulate an alignment". But whatever. Even if the "Sometimes" here can be read to be non-exclusive, there is nothing about the other case, the "You do not need to use a class feature" case. There is nothing that explicitly allows an "Emulate a class feature" check in this other case. So the "short skill description" applies since there is no contradiction, that is no check is allowed.

The Cadeus bracers can potentially be emulable: the difficulty is between the chalice example

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.
and the paragraph that follows this example

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.
There are plenty of ways to read the two above quotes as can be seen in this thread.

If the reading leads to a contradiction, I see no compelling reason to rule in favor of "you can use the emulated class feature to activate the item" or of "you cannot". These quotes are both text and at the same level of precedence as I see it. So now, you can argue that an example is here to clarify things so that one should take the example as the ruling. And then, someone else can now argue this chalice is never described anywhere and there is not enough information to conclude anything. Or also that that chalice is a specific device and that what is allowed for this chalice is not necessarily allowed for another device, again no description of the chalice. Or even that since the "precedence level" of these quotes are the same, one should take the last one because it is written after and it is allowed to overrule whatever is before it.

Personally, I think that it should be possible to use the emulated class feature to activate a device, and only to activate a device -- and not to actually turn undeads -- so that the chalice example and the "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." part of the description are consistent. Another reason but outside of RAW reading is that I really don't see the developpers being inconsistent in the same small section. It certainly is possible with intereactions with some far away things, but here we are talking about lines which are one after another.

That being said, it is not so clear that the Cadeus bracers can be emulated even in this case. I didn't found where those bracers are described so I take the description given by redking

Caduceus bracers allow you to convert your innate healing powers into other forms of restorative magic. By sacrificing 5 points of healing (derived from lay on hands, wholeness of body, or any similar ability that measures your ability to heal as a daily limit of points), you can remove 1 point of ability damage or remove the dazed, fatigued, or sickened condition from one creature. Using these bracers in this manner follows all the normal limitations of your healing ability.

For example, a paladin using caduceus bracers must touch the target to be affected (just as with lay on hands), while a monk wearing these bracers can affect only herself (since she can’t use wholeness of body on another creature). You can spend extra points for cumulative effect, For example, you could spend 15 points of healing to remove both the fatigued condition and 2 points of ability damage.

You can also combine normal healing with the bracers’ effect. For instance, you could spend 25 points to produce the effects in the previous example and heal 10 points of damage as well.
Because now, one needs to know if "convert healing power" and "sacrificing point" is part of the use -- as can be performed by an emulation -- of Lay on Hands for instance, because RAW is also about exact wording, right (or I can't understand why there was a discussion about the word "Sometimes" or about the "You don't need to"...)? At least, it is clear that it is not part of the usual use of Lay on Hands, by this I mean the description that can be found in the Paladin class at p. 44 of PHB. Using normally Turning undead, you channel positive energy so that the chalice example does not allow to discriminate.

The "sad" part is, since we are talking about some magic stuff here, it is not even possible to rely on real life experience to decide something. And PSR forbids the use of any other resource book than the PHB to this purpose, except specifically stated. For simplicity reasons, I would say that if the use of an emulated class feature is allowed, then an unusual use of it is also allowed. That's my take on the point but I don't know if there is anything that could decide this matter.


Finally, I should also say that there is another reason (beyond the PSR) why I think that the "short skill description" holds rule value and why the rules should be read within context. If you discard the "short description", the Check description says

[...]You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand.[...]
Discarding the "short skill description", the sentence suggests that you make a check even if you are legitimately able to activate the device since it is "You make..." and not "You can make..." and no there is no difference between "You make..." and "You must make..." in this sentence. And there is nothing that contradicts this as I see it. So you are now in a situation where you make a check, with a potential 1 and being unable to use the item for 24 hours as per "Try again" says, whatever legitimatly you have to activate the device... Not talking about the case where the character doesn't have the UMD skill. Actually, I am thinking that even if you don't discard the "short skill description", as per PSR, the Check description has precedence over the "short skill description", so that an UMD check must be made each time a character activates (or at least tries to activate) a device. Totally dysfunctional... Obviously anyone who reads this part of the description can easily correct the meaning of the sentence but it is not what is written.


Now, the question: is there something in there which is not a RAW reading (and more importantly why)?

[Darg]

PSR is being used way too liberally. The errata text only examples broad stroke items of interest. Unlike the short description and long description of a spell, the whole description of UMD is the description of UMD. It shouldn't be piecemealed. An example of where giving the general text priority over the plain text negates necessary rules is in the weapon focus feat:


WEAPON FOCUS [GENERAL]
Choose one type of weapon, such as greataxe. You can also choose
unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your
weapon for purposes of this feat. You are especially good at using
this weapon. (If you have chosen ray, you are especially good with
rays, such as the one produced by the ray of frost spell.)
Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected weapon, base attack
bonus +1.
Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus on all attack rolls you make using
the selected weapon.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not
stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of weapon.
A fighter may select Weapon Focus as one of his fighter bonus
feats (see page 38). He must have Weapon Focus with a weapon to
gain the Weapon Specialization feat for that weapon.

If you give priority to the benefit text (or actual rules text for people who believe fluff is real) then you could never apply the feat to rays or grapples as "selected weapon" contradicts the plain text.

As for the bracers, nothing says you can't activate them with 0 healing. You just don't have anything to sacrifice so you don't receive the benefit. That's the argument. A paladin still has LoH even if they have 11 or lower charisma, or if they have 0 uses per day left. Cadeus Bracers also have "activation: --"


—: A dash on the activation line indicates that the item is always active so long as you wear, wield, or possess it in the proper manner. Simply wearing a cloak of resistance provides you with its bonus; you do not need to activate it. Similarly, a +2 flaming battleaxe grants the benefit of its magic on attacks you make with it without any special action on your part.
Using an item of this type does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Even if UMD could be used here, using the benefit of the item requires the actual use of the ability required for it's use. That means UMD would have no effect either way.

[Gruftzwerg]

@Nelfin

1) At the beginning of ANY rule interaction is the Primary Source Rule that dictates the hierarchy between the rules. This starts as soon as at least 2 (or more) rules meet (e.g. Power Attack rules and regular/general attack rules).

2) Most chapters in 3.5 books have rules (!) at the start how to read the stuff in this chapter. To give a few examples, you can find this for classes, feats, spells and in our case "Skill Descriptions".

3) "Skill Descriptions" defines where to find what rule. The rules for "when your can roll the check for a certain skill" are found in the "Check" section. (who would have thought that^^).
The sentence:
"Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate."
is positioned in an undefined area by the Skill Description. Nothing has given you the "permission" to use this text as rule text.

4) This..


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.

...is part (!) of the rule text. It's the part giving an example for the previously mentioned rules. The example lacks the language to be representative for all possible rolls (thus, just because the example requires something, can't be extrapolated as general rule for all rolls. It's just a part of this specific example. Other uses of this option don't need to reflect the restrictions presented by the example. Examples don't add rules, they sole give an example, not more not less. The rules for this option are already given in "Check" and its "table".

5) activating magic items
Yeah we have explicit rules how and when an item is activated. Have a look at the magic item basics (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm).
As said, a non-evil character can still activate evil items without UMD and face the consequences (penalties/curse/whatsoever).
And you activate some items just by donning/equipping em. (Monk's Belt)

6) emulating class feature != use class feature
Many seem to struggle to see what they meant here and what the difference is. It's quite simple once you understand the logic behind it.
It's a question about targeting: "what is altering/targeting what?"
The chalice is using the power of the Turn Undead ability to fuel itself and thus a legal option for UMD.
But we couldn't emulate lets say "Hellfire Infusion" + any magic item. Because in this case, we are not talking about what the item does with the ability, but what the ability does with the items effect. Hellfire Infusion is an ability that specifically targets the effects of magic items and thus can't be emulated. The magic item isn't targeting the ability at all. And this is the important difference here.


I hope that should cover your questions. I'm still short on time here, but if questions should remain I'll try to address em as soon as I have more time..^^

edit: @Darg

RAW is not free of errors. And not everything did made it into the ERRATA. "Grappling & Weapon Focus" is imho one of em. By RAW you couldn't use it with Weapon Focus. Other things have their specific rules that supersede the normal definition of weapons and allows for em to count for feats as weapon (rays, touch attacks, unarmed strikes...). As said, it's never a good idea to play RAW or assume that it is some kind of holy grail. It is what it is,... it has it flaws and its beauty at the same time..^^

[Darg]

The skill name line is followed by a general description of what
using the skill represents. After the description are a few other types
of information:
Check: What a character (“you” in the skill description) can do
with a successful skill check and the check’s DC.

Funnily enough, "emulate class feature" is part of the "check" section.


edit: @Darg

RAW is not free of errors. And not everything did made it into the ERRATA. "Grappling & Weapon Focus" is imho one of em. By RAW you couldn't use it with Weapon Focus. Other things have their specific rules that supersede the normal definition of weapons and allows for em to count for feats as weapon (rays, touch attacks, unarmed strikes...). As said, it's never a good idea to play RAW or assume that it is some kind of holy grail. It is what it is,... it has it flaws and its beauty at the same time..^^

Of course RAW has errors, it's why there is errata. However, I must 100% disagree that RAW says you can't use grappling/rays with weapon focus as that is explicitly allowed. Not even once has any one brought forth RAW evidence that plain text does not constitute rules text, nor that the benefit section supersedes all text before it. If you take the PSR rule to that extreme, you have to rule that the "special" section is also preceded, meaning two handed weapons don't get double the benefit of power attack. It simply breaks the game apart using something not meant to apply to something so microscopic.

[Gruftzwerg]

Funnily enough, "emulate class feature" is part of the "check" section.
Yeah, Check refers to the table to show possible things to roll for. Check also gives your the permission to use UMD when you want, and not sole when the item requires it.
The example given in "Emulate Class Feature:" don't create any further rules. Just because the example item has a "requirement to activate" doesn't force a new rule that the item must require this for you to be able to UMD it. The example doesn't make a call out for an exception to the mentioned general rules (that you can freely decide for yourself when and if you wanna roll UMD). Thus it gives you a single example that is not representative for all possible situation where you could roll to emulate a class feature.




Of course RAW has errors, it's why there is errata. However, I must 100% disagree that RAW says you can't use grappling/rays with weapon focus as that is explicitly allowed. Not even once has any one brought forth RAW evidence that plain text does not constitute rules text, nor that the benefit section supersedes all text before it. If you take the PSR rule to that extreme, you have to rule that the "special" section is also preceded, meaning two handed weapons don't get double the benefit of power attack. It simply breaks the game apart using something not meant to apply to something so microscopic.

I have to heavily disagree too^^

RAI you are totally right. We have enough evidence what the designers intended here.

But RAW doesn't care about that!

RAW has defined what is relevant rule text and what is not relevant.
Using short descriptions, fluff text and otherwise extrapolated info is not RAW. That is RAI's territory.
Again, I'm not arguing that you should play like that. I'm just arguing about the important difference between RAI and RAW. Not all text in the books is rule text (Take fluff texts as an example here. They are not rules). The "Benefits:" section of Weapon Focus has supremacy. And anything saying something else that doesn't create a more specific situation (specific trumps general) is wrong by RAW.
See the slight but important difference between RAI and RAW.

[Nelfin]

I am going to go back to a sane reading of the rules, that is

read the rules carefully;
read the rules with its context;
use PSR to rule disagreements, when PSR is applicable;
apply common sense;

and if everything fails, just do whatever I want. The reasons for that is that any reading I came up that allow to use "Emulate a class feature" on the Monk's belt or the Caduceus (and not Cadeus) bracers makes the rules themselves inconsistent, or at the very least totally dysfunctional.

The general skill description is not a rule (!)
Except Gruftzwerg, no one in this thread gave any reason for why this general skill description is not a rule. The reasons given by Gruftzwerg are

the general skill description is positioned in an undefined area by the Skill Description;
nothing has given you the "permission" to use this text as rule text.

There are a lots of contenders to these two assertions from my point of view. First:

that is a pretty weak argument, if an argument at all. By the very fact that we know what we are talking about pretty much means that the area is clearly defined;
this is an assertion without any reference to any written rule. What are the rules that are used?

But whatever. Assuming this general skill description is discarded for rule purpose, you have some huge inconsistencies and unusable skills:

you now look in the Check description when you are making a check with this particular skill. This is not what the Check description is meant to be as precisely described in the rules that should tell anyone how to read the skill description

Check: What a character (“you” in the skill description) can do with a successful skill check and the check’s DC.
So now, where in the rules does it given the permission to the Check description to decide when to make a check? And the question of when a rule is applicable is important. Just take a mathematical result. There are assumptions that must to met (the "when to" question) for the result to hold. Now if you apply the result without checking the assumptions, you may be lucky and the result can still be correct in a specific case. But most of the times, you come with a false result. Effectively, if a wrong logic is used, any result can be obtained.
contrarily to UMD, some skill never says when to make a roll in the Check description, for example Climb.

Check: With a successful Climb check, you can advance up, down, or across a slope, a wall, or some other steep incline (or even a ceiling with handholds) at one-quarter your normal speed. A slope is considered to be any incline at an angle measuring less than 60 degrees; a wall is any incline at an angle measuring 60 degrees or more.

A Climb check that fails by 4 or less means that you make no progress, and one that fails by 5 or more means that you fall from whatever height you have already attained.

A climber’s kit (page 130) gives you a +2 circumstance bonus on Climb checks.

The DC of the check depends on the conditions of the climb. Compare the task with those on the following table to determine an appropriate DC.

You need both hands free to climb, but you may cling to a wall with one hand while you cast a spell or take some other action that requires only one hand. While climbing, you can’t move to avoid a blow, so you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). You also can’t use a shield while climbing.

Any time you take damage while climbing, make a Climb check against the DC of the slope or wall. Failure means you fall from your current height and sustain the appropriate falling damage. (The Dungeon Master’s Guide has information on falling damage.)

Accelerated Climbing: You try to climb more quickly than normal. By accepting a –5 penalty, you can move half your speed (instead of one-quarter your speed).

Making Your Own Handholds and Footholds: You can make your own handholds and footholds by pounding pitons into a wall. Doing so takes 1 minute per piton, and one piton is needed per 3 feet of distance. As with any surface that offers handholds and footholds, a wall with pitons in it has a DC of 15. In the same way, a climber with a handaxe or similar implement can cut handholds in an ice wall.

Catching Yourself When Falling: It’s practically impossible to catch yourself on a wall while falling. Make a Climb check (DC = wall’s DC + 20) to do so. It’s much easier to catch yourself on a slope (DC = slope’s DC + 10).

Catching a Falling Character While Climbing: If someone climbing above you or adjacent to you falls, you can attempt to catch the falling character if he or she is within your reach. Doing so requires a successful melee touch attack against the falling character (though he or she can voluntarily forego any Dexterity bonus to AC if
desired). If you hit, you must immediately attempt a Climb check (DC = wall’s DC + 10). Success indicates that you catch the falling character, but his or her total weight, including equipment, cannot exceed your heavy load limit or you automatically fall. If you fail your Climb check by 4 or less, you fail to stop the character’s fall but don’t lose your grip on the wall. If you fail by 5 or more, you fail to stop the character’s fall and begin falling as well.

Now you need to infer from the results of the check but inferring is not RAW I guess? OK, nobody cares about the "when" for climbing because everyone knows what climbing means. The "when" question for UMD is crucial because it is magic and magic is not real! Or equivalently the "what is it" question is central. You want to be careful with magic.
UMD is dysfunctional as I previously described.
some skills are just unusable. This is the case of the Knowledge skills. Encounter a creature? Want to know what it is? Want to know what weaknesses it has? Want to know to which specific Knowledge skill it corresponds to make a check? Nope, nothing without the general skill description! Have Knowledge Devotion? Want to use it? Nope! Encounter a knigth with an insignia? Want to know which family it is? Nope!

OK, let's swallow that the general skill description is not a rule text, following unreferenced assertion and discarding the contenders.

The Emulate class feature let you benefit from the Monk's belt as if you were a level 20 Monk or from the Caduceus bracers as if you were a level 20 Paladin (!)
There are two interesting facts, at least from my point of view, in UMD when comparing "Emulate a class feature, "Emulate a race" and "Emulate an alignment":

Emulate a class feature makes reference to device activation whereas it is not the case for the two others;
Emulate a class feature gives an ex-nihilo device example while the two others use an example that can be found in DMG.

I didn't checked every single magic item of the DMG but I bet that there is exactly 0 item that is activated with a class feature in it if you follow (bold emphasis is mine)

This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.

Many use-activated items are objects that a character wears. Continually functioning items, such as a cloak of resistance or a head-band of intellect, are practically always items that one wears. A few, such as a pearl of power, must simply be in the character’s possession (on his person, not at home in a locked trunk). However, some items made for wearing, such as a ring of invisibility, must still be activated. Although this activation sometimes requires a command word (see above), usually it means mentally willing the activation to happen. The description of an item states whether a command word is needed in such a case.

Unless stated otherwise, activating a use-activated magic item is either a standard action or not an action at all and does not provoke attacks of opportunity, unless the use involves performing an action that provokes an attack of opportunity in itself, such as running out of a threatened square while wearing magic boots. If the use of the item takes time (such as drinking a potion or putting on or taking off a ring or hat) before a magical effect occurs, then use activation is a standard action. If the item’s activation is subsumed in its use and takes no extra time (such as swinging a magic sword that has a built-in enhancement bonus), use activation is not an action at all.

Use activation doesn’t mean that if you use an item, you automatically know what it can do. Putting on a ring of jumping does not immediately activate it. You must know (or at least guess) what the item can do and then use the item in order to activate it, unless the benefit of the item comes automatically, such from drinking a potion or swinging a sword.

that would certainly explain why there is the chalice example instead of the Monk's belt for instance (yeah, I know this is outside of RAW reading since it can be argued that it is because the Monk' belt was added lately in the DMG). This is further stressed by the Caduceus bracers with an explicit "Activation: --" in its description as noted by Darg. And please, no, PSR does not help here because PSR is only applicable "when you find a disagreement between two D&D rules sources" and "Activation: --" is totally consistent with "Use-activated" in DMG. If you strictly follow what is written, you just can't use "Emulate a class feature" to activate the Monk's belt or the Caduceus bracers because they are not activated with a class feature. And I bet that "Emulate a class feature" was intended for a potential use later on.

To allow the use of Emulate a class feature for one of these two items, you need to rule

that "Emulate a class feature" can be used outside of activation. Given the description

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.
I say "Nope!". And honestly, interpreting this quote as something else than "When you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20." is pretty much a stretch of interpretation to allow using the Monk's belt with a level 20 Monk level to me. (Edit: this is ambiguous. I don't see any rule that allow to make a check outside of what is written. Now it is possible to argue the inverse: there is no rule that says that it is not allowed either. But choosing one of this reading is not strictly RAW. It is not a rule-based decision.).
or that these items needs the corresponding class feature to be activated which is clearly not the case.


That's my take and I am going to do something else now! And thanks to Gruftzwerg and Darg for trying to help me (@Gruftzwerg although I end up not following your RAW reading :p).

[Gruftzwerg]

@Nelfin

1)
Point for you that counting the "undefined text area" not as part of the rules leaves other skills dysfuctional.

But even if I/we assume that these texts are rules, does that change the outcome for UMD?

Imho not. Because "Check" is still the primary source for the topic "when to roll a skill". The "undefined text" didn't create a more specific situation/topic and thus may not change the general rules presented in "Check". The PSR still rules in favor of "Check" and its table. Nothing changes imho.

2)
You have quoted sole the rules for "use activated" which sole covers some magic items (e.g. the chalice/wands..).
Whereas the Monk's Belt falls into this category:

Using Items

To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly.
Nowhere does "emulate a class feature" limit you to sole "use activated" items.

You activate a Monk's Belt at the moment you donne it, qualifying for UMD rolls.
And UMD allows to fake the monk lvls, because "Check" allows to roll for it when we want to and not sole when the item requires it.

[Darg]

RAW has defined what is relevant rule text and what is not relevant.
Using short descriptions, fluff text and otherwise extrapolated info is not RAW. That is RAI's territory.
Again, I'm not arguing that you should play like that. I'm just arguing about the important difference between RAI and RAW. Not all text in the books is rule text (Take fluff texts as an example here. They are not rules). The "Benefits:" section of Weapon Focus has supremacy. And anything saying something else that doesn't create a more specific situation (specific trumps general) is wrong by RAW.
See the slight but important difference between RAI and RAW.

Yeah, we are going to have to part here. There has been no citing of a source that tells us that descriptions aren't meant to be used for adjudication when the text tells you that descriptions tell you what something does or represents; or that "fluff" text even exists outside of specific books like the spell compendium. "Fluff" is used as a way to ignore rules that don't fit ones view.

People separate rules vs "fluff" when neither has been defined. The rules are designed not to be so cut and dry unless they need to be for players to have the freedom to be imaginative. That is the reason behind the blending of rules and "fluff." "Fluff" as it's been called has in setting consequences and removing the rules from the setting in which the characters exist does nothing except prevent the grounding of the framework of the game.

[Gruftzwerg]

Yeah, we are going to have to part here. There has been no citing of a source that tells us that descriptions aren't meant to be used for adjudication when the text tells you that descriptions tell you what something does or represents; or that "fluff" text even exists outside of specific books like the spell compendium. "Fluff" is used as a way to ignore rules that don't fit ones view.

People separate rules vs "fluff" when neither has been defined. The rules are designed not to be so cut and dry unless they need to be for players to have the freedom to be imaginative. That is the reason behind the blending of rules and "fluff." "Fluff" as it's been called has in setting consequences and removing the rules from the setting in which the characters exist does nothing except prevent the grounding of the framework of the game.


Half-elf men are taller and heavier than half-elf women, but the difference is less pronounced than that found among humans.
No "sometimes" or "often". Are you going to argue that this is rule text and that no Half-Elf woman may be taller or heavier than any Half-Elf man in existence? I hope not.

The books are full with fluff text all over the place. It's just that most of the times it is irrelevant and thus we keep ignoring it, maybe even don't notice em anymore.

[Darg]

2)
You have quoted sole the rules for "use activated" which sole covers some magic items (e.g. the chalice/wands..).
Whereas the Monk's Belt falls into this category:

Nowhere does "emulate a class feature" limit you to sole "use activated" items.

You activate a Monk's Belt at the moment you donne it, qualifying for UMD rolls.
And UMD allows to fake the monk lvls, because "Check" allows to roll for it when we want to and not sole when the item requires it.

Except the Monk's Belt IS use-activated:


Use-Activated

This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.

You wear or don a belt. That's use-activated. What Nelfin got wrong was the bolded part of their quote. That line has to do with command word worn items. A ring of invisibility must be activated with a command word for example even though it is worn.


No "sometimes" or "often". Are you going to argue that this is rule text and that no Half-Elf woman may be taller or heavier than any Half-Elf man in existence? I hope not.

The books are full with fluff text all over the place. It's just that most of the times it is irrelevant and thus we keep ignoring it, maybe even don't notice em anymore.

I don't have to argue that. It's true. Human men ARE taller and heavier than human women. The tallest heaviest man is taller and heavier than the tallest heaviest woman. The opposite is true too. The shortest lightest woman is shorter and lighter than the shortest and lightest man. The text is telling you that the range for men will always be higher than the range for women.

[Nelfin]

@Gruftzwerg

1) You are correct in that this does not change much the outcome for UMD. As I read the skill,

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.
comes in modulating what can be read in the Check part. The major point is that it renders UMD functional, even the dysfunctional part I requote here:

You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand.
If you modulate it as something like

You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand, when you activate magic devices that you could not otherwise activate.
This is functional now.

In the spirit, it is the same example as Weapon focus brought by Darg, if you modulate what you read with the "undefined area", Weapon focus becomes totally functional. And from my point of view, "Activation" is quite similar to "Prerequisite" and the description of item is similar to "Benefit".

See below for a continuation about the change of rule text / not a rule text.

2) It is not about UMD in general, it is about its particular use to emulate a class feature. I read this as follows: if

you want to activate an item that you cannot activate otherwise;
the item needs a class feature to be activated;

then and only then you can make an UMD check for emulating a class feature. The point is that the Monk's belt is a use-activated item and thus it does not need a class feature to be activated. So no UMD check to emulate a class feature is allowed at activation.

1) Back again to 1). As you can see, the modulation does not change much the outcome: who's in their right mind would make a check that could fail when they could do it simply without any check. There is only one edge case that I can think about where the outcome could be changed if you don't include the modulation by "cannot otherwise be activated". But I think such an item does not exist. But anyway, the case is:

the item needs a class feature to be activated;
its benefits depends on the level of the emulated class.

For instance, let's say, you have a chalice (:p) with

Activation: channel positive energy into the item;
Benefit: transform the water into healing potion depending on your cleric level (for instance 1-5 potion of cure Minor wounds; 6-10 potion of cure moderate wounds and so on)

and Lidda (:p) is Cleric 3/Rogue 20 with (23 ranks in UMD). If you don't include the modulation, Lidda can make an UMD check to emulate Turn undead and can potentially obtain a potion of cure moderate wounds. If the modulation is included, Lidda is not allowed to emulate Turn undead and will obtain a potion of cure of minor wounds.

And @Darg, actually I emphasized the part about activation to stress that, even if an activation were to be needed, it is not a class feature. But you are right that the other part of the description is sufficient by itself.

[redking]

Nelfin, thank you for mentioning climb checks because this is apposite to UMD checks.

Let's say that a character wants to make a climb check on a flat, horizontal surface. There is nothing at all to climb, but if the player insists on making the check, you may as well let them roll the dice for the climb check and then tell them "no effect".

The same is true ot UMD. If you do not permit users of UMD to use class abilities, that is they cannot expend a use of turn undead into an item via UMD for example, then the when of a UMD check becomes as irrelevant as a climb check.

It is this one interpretation that is at the root of all the dysfunction of UMD.

[Nelfin]

It is not how I read the skill though. You can use the emulated class feature to me. But this is the Use Magic Device skill and the use should be understood in this context. You can't emulate a class feature in a vaccuum and say that you can actually use it. It is how I interpret the following quote

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 we take the example quote again

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.
it is pretty clear to me that 1) Lidda is emulating Turn undead; 2) she is not emulating Channel positive energy and 3) she uses the emulated Turn undead to fake channel positive energy into the chalice to activate it. Actually

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.
also screams that the emulated class feature can be used. But the quotes also screams that it is only for activating magic device as well as the general skill description

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.
So you have 2 reasons why the Monk's belt cannot be emulated with Emulate a class feature: 1) you can activate it normally; 2) the belt does not need a class feature to be activated. But indeed, you can let your player roll if they really want to and say "No effect".


But the single most important thing I wanted to say is that

Let's say that a character wants to make a climb check on a flat, horizontal surface.
is called crawling.

[redking]

It is not how I read the skill though. You can use the emulated class feature to me. But this is the Use Magic Device skill and the use should be understood in this context. You can't emulate a class feature in a vaccuum and say that you can actually use it. It is how I interpret the following quote

I understand your interpretation. What I would like the emphasize or impress on you is that the totality of the dysfunction attributed to the UMD skill is due to an item that does no exist within the game, has no description, and ostensibly similar items like Caduceus Bracers are quite rare.

Since the chalice that Lidda used does not exist, we might as well talk about using the Caduceus Bracers. In order to allow the Caduceus Bracers to be used with UMD, the rest of the game is thrown into utter dysfunction, because it opens the door to all kinds of radical uses of UMD. If one is consistent, they should allow these uses of UMD if Caduceus Bracers is allowed. That's what I am trying to say.

[Thane of Fife]

So you have 2 reasons why the Monk's belt cannot be emulated with Emulate a class feature: 1) you can activate it normally;

This is just my reading of the thread, but, when it comes to the monk belt, I don't think this is the real first reason - I think the real first reason is that the two camps are reading the item differently. (Note that what I am saying here is specific to your first point - I'm ignoring the second).

I think Camp A reads it as essentially "You get +5 monk level for these two abilities," and Camp B reads it as "You get these abilities as if you were a monk of five levels higher than you are." That doesn't sound like much of a difference, but consider the following:

Imagine two magic items. First, a pair of gloves that give +2 arcane caster level. Second, a ring that let's you cast Light once per day, and, if you have the Sun domain, you may choose to instead use that charge to cast any spell from that domain that you would be a high enough level divine caster to cast. (I acknowledge that the precise wording of this second item in particular could be relevant to how you would rule it; please bear with me and imagine it's written in the right way).

I think pretty much everyone would agree that a 10th level wizard with the gloves and subject to no other relevant effects would have a caster level of 12. They can't use UMD to emulate being a 20th level wizard and thereby increase their caster level up to 22. I suspect that most people would agree that a rogue could emulate having arcane spell casting and get the +2 CL, but they would not actually gain the ability to cast spells.

I think most people would also accept that a rogue with the ring could use UMD to emulate having the Sun domain (and I guess also divine spell casting), and that the level they emulate would determine which spells they could use the ring to cast. I think this is probably true even though the rogue could use the ring to cast Light without using UMD.

I think these items are somewhat analogous to the two readings of the monk belt. Camp A reads it as similar to the gloves - if you don't have the monk abilities, you can't use UMD to fake having them to get the enhancement (well, you can, but you won't actually get the abilities in that case), and if you do have the abilities, using UMD would have no effect. You could emulate being higher level, but only for the purpose of activating the item, and the item does the same thing regardless of character level (+2 CL for the gloves), so it would be pointless.

In contrast, Camp B reads it as similar to the ring. In this case, the belt or ring is giving you abilities, not enhancing them. If you can cast spell A, you gain the ability to cast spell A from the ring; if you can cast spell B, you gain the ability to cast spell B from the ring. If you have the ability that lets your unarmed strikes deal X damage, you gain the ability that lets them deal Y damage; if you have the ability that lets them deal Y damage, you gain the ability that lets them deal Z damage. You can use UMD to emulate being able to cast spell A or having unarmed strikes that deal X damage. The fact that you can't actually do it is irrelevant because the item gives you an ability based on your possession of the other ability, it doesn't improve that ability.

I think the only place UMD and needing to use it comes in is, if you're in Camp B, can you use UMD if you are already the right class? That is, could a cleric with the Sun domain emulate being a higher level cleric to gain access to the higher level functions of the ring? Likewise (given the Camp B reading), could a level X monk emulate the abilities of a level X+Y monk to gain the abilities of a level X+Y+Z monk? If your gut reaction is no, I think you're still thinking in Camp A - if the belt said something like, "If you have Abundant Step, you gain Perfect Body," you might be more okay with allowing a low-level monk to emulate having Abundant Step in order to gain Perfect Body, and that is similar to what I am terming the Camp B reading.

[Nelfin]

I am wondering now if there is a single item that is activated with a class feature.

@redking
I just gave my reading. It is consistent with what is written in the skill description, makes the dysfunctional part functional, is consistent with "fluff" value of the items as they are described and makes other skills functional. I get that this reading can open "abuse" for items I am not aware of. People were talking about runestaffs (though these seems to be staffs so should fall under the Use a wand part of UMD) and knowstones if I remember correctly. But I guess that the problem is more about the level of the emulated class rather than being able to fake use a class feature?

@Gruftzwerg
I am not even sure that the example I gave you would work. Now you want to know if the cleric level you have emulated for activation carries over to the benefit of the item.

@Thane of Fife
That was part of the discussion at the beginning of the thread. But the way it is written, actually the problem is the activation method of the items. Can activate the item? No UMD for activating the item and no problem with emulated class level. It is as simple as that. To allow a use of Emulate a class feature on the Monk's belt, you have to:


ignore the "cannot activate otherwise" part because it is supposedly "fluff" and not rule text while being unable to provide a citation for that ruling;
ignore the activation method of the belt;
argue that the belt needs a class feature to be activated based on interpretation of its benefit;

and then still call that RAW... That's way too much stretching for me.

[Thane of Fife]

To allow a use of Emulate a class feature on the Monk's belt, you have to:


ignore the "cannot activate otherwise" part because it is supposedly "fluff" and not rule text while being unable to provide a citation for that ruling;
ignore the activation method of the belt;
argue that the belt needs a class feature to be activated based on interpretation of its benefit;


I don't have anything to say with regards to the latter two points here, but for the first, under Emulate a Race, it says, "Some magic items work only for certain races, or work better for those of certain races. You can use such an item as if you were a race of your choice." An item that "work[s] better for [characters] of certain races" is usable even by those not of that race, so, to me, the inclusion of such implies that the "cannot activate otherwise" is not meant to be read that strictly.

[Nelfin]

Yes I know. Emulate an alignment and Emulate a race do not make mention of activation. "That you cannot activate otherwise" do not apply to them.

[Darg]

I am wondering now if there is a single item that is activated with a class feature.

There are two types of those: Caduceus Bracers for one and Badge of Glory for the other.


BADGE OF GLORY
Price (Item Level): 3,400 gp (8th)
Body Slot: Throat
Caster Level: 5th
Aura: Faint; (DC 17) transmutation
Activation: Swift (command)
Weight: 1 lb.
This ornate platinum badge is set with two
large cabochon aquamarines.
When you activate a badge of glory, the
next melee attack you make on the same
turn against an evil creature deals an
extra 1 point of damage per two charac-
ter levels. A badge of glory functions two
times per day.
If you have the smite evil class feature,
the extra damage granted by a badge of
glory is instead equal to that granted by
your smite evil ability (or 1 point per two
levels, whichever is greater).
Prerequisites: Craft Wondrous Item,
ability to smite evil, possession of a piece
of the set.
Cost to Create: 1,700 gp, 136 XP, 4 days.


CADUCEUS BRACERS
Price (Item Level): 2,000 gp (6th)
Body Slot: Arms
Caster Level: 12th
Aura: Strong; (DC 21) conjuration
Activation: —
Weight: 1 lb.
These lightweight silver bracers depict a
pair of intertwined, snakelike shapes.
Caduceus bracers allow you to convert
your innate healing powers into
other forms of restorative magic. By
sacrificing 5 points of healing (derived
from lay on hands, wholeness of body,
or any similar ability that measures your
ability to heal as a daily limit of points),
you can remove 1 point of ability damage
or remove the dazed, fatigued, or sickened
condition from one creature.
Using these bracers in this manner
follows all the normal limitations of your
healing ability. For example, a paladin
using caduceus bracers must touch the
target to be affected (just as with lay on
hands), while a monk wearing these
bracers can affect only herself (since she
can’t use wholeness of body on another
creature).
You can spend extra points for cumula-
tive effect, For example, you could spend
15 points of healing to remove both the
fatigued condition and 2 points of abil-
ity damage.
You can also combine normal healing
with the bracers’ effect. For instance, you
could spend 25 points to produce the
effects in the previous example and heal
10 points of damage as well.
Prerequisites: Craft Wondrous Item, lesser
restoration.
Cost to Create: 1,000 gp, 80 XP, 2 days.

As you can see, possessing the feature is enough to use the badge. For the bracers, it requires you actually using your ability to deliver the effect because the effect is passive:


—: A dash on the activation line indicates that the item is
always active so long as you wear, wield, or possess it in the proper
manner. Simply wearing a cloak of resistance provides you with its
bonus; you do not need to activate it. Similarly, a +2 flaming bat-
tleaxe grants the benefit of its magic on attacks you make with it
without any special action on your part.

With the Lidda example in the PHB, it likely works like the badge because the text doesn't say she actually uses the ability in question but instead is just activating the item with the ability.

[Nelfin]

First, don't get me wrong, I totally get what you are saying about the Badeg of glory and the Caduceus bracers (as well as what redking is saying about the chalice being not described). I wrote somewhere in the thread something like "need external resource = can't emulate" and "don't need external resource = can emulate".

And I think I finally get your reading of the example. It could be something like:


Activation: being able to Turn undead;
Benefit: turns regular water into holy water when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead.

It could explain the "actual use". The example would be completely dumb though, she would be activating an item she cannot benefit from...

But still, it does not correspond to the Badge of glory. The Badge of glory is activated by command and it asks for the class feature inside the benefit and not at activation. From a ruling point of view, it is impossible for the Badge of glory to be emulated, unless you remove the "that you cannot activate otherwise" and the "need" or the "activate" in "Sometimes, you need to use a class feature to active...". Another possibility is to move the class feature to the activation line or that there is a generic rule somewhere that says "any class feature in the benefit means that the class feature is required for activation" (that would be some common sense but rules...) or something like that. But those are more than just some typos or ambiguous wording.

And what I was asking was more precisely "Is there an item which has a class feature (or a use of a class feature) in its Activation line". Except wand and staffs which are covered by Use a wand.

I am also interested (:p) in answering to the question: assume that an Emulate a class feature check is allowed for an item, if such an item exists in the first place, does the emulated class feature and emulated class level for the activation carries over to the benefit of the item? In my reading, it is quite critical whereas, in yours, it is a moot point.

Also, where are the runestaffs and knowstones described? In Magic Item Compendium?

PS: the message can seem weird in its construction because I understood your reading in the middle of writting the message. And I don't want to rewrite it!

[Darg]

Also, where are the runestaffs and knowstones described? In Magic Item Compendium?

Off the top of my head I know that runestaffs are in the MIC, but I don't remember the source of knowstones. I know that domain staffs are from Complete Champion.

[redking]

Also, where are the runestaffs and knowstones described? In Magic Item Compendium?
!

Knowstones are in Dragon Magazine #333. Runestaffs in MIC I believe.

Now imagine what Lidda can do with these items if you determine that the magical chalice that Lidda activated was actually powered by uses of turn undead.

You can't say Lidda can emulate uses of turn undead but not emulate uses of class features with these items. This has been my point throughout this thread.

[Gruftzwerg]

(sorry for the late response, but I've been busy with other stuff, including forum activities..^^)

Since one part of the discussion is drifting into a RAW vs RAI argumentation I would like to point out a specific example that did came up a while ago:

PHB II - Spell - Rouse:

With a loud snap of your fingers, you cause
any sleeping creatures in the spell’s area
to awaken.
This spell has no effect on creatures that
are unconscious due to being reduced to
negative hit points, or that have taken
nonlethal damage in excess of their
current hit points.
Note that the italic part is defined as fluff text / non-rule text. And yes, this leaves this spell in a totally dysfunctional state by RAW.
RAI, it is pretty clear what the spell has to do. But RAW doesn't care for that. It only cares for the stuff that has actually been declared as rules.
And to confirm my argument here, this spell was updated in the ERRATA of the PHB II:

Page 123 – Rouse [Substitution]
Replace the spell description with the following
text: “This spell awakens creatures from magical
and nonmagical sleep. It has no effect on creatures
that are otherwise unconscious.”
As you can see, even in the PHB II the authors and quality management have failed to do their job properly. I assume that not everybody was on the same page about rule structure and the PSR logic, that was still new at that moment. PHB II was released shortly after the PHB ERRATA. Thus at least quality management should have noticed this bug before the release of the PHB II. But they failed here too.

The reason why I'm telling this story is, that imho many authors did struggle with the rule structure imposed by the PSR and how to read and write rules in 3.5
All of the 3.5 stuff suffers from this problem to some degree. For some cases we have ERRATA for correction, for others we don't...

As said, RAW is not the holy grail, and it may leave things totally dysfunctional because the authors have fked up to do their job properly...

Back to UMD (and the other problematic skills by RAW). Maybe now you understand my point of view here why RAW does ignore certain parts that are not rules. When some other skills become dysfunctional by a strict RAW reading, its their own problem (of bad editing) that needs to be addressed by the DM (by relying on RAI for those cases).

But UMD is imho fully functional by RAW, just extremely cheesy in some cases. I mean, the broken aspect from a balancing point of view is already known for UMD for quite a while now, but that doesn't change that RAW is functional here.
___________________________



Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item.
...
This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class.
I guess we can all agree that this leaves a dysfunctional taste at first glance. But that is imho not the case. What the rules try to tell us here is, that we can only "use" class features "to activate magic items" but not "use" abilities that target/enhance magic items and add or change their normal effect.
Think of the Artificer's "Infusions" or "Metamagic Spell Trigger" abilities. Those target a magic item's effect (or add an effect), thus you may not "use" em via UMD. They change what the magic item is capable of and are thus illegal. While the "use" of an ability to "activate an item" is legal, because it doesn't affect what the item is normally capable of. Try to see the difference here, what they try to imply with "use".

[Nelfin]

The more I read, the stranger it becomes. Except for some specific item -- that may not exists -- which would explicitly allow it, I am now concluding that Emulate a class feature can only be used with scrolls, and more generally Spell completion items (actually, you can also use Emulate class feature to make a caster's level check but it is not the point here), by a RAW reading... Well, you might still abuse the system depending on another ruling (and if you are able to use the emulated class feature). Everything under the condition that I read the rules correctly.

First, Rules Compendium takes precedence over every other books for rules. Now, we have in it (every bold emphasize in the quotes are mine):

When a creature wants to use a magic item that has already been identified, the first consideration is whether that creature can use the item at all. To do so, the creature must usually have available body slots and be of appropriate size and shape. The second consideration is the item’s method of activation.
Rules Compendium also defines 6 activation methods (pp. 84-86) 1) Command, 2) Constinuously functioning, 3) Manipulation, 4) Mental, 5) Spell completion and 6) Spell trigger while still precising in its introduction

[...]Activation methods are delineated here, but the details of a particular item’s description supersede these general rules. If no activation method is given either in the item’s description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it.

Now, to activate a spell triggered item, we have:

To use a spell trigger item, the user must first know what spell the item stores (unless he is activating the item blindly using Use Magic Device). Activating the item requires the user to have the spell stored in the item on his spell list and to speak a word. Even a character who can’t cast the spell stored in the item can use it from a spell trigger item as long as that spell is on his spell list. This is the case even for a member of a class that eventually grants spells but who can’t actually cast spells yet, such as a 3rd-level paladin. A domain spell is on a user’s spell list only if the user has access to that domain.

Activating a spell trigger item takes the same amount of time as the casting time of the spell that the item stores, but activating the item doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. You can’t activate a spell trigger item in the area of a silence spell or if unable to speak.

Staffs and Wands: To activate a staff or wand, the user must hold the item toward the target or area in a hand or similar appendage. A wand can be used while the user is grappling, but a staff can’t.

Staffs use the wielder’s relevant ability score and relevant feats to set the DC for saves against their spells. Unlike with other sorts of magic items, the wielder can use his caster level when activating a staff if that caster level is higher than the staff’s. He can also use Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration to overcome spell resistance when using spells cast from a staff.

You don't need to be able to cast spells. The only thing you need is to have the spell in your (I guess as in your class) spell list (and a command word). Which is precisely what Use wand of UMD is for.

But, you might be able to abuse the system. You still need the class spell list. So now, instead of using Use wand (!), you use Emulate class feature, because everything is checked for its use. And you don't Emulate a Wizard, because it would be emulating the spell book class feature (making a book appear?) that does not provide you with the ability to cast spells, only their knowledge. You emulate the Spell class feature of the Sorcerer because it lets you have both the spell list and the casting ability. (Edit: actually you can emulate the Wizard class feature Spell. It gives both the class spell list and the casting ability)) And finally, you must rule that the class feature emulation carries over to the benfit of the item and does not apply only to activation. And honestly, this is not clear at all this is the case. At the moment, I would say "no" because RAW means "what is not written is actually forbidden" and not "what is not written is actually allowed", well except if Rules As Written has a more subtle meaning than its face value one. This has no impact for scrolls since everything is set by the scroll itself. But judging from the reactions, I guess that it has an impact for domain staves, rune staves and knowstones, at least.


@Gruftzwerg
I understand your point of view. What irks me is that you pretend that your "a rule text / not a rule text" reading is Rules As Written. It is plain inconsistent if you are unable to provide a citation. So again, where does it say so? Such clear distinctions I am aware of are 1) the class descriptions in PHB and 2) Magic Item Compendium mentioned by Darg. And in both of these cases, it is written! It may have no consequence at all in terms of rules for UMD. But it may have if you read everything else differently, i.e. without assuming from the start that such a plain text is not a rule.


PS: thanks for keeping the discussion civil!
PS: thanks for the reference for the domain, runestaves and knowstones. I don't have time to read about them at the moment but I will.

[Gruftzwerg]

....

@Gruftzwerg
I understand your point of view. What irks me is that you pretend that your "a rule text / not a rule text" reading is Rules As Written. It is plain inconsistent if you are unable to provide a citation. So again, where does it say so? Such clear distinctions I am aware of are 1) the class descriptions in PHB and 2) Magic Item Compendium mentioned by Darg. And in both of these cases, it is written! It may have no consequence at all in terms of rules for UMD. But it may have if you read everything else differently, i.e. without assuming from the start that such a plain text is not a rule.


PS: thanks for keeping the discussion civil!
PS: thanks for the reference for the domain, runestaves and knowstones. I don't have time to read about them at the moment but I will.

Lets have a look how this/these line/s:

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.

Use this skill to activate magic
is/are defined in the PHB/SRD:



...
The skill name line is followed by a general description of what using the skill represents. After the description are a few other types of information:
...

The first sentence defines it as "general description of what the skill represents".
The second sentence excludes any information from the "general description" that would fit into the other types of information, like in "Check:".

"Check:" still defines the general rules for "when you may roll for UMD" and the general description still doesn't create a more specific situation. The PSR still rules in favor of the "Check:" line.

Since we finally have digged out the definition of "that line", we can ensure that it excludes itself from providing rules for the other types of information.

If it wasn't messy enough yet, Rules Compendium will make it really messy...
Because..:

1: RC gives it self the permission to overwrite rules that have already been published.
2: RC totally ignores the rules set by "Skill Description"
3: RC lacks the explicit info we are normally used from ERRATA

Instead we got this:

If you’re trained in this skill, you can use it to read spells and activate magic items as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment. You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a magic item as part of the action required to activate that item. If you’re using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner, you need to make the relevant Use Magic Device check once per hour.
You can’t take 10 with this skill. Nobody else can use aid another to help you. If you ever roll a natural 1 while attempting to activate an item and you fail, then you can’t try to activate that item again for 24 hours. You can otherwise try to activate an item as often as you like.
If emulating an attribute, you must consciously choose which requirement to emulate. That is, you must know
what you’re trying to emulate when you make a Use Magic Device check for that purpose. The DCs for various tasks
involving Use Magic Device checks are summarized on the following table.

The new UMD rules are in the "activate magic item rules" section and not in the part for skills anymore..
The PSR is getting a headache from seeing this..

RC's version of UMD once again does not require "that the item has requirements". You are free to decide if and for what you want to roll UMD. The target item can't set any limitations for UMD, nor does it provide any permissions when you may use UMD.

It also refers to a table again, to show which types of UMD rolls can be made.

Then it once again gives examples for each type (example != new rule).


Emulate 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 —20. This skill
doesn’t 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’re emulating has an
alignment requirement, you must meet it, either honestly or
by emulating an appropriate alignment with a separate Use
Magic Device check.
You can use the skill in this way to make a caster level
check with an item. Your effective caster level is your check
result —20. See Caster Level Checks, page 31.
"Emulate Class Feature" gives 2 examples how this "roll type" can be used. Nowhere does the language provide indicators that these 2 examples are meant exclusive. Nor does any of em create a more specific situation to trump "the rules" given before. Just because one example has a requirement, doesn't make a rule that all possible examples need to require this. Examples are examples and not new additional rules.

__

No matter where I look at, PHB, SRD or even RC, I always end up with the same result with my interpretation.

As such I assume that when you UMD a staff, you can make UMD checks for "using a wand", an "ability score" check and a "caster level" check to pimp the staff's effect as much as your UMD rolls allow.

[Nelfin]

I guess we have a fundamental problem: what does Rules As Written means?

To me, it means that anything that is not explicitly allowed is forbidden. If you follow that, everything you do is written.

To you, it means that everything that is not explicitly forbidden is allowed. Let's do that. Your character do something which is not explicitly forbidden and you say it is Rules As Written. But since it is "As Written", I am going to ask "where does it allow you to do so?". If you ever find a citation that allow you to do so, it becomes an explicitly allowed action. Any action that is outside of what is allowed by a written rule is not Rules As Written, it is de facto interpretation.

Of course, you can always argue about what is "explicitly allowed" due to wording or whatever.

[Gruftzwerg]

I guess we have a fundamental problem: what does Rules As Written means?
yeah we seem to have fundamental problems here but imho not what you think..


To me, it means that anything that is not explicitly allowed is forbidden. If you follow that, everything you do is written.
I would say that I follow the very same logic..



To you, it means that everything that is not explicitly forbidden is allowed. Let's do that. Your character do something which is not explicitly forbidden and you say it is Rules As Written. But since it is "As Written", I am going to ask "where does it allow you to do so?". If you ever find a citation that allow you to do so, it becomes an explicitly allowed action. Any action that is outside of what is allowed by a written rule is not Rules As Written, it is de facto interpretation.

Of course, you can always argue about what is "explicitly allowed" due to wording or whatever.

That is not what I have said.

I said, that the "Skill Description" gives "Check" the permission to say when you can roll UMD.
And that the short "General Description" of a skill excludes itself from "other type of information" such as what is said in "Check:".

Further I claim that "examples" can't create nor refine "rules". They are just possible examples which may not be representative for all examples unless the wording/language implies explicitly otherwise. None of the examples indicate that these examples are exclusive.

When one example has restrictions which are not represented by the "rules" then these restrictions are not representative for all examples. It's sole for that specific example. It doesn't become a "rule".

The rules presented in "Check:" and "it's table" set the rules for UMD and show no limitation when you can use UMD.
The examples may not change the rules presented in "Check:".

Imho you are ignoring "Skill Description" and extrapolate rules out of examples. That is not RAW. Not even RAI imho because you ignore the intended rule structure.
(I hope this didn't sound offending, not my intention here ;) )

[Nelfin]

I am going to rephrase what you wrote, or at least try.


Everything outside of "Activate Blindly" to "Use Wand" sets the general rules for the skill usage (when, what DC and what outcome). Here, for UMD, you can use UMD in whatever way you want because it doesn't say otherwise;
Each of the other part (from "Activate Blindly" to "Use Wand") sets examples to the conditions when those usage of UMD applies. They give only some conditions under which they apply but do not give all the conditions they apply to. Since they are examples and are not in contradiction with the general rules of UMD, you can use them for other conditions.

If this is correct, I have a hard time understanding how you can come to the conclusion that you can use, so "Emulate class feature", in other conditions that what is explicitly written if you follow the logic "anything that is not explicitly allowed is forbidden".


you can use UMD in whatever way you want because it doesn't say otherwise: this is an explicit example of "everything that is not explicitly forbidden is allowed". For example, it does not say that you can use Emulate an ability score for activating staffs. So following the logic, you can't.
since they are examples and are not in contradiction with the general rules of UMD, you can use them for other conditions: this is also an explicit example of "everything that is not explicitly forbidden is allowed".


There are other things also but this is the most important at the moment.

[Gruftzwerg]

I am going to rephrase what you wrote, or at least try.


Everything outside of "Activate Blindly" to "Use Wand" sets the general rules for the skill usage (when, what DC and what outcome). Here, for UMD, you can use UMD in whatever way you want because it doesn't say otherwise;
Each of the other part (from "Activate Blindly" to "Use Wand") sets examples to the conditions when those usage of UMD applies. They give only some conditions under which they apply but do not give all the conditions they apply to. Since they are examples and are not in contradiction with the general rules of UMD, you can use them for other conditions.

If this is correct, I have a hard time understanding how you can come to the conclusion that you can use, so "Emulate class feature", in other conditions that what is explicitly written if you follow the logic "anything that is not explicitly allowed is forbidden".


you can use UMD in whatever way you want because it doesn't say otherwise: this is an explicit example of "everything that is not explicitly forbidden is allowed". For example, it does not say that you can use Emulate an ability score for activating staffs. So following the logic, you can't.
since they are examples and are not in contradiction with the general rules of UMD, you can use them for other conditions: this is also an explicit example of "everything that is not explicitly forbidden is allowed".


There are other things also but this is the most important at the moment.

An example is primarily just that, a single possible example unless it is called out to be an explicit example (no other possible examples). The UMD examples and their wordings nowhere mention/indicate that these are the sole way to make use of the roll types provided by "Check".

Let me try to give a theoretical example. If I an ability would say "you may use feats like Power Attack". Does that limit you to feats that imply an attack penalty? NO, It is just a single possible example of an used feat. And you may not extrapolate additional rules or restrictions that are not presented by the original rule.

As said, an example doesn't create "more specific rules". It's meant as an example of the rule it is is tied to. And the rule for that UMD roll (including DCs) is in "Check" and its "table" and not in the examples. The examples sole provide example and not additional rules. "Check and its table" already provided all the rules needed. I'm not implying the absence of rules here.

Further, most skills aren't limited in their "use" to the situations where they produce a beneficial or game relevant outcome. Think about the following examples of "skill use":
"You may attempt spot checks when there is nothing more to see than you already do see"
"You can roll to climb on a normal sized chair if you really want to"
"You can jump for no reason"
"You can make knowledge checks, even if there is nothing to know/reveal anymore"
"You can make UMD rolls even if it doesn't change the outcome of the magic item"

In that regard, UMD's wording is similar to most other skills.
"Check" sole limits your UMD rolls to "activate magic items". If that requirement is given, you can roll UMD for what you want and as many different (!) UMD rolls as you want, for that single activation. (different means: a single race roll if you want, a single roll to effectively emulate class levels for class features if you want, a single roll for...if you want...). Nothing in the rules presented by "Check" does restrict "when you may roll to emulate a class feature" other than "activating a magic item". Anything else is just extrapolated info from a single non exclusive example.

As said, imho (!) your attempt ain't RAW nor even RAI, because the designers intended rules like "Skill Description", "Spell Description", "Feat Description", "Reading a Monster Entry"... blaaa.
We have enough examples that we can safely assume that all these are intended by design. As such, if you ignore these standards, you basically ignore the designer's intentions too (RAI).

Can you provide any indicators that either "Skill Description" or "UMD" gives you the permission to take the provided examples as exclusive and that you may in conclusion extrapolate additional rules out of the examples? Because that is what you are attempting here imho.

[Nelfin]

I am totally aware that what I am saying in not RAI.

About this general decription.

"Check:" still defines the general rules for "when you may roll for UMD" and the general description still doesn't create a more specific situation. The PSR still rules in favor of the "Check:" line.
The basic assumption you are again making is that Check gives you the rules for "when you may roll for UMD". What I read in the description is

Check: What a character (“you” in the skill description) can do with a successful skill check and the check’s DC.
Nowhere it is said that the applicable conditions are in Check! And I am reading. You can infer that the outcomes gives you the conditions if you want, but that is not what is written. You brush this every time, but that is kind of important. I can't even understand how you can come up with the assertion that the general skill description does not change the reading. Can it be clearer than

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.
And applying PSR to that level when everything in the PSR deals about book and topic precedence?

And I heartfully hope that sub rules can refine the rules: otherwise, there's no point in sub rules existing in the first place. And there is no point in the "specifc trumps general" rule either. Even in the UMD, there is such a thing: Activate blindly. Unless you are also saying that your character don't need to speak or gesture as needed, this is exactly a refinement. If you take the Handle animal skill, it is even worse

Check: The DC depends on what you are trying to do.
Nothing else except the tables. Everything are in the sub rules, even what the labels actually means. But the moment that Activate blindly is refining the rule, you must consider that the others can also do the same, otherwise it is an internally inconsistent reading. But again, you can rule that sub rules can't refine rule and that Handle Animal is dysfunctional in the same way that Knowledge skills are also dysfunctional because the general skill description is not a rule! That's always a possibility.

And I did not extrapolate anything. I just applied the "everything which is not explictly allowed is forbidden" philosophy you agreed with. Of course I can't give a rule but that's the very meaning of RAW. Even if it is an example, as long as it is the only conditions given, that's it.

PS: and sorry for the late answer. Was busy elsewhere.

Edit: I forgot. There's nothing wrong with Rule's Compendium saying that it takes precedence. This is a specific rule that overrides the general PSR rule. The only thing that it does not do well is to formally write what it is replacing. I can concede that. Here I am just assuming that the text by itself is enough to understand which is replaced by what and that's what the authour was thinking.

[Doctor Awkward]

All right, so if a rogue uses UMD to emulate the class feature of a Monk's Belt he is treated as having the unarmed damage of a 15th-level monk, which is then improved by 5 levels to 20th level.

He then cannot use this in any meaningful fashion because UMD explicitly does not grant you the ability to use the features of said class, you are just treated as having them.

So he has base unarmed damage of 2d10, makes unarmed attacks at -4 penalty and provokes an attack of opportunity from any opponent that threatens him when he does.

[Gruftzwerg]

I am totally aware that what I am saying in not RAI.

About this general decription.

The basic assumption you are again making is that Check gives you the rules for "when you may roll for UMD". What I read in the description is

Nowhere it is said that the applicable conditions are in Check! And I am reading. You can infer that the outcomes gives you the conditions if you want, but that is not what is written. You brush this every time, but that is kind of important. I can't even understand how you can come up with the assertion that the general skill description does not change the reading.

I disagree here:


Check: What a character (“you” in the skill description) can do with a successful skill check and the check’s DC.

"Check" determines which DC's are tied to a specific situation or circumstance. As such it determines under which situations/conditions the rolls can produce a beneficial outcome.





Can it be clearer than

And applying PSR to that level when everything in the PSR deals about book and topic precedence?

And I heartfully hope that sub rules can refine the rules: otherwise, there's no point in sub rules existing in the first place. And there is no point in the "specifc trumps general" rule either. Even in the UMD, there is such a thing: Activate blindly. Unless you are also saying that your character don't need to speak or gesture as needed, this is exactly a refinement. If you take the Handle animal skill, it is even worse

Nothing else except the tables. Everything are in the sub rules, even what the labels actually means. But the moment that Activate blindly is refining the rule, you must consider that the others can also do the same, otherwise it is an internally inconsistent reading. But again, you can rule that sub rules can't refine rule and that Handle Animal is dysfunctional in the same way that Knowledge skills are also dysfunctional because the general skill description is not a rule! That's always a possibility.
The PSR compares rules to each other, not examples. I don't see why an example should be treated as a subrule. To be a subrule, you would need to create more specific ("sub-") situation (Specific Trumps General in the RC or as the PSR calls it: Topic precedence).

An example is still sole an example and not defining a more specific situation. Those 2 things logically exclude each other. An example is "tied to a specific situation" and "doesn't create a more specific situation".

Assume "we agree on a discussion" (the rule) about the topic "cars".
If I start with "oldtimers" as example, does this automatically imply that you are now forced to sole talk about oldtimers?
While you are free to also use "oldtimer" examples, you ain't limited to em. Because "oldtimer" was sole an example and not an agreed subtopic (a subrule).
And in the moment "when we agree on a new subtopic" (sub-rule), we aren't providing examples of "cars". We are creating more specific (sub) rules/topics.







And I did not extrapolate anything. I just applied the "everything which is not explictly allowed is forbidden" philosophy you agreed with. Of course I can't give a rule but that's the very meaning of RAW. Even if it is an example, as long as it is the only conditions given, that's it.
See above. If I where to agree that the example is a subrule, you would be right. But that is not the case here. As said, I totally disagree that "an example" can "create new rules". That is imho logically not possible.



PS: and sorry for the late answer. Was busy elsewhere.

Edit: I forgot. There's nothing wrong with Rule's Compendium saying that it takes precedence. This is a specific rule that overrides the general PSR rule. The only thing that it does not do well is to formally write what it is replacing. I can concede that. Here I am just assuming that the text by itself is enough to understand which is replaced by what and that's what the authour was thinking.

Same here, time management could be improved, but the nice weather lures me always outside^^

Regarding RC:
1. It's still optional, since it ain't defined as one of the CORE rule books you need to play.
2. The RC creates the topic Updated Rules and calls out supremacy over it. Thus following 100% the rules of the PSR

It updates and elucidates the rules, as well as expanding on them in ways that make it more fun and
easier to play. When a preexisting core book or supplement differs with the rules herein, Rules Compendium is meant to take precedence.
_____________________________________


All right, so if a rogue uses UMD to emulate the class feature of a Monk's Belt he is treated as having the unarmed damage of a 15th-level monk, which is then improved by 5 levels to 20th level.

He then cannot use this in any meaningful fashion because UMD explicitly does not grant you the ability to use the features of said class, you are just treated as having them.

So he has base unarmed damage of 2d10, makes unarmed attacks at -4 penalty and provokes an attack of opportunity from any opponent that threatens him when he does.

Never implied otherwise. =)
You still need to have/invest in other things to make it useful. Take a dip into unarmed swordsage as example. Or take Improved Unarmed Strike regularly. Or abuse it for Eldritch Claws (clawlock). Or maybe you are a grappler?
There are enough niche situations to make use of it. I personally favor the Monk's Tattoo over the belt (for forum showcases, since I barely got to play at high optimization tables..^^), since the Tattoo offers the movement speed bonus (while only giving +4 on lvls).

[Nelfin]

What? So now even what is in the check section is not a rule when it even does not say "for example" as in the Lidda example? I am done trying to understand "RAW".

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.
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.
So the chalice example is an example of an example?........

[redking]

If only the PHB example of Lidda had been written like this instead.


For example, Lidda finds a magic chalice that turns regular water into holy water in the hands of a cleric or an experienced paladin with the ability to turn undead. She attempts to activate the item by emulating the cleric’s turn undead class feature. 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.

[RandomPeasant]

If only the PHB example of Lidda had been written like this instead.

Yes, if the rules said a different thing, they would be different. The notion that this has even the most marginal impact upon what the rules actually say is somewhat absurd.

[Darg]

Yes, if the rules said a different thing, they would be different. The notion that this has even the most marginal impact upon what the rules actually say is somewhat absurd.

Or it's simply not different. Saying something in a different way doesn't necessitate completely different meaning.

[RandomPeasant]

Or it's simply not different. Saying something in a different way doesn't necessitate completely different meaning.

Well, in this case the suggestion is that it should say something that doesn't let you emulate expending abilities instead of something that does, so I would suggest that the meaning is in fact being changed.

[Darg]

Well, in this case the suggestion is that it should say something that doesn't let you emulate expending abilities instead of something that does, so I would suggest that the meaning is in fact being changed.

Or the text never said or even implied that there was emulation of the expenditure of abilities. As I've mentioned before, "as if turning undead" is a descriptive phrase and not a declaration. Removing it from the sentence does not change the meaning of the sentence at all. If they wanted it as an indication to how something is done, "as turning undead" would be the actual correct phrase to use. We can argue that the existence of "if" in the phrase was a mistake, but I doubt it because the skill directly states that it doesn't let you actually use the ability. It'd be like saying Skirmisher's Boots when UMD'd allows you to skirmish.

[RandomPeasant]

When you find a way to turn undead without expending turn attempts, you let me know. Until then, it is demonstrably the case that something that works when someone "channels positive energy into it as if turning undead" involves expending something.

[Gruftzwerg]

What? So now even what is in the check section is not a rule when it even does not say "for example" as in the Lidda example? I am done trying to understand "RAW".

So the chalice example is an example of an example?........

Kinda.. sounds a bit irritating but let me try to put it into a better phrase..

"Emulate a Class Feature" starts to give a broad example of the most common type/situation for this roll and then gives a specific example fitting for that (broad example).

_____

I've the impression that some still struggle with the difference between the legal and illegal "use" of "Emulating a Class Feature":

(1) "pretending that you use an ability to active the magic item"

and

(2) "using an ability to alter a magic item's effect"

The 2 different meanings of "use" here are tied to the "source" of the benefit.

The chalice example fits into (1), because Turning Undead is a required (or at least optionally possible) part of "activating" the magic item. The magic item is the one giving the desired effect (source) based on the pretended input. Thus this is a legal example of "Emulating a Class Feature".
Same goes for Monk's Belt. The belt is still the source of the desired effect and acts "normal" for the "pretended input".

But when you have abilities that alter the effects of an magic item (2), the desired effect's source is the "ability" and not the magic item.
You may not use things like a warlock's "Hellfire Infusion", or an artificer's "Metamagic Spell Trigger/Completion" abilities. Here the abilities are the source of the altering effect to use the item.

You can only get the things that an "item's rule text can give you" (source) and "not what the abilities rule text could give you"(source).


______________

Back to UMD staffs:

Imho you have to fake Casterlevels and the casting ability score to fully use a staff as UMD user.

While this may look broken, it's imho the intended power lvl of UMD.
Keep in mind that UMD is a skill. As all skills you get better at what you do, if you have more points.
Further note that skills in 3.5 can easily go beyond what normal real life humans can do and produce even "epic results", if you have a very high (specialized) modifier in that skill.
As such, it's imho only natural (doesn't have to mean balanced!) that UMD scales in some situations (the niche of magic item that scale).

Try to see it this way:
We know the wizards in general have the most power when it comes to class Tiers. But we also know that Sorcerers can specialize in a niche where they can easily overshadow the wizard in that niche.

UMD is a tool to specialize in magic item use. As such, it is to be expected to become very strong in the 3.5 multiverse. The "balance problem" here is not UMD, its magic overall.

Every table should decide how much UMD cheese is good for their table. But if you allow specialized full caster builds, a UMD focused build is the lesser problem in most cases. Just my humble opinion.

[redking]

Imho you have to fake Casterlevels and the casting ability score to fully use a staff as UMD user.

UMD doesn't say that you can set the caster levels or DCs of staffs at all. People make the inference, but its not explicitly or even implicitly stated.

[RandomPeasant]

It also doesn't explicitly say you can activate eternal wands, or that you can emulate the class features of a Dragon Shaman. But you can do those things, because they fall within the general purview of things it allows you to do, and the skill is not obligated to explicitly allow every possible use. So it is with boosting up staves, which you can do because having a particular caster level is a class feature which is eligible for emulation. If you don't like that, you can just houserule it. This thing where we tie ourselves in knots to try and assert some part of the system isn't broken just makes the exercise of understanding the rules harder for everyone else.

[Nelfin]

Kinda.. sounds a bit irritating but let me try to put it into a better phrase..
Yeah I was really pissed off.


"Check" determines which DC's are tied to a specific situation or circumstance. As such it determines under which situations/conditions the rolls can produce a beneficial outcome.
Is the bold part written somewhere or is it common sense?


"Emulate a Class Feature" starts to give a broad example of the most common type/situation for this roll and then gives a specific example fitting for that (broad example).
I think you are over interpreting because of the "Sometimes". Now, my interpretation. As far as activating an item with a class feature is concerned, there are only two mutually exclusive possibilities: 1) yes, the item needs a class feature to be activated; 2) no, it doesn't. But some items are in the first categories and some are in the second. "Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item" refers to the first category and is a generic rule that covers all the possibilities. Put together with the sentence "In this case, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20.", it is the same meaning as "When an item needs to be activated with a class feature, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20.".

If the second category was indeed meant to be not emulable, it makes sense to just not talk about it. Another way to view this second category is: even if you were able to emulate a class feature for these items, I can't see how the emulated (or not by the way) class feature would impact the item. It just doesn't need the class feature and wouldn't care about it. As you say, it is not an input: "no effect". Or equivalently, just don't allow a check for this second category.

As a comparison, let's say you want to open a door but you don't have the key. Surely lock picking it would do something to it because it needs the key you are pretending to have by lock picking. Now you can (pretend to or actually) dance in front of it if you want, the door just doesn't care: "no effect".

This interpretation does not create weird stuff like "not a rule" in the Check section and "example of an example".



I've the impression that some still struggle with the difference between the legal and illegal "use" of "Emulating a Class Feature":

(1) "pretending that you use an ability to active the magic item"

and

(2) "using an ability to alter a magic item's effect"

The 2 different meanings of "use" here are tied to the "source" of the benefit.

The chalice example fits into (1), because Turning Undead is a required (or at least optionally possible) part of "activating" the magic item. The magic item is the one giving the desired effect (source) based on the pretended input. Thus this is a legal example of "Emulating a Class Feature".
Same goes for Monk's Belt. The belt is still the source of the desired effect and acts "normal" for the "pretended input".

But when you have abilities that alter the effects of an magic item (2), the desired effect's source is the "ability" and not the magic item.
You may not use things like a warlock's "Hellfire Infusion", or an artificer's "Metamagic Spell Trigger/Completion" abilities. Here the abilities are the source of the altering effect to use the item.

You can only get the things that an "item's rule text can give you" (source) and "not what the abilities rule text could give you"(source).
This seems to be related to my question about "does the emulation carries from the activation to the effect of the item?". There are two contradicting view point here to me:

the emulation (well except the race and alignment emulation which can be used outside of activation) is about activation. Activation and effect are not the same line of the description so are different;
it is one single action so there is no reason to separate activation and effect. But there is also an example of such a case: attack roll and damage roll;
it is unclear if "activating an item" is actually the same as "using an item".

I am under the impression that RAW reading is a tag science (i.e. "use", "activation" and "effect" are 3 different things) so I am enclined to say "no, it does not carry over to the effect". But you seem to say the inverse. Why?

[Darg]

When you find a way to turn undead without expending turn attempts, you let me know. Until then, it is demonstrably the case that something that works when someone "channels positive energy into it as if turning undead" involves expending something.

When you can demonstrate that the sentence says that Lidda was actually turning undead, you let me know. I can reiterate the difference between "as if" and "as" if you'd like.


It also doesn't explicitly say you can activate eternal wands, or that you can emulate the class features of a Dragon Shaman. But you can do those things, because they fall within the general purview of things it allows you to do, and the skill is not obligated to explicitly allow every possible use. So it is with boosting up staves, which you can do because having a particular caster level is a class feature which is eligible for emulation. If you don't like that, you can just houserule it. This thing where we tie ourselves in knots to try and assert some part of the system isn't broken just makes the exercise of understanding the rules harder for everyone else.


Use a Wand

Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill also applies to other spell trigger magic items, such as staffs.

Seems really explicit that it does apply to other sources of spell trigger items. Of course, emulating the spells feature of a wizard doesn't actually give you a spell list because it doesn't actually allow you to use the ability. Therefore, emulating the spells feature of any class doesn't allow you to use spell trigger items because you need the spell on your class spell list. You have to use the "Use a Wand" use of the skill which does not allow you to emulate a class. Though, you are quite right that it doesn't specifically say you can emulate the class features of a dragon shaman. It also doesn't specifically call out anything other than the turn undead feature either. There is no tying knots at all. Trying to make UMD do something it doesn't makes knots.

[RandomPeasant]

When you can demonstrate that the sentence says that Lidda was actually turning undead, you let me know. I can reiterate the difference between "as if" and "as" if you'd like.

You can repeat the distinction without a difference all you want. It doesn't mean anything, because it's a distinction without a difference. Show me the way to turn without expending resources. Without that, resources are in fact being expended, and since the example says you can emulate that, you can jolly well emulate expending resources. Honestly, it'd be a better argument to claim the only thing you can emulate is expending turn attempts.

If it offends you, just houserule it. "You can't emulate a class feature at a higher level than your own" and "you can't emulate expending class features" solve 100% of the problems here, and I promise you they do not take 200 posts to explain. Unlike "the real and important difference between 'as if' and 'as' means you can expend turn attempts without expending turn attempts". I am begging people to please just accept that the rules mean what they say and be willing to change ones that say things they don't like.


Seems really explicit that it does apply to other sources of spell trigger items.

I mean, yes, that was my point? When I say "things do not need to be explicitly enumerated, they can be listed by categories", saying "well it lists that category" does not constitute a meaningful response.

[redking]

It also doesn't explicitly say you can activate eternal wands, or that you can emulate the class features of a Dragon Shaman. But you can do those things, because they fall within the general purview of things it allows you to do, and the skill is not obligated to explicitly allow every possible use. So it is with boosting up staves, which you can do because having a particular caster level is a class feature which is eligible for emulation. If you don't like that, you can just houserule it. This thing where we tie ourselves in knots to try and assert some part of the system isn't broken just makes the exercise of understanding the rules harder for everyone else.

There is literally no hint that you can actually use an ability score via UMD to set DCs. You can emulate an ability score in order to use the item, if the item requires a given ability score to use. That's the context. You make inferences that the ability score can be used in place of your own AFTER the item is activated. That's not written in the rules at all.

[RandomPeasant]

Yes there is. You can emulate an ability score, and when activating a staff your ability score sets the DC. There's no "after the item is activated", no one thinks you can make a UMD check after you've popped a fireball out of a staff to retroactively change whether people made their saves.

[redking]

Yes there is. You can emulate an ability score, and when activating a staff your ability score sets the DC. There's no "after the item is activated", no one thinks you can make a UMD check after you've popped a fireball out of a staff to retroactively change whether people made their saves.

The part bolded. It doesn't say that AT ALL. You emulate the ability score to be able to use the item, if required. Where does it say that your emulated ability score to activate the item sets the DC? Waiting for a quote here.

[RandomPeasant]

So is your contention that you can only ever emulate an ability score in the context of casting a spell from a scroll? That UMD is powerless to help you if there is a magic sword that unlocks special bonuses if you have a high enough CHA or a rod that grants benefits to someone with sufficient STR? Or perhaps your notion that there is some manner of separate step arises from the fact that the entry for staves only explicitly says that the caster level is used "when activating", so clearly the other stuff is picked up at some other time when the ability to emulate things during activation would not apply.

[Nelfin]

Why not? Why would the rules care about the expectations of someone about a skill?

Edit : and that’s coming from someone who may or might agree on the CHA-based sword stuff.

[redking]

So is your contention that you can only ever emulate an ability score in the context of casting a spell from a scroll? That UMD is powerless to help you if there is a magic sword that unlocks special bonuses if you have a high enough CHA or a rod that grants benefits to someone with sufficient STR? .

You emulate the ability score to make use of the item. That is, if the item has a virtual gatekeeper for activation of certain abilities through a specific ability score, you can emulate that ability score BUT NOT USE the ability score.

I'm glad you mentioned STR because it's apposite to what I am talking about. Let's say there is an item called Flachion of the Storm Ogre that grants a +2 electricity damage when used by a character with 20 STR. If you do not have 20 STR, then you can emulate it. You can now activate the gatekept +2 electricity damage provided by the item. However, you do NOT get 20 strength when making attacks. You use your own strength score for that.

Ditto abilities scores for staffs. If there is gatekept feature connected to an ability score, you get access to the higher order feature if you can emulate the score. You don't get to use the roll for emulated INT for DCs however. Ditto caster level. You emulate the CL to get access. You can't use the emulated caster level via UMD.

If you stop making inferences, you'll stop thinking that people are talking house rules. It's you doing that.

[RandomPeasant]

If there is gatekept feature connected to an ability score, you get access to the higher order feature if you can emulate the score. You don't get to use the roll for emulated INT for DCs however. Ditto caster level. You emulate the CL to get access. You can't use the emulated caster level via UMD.

So if the staff had the separate individual properties of "DC increases by 1 if you have an INT of 12" and "DC increases by 2 if you have an INT of 14" and "DC increases by 3 if you have an INT of 16" and so on, that would be eligible for emulation. But since it has the integrated single property of "DC increases based on whatever your INT happens to be", it can't be emulated? Sorry, but I don't find that convincing at all.

The CL thing is particularly bad, as it explicitly says that it picks up the CL when it is activated. The idea that you can have a CL for the purpose of doing the activation, but not have the activation notice that CL, slices the timing with the a thinness that is not reflected anywhere in the actual text.

[redking]

You are talking about two different events that are not the same. You don't have a caster level. There is nothing there for the staff to use. What you do is emulate a caster level to get access ("activate") the abilities of the staff (if mandated).

If the staff description gave a +2 DC for a specific ability score, that is, it has a gatekept feature, then you get the +2 DC. Otherwise you get nothing except your own relevant ability score.

Let me redirect you to your mentioning of STR. If a weapon is gatekept for a feature, say +2 electricity damage at 20 STR, are attacks by the character using that weapon now made at 20 STR? If not, why not? It's consistent with your interpretation.

And why even bother with an item that requires 20 STR? Just emulate ability scores willynilly.

Note that under my interpretation, it doesn't matter when you activate or for what reason.

[Darg]

Show me the way to turn without expending resources.

I mean, you have yet to show where the description says the item requires you to actually turn undead. Once you do that I'll show you how to turn without expending resources.


So is your contention that you can only ever emulate an ability score in the context of casting a spell from a scroll? That UMD is powerless to help you if there is a magic sword that unlocks special bonuses if you have a high enough CHA or a rod that grants benefits to someone with sufficient STR? Or perhaps your notion that there is some manner of separate step arises from the fact that the entry for staves only explicitly says that the caster level is used "when activating", so clearly the other stuff is picked up at some other time when the ability to emulate things during activation would not apply.

UMD is used TO activate an item. If an ability score or caster level isn't required to use the item, why would the skill allow you to emulate having it so? To use a staff, you roll to use a wand. You never roll to emulate a class feature or ability score.


You are talking about two different events that are not the same. You don't have a caster level. There is nothing there for the staff to use. What you do is emulate a caster level to get access ("activate") the abilities of the staff (if mandated).

They do have a minimum caster level for a reason.

[RandomPeasant]

You are talking about two different events that are not the same. You don't have a caster level. There is nothing there for the staff to use. What you do is emulate a caster level to get access ("activate") the abilities of the staff (if mandated).

The timing distinction you are carving out here does not exist. The activation is one step. The description of staves says that the CL used during that step replaces that of the staff if it is higher. There is simply no opportunity for a CL to apply to "can you use the staff" but not "what does the staff do".


If the staff description gave a +2 DC for a specific ability score, that is, it has a gatekept feature, then you get the +2 DC. Otherwise you get nothing except your own relevant ability score.

Again, this is just saying that you can benefit from enumerated ways to post DC from ability scores, but not general ones, without any basis for that distinction.


Let me redirect you to your mentioning of STR. If a weapon is gatekept for a feature, say +2 electricity damage at 20 STR, are attacks by the character using that weapon now made at 20 STR? If not, why not? It's consistent with your interpretation.

If a magic sword said "you can add your STR bonus to damage rolls with this weapon", you could absolutely UMD up a big bonus by emulating a high STR. But magic swords don't say that, because the ability to add your STR bonus to weapon damage is a normal rule. The ability to use your person attributes for item DCs, on the other hand, is very much a special property of staves, and therefore eligible for emulation.


I mean, you have yet to show where the description says the item requires you to actually turn undead. Once you do that I'll show you how to turn without expending resources.

"You have yet to show where the description that specifically mentions turning undead mentions turning undead."

It is, if that was unclear, the place where it explicitly mentions turning undead.


UMD is used TO activate an item. If an ability score or caster level isn't required to use the item, why would the skill allow you to emulate having it so?

And now we're back to "you can't UMD a staff of power because it can be used as a weapon without a roll". The ability to use one functionality of UMD to engage with an item does not preclude using others. The idea that it does instantly creates wide swathes of dysfunction throughout the game.


They do have a minimum caster level for a reason.

No one is claiming that you can't activate a staff without emulating a caster level. I don't understand why you keep pointing to stuff that is completely explicable like it is some giant hole in the rules, particularly when you also bash open giant holes in the rules like "it is impossible to UMD a staff of power".

[redking]

If a magic sword said "you can add your STR bonus to damage rolls with this weapon", you could absolutely UMD up a big bonus by emulating a high STR. But magic swords don't say that, because the ability to add your STR bonus to weapon damage is a normal rule. The ability to use your person attributes for item DCs, on the other hand, is very much a special property of staves, and therefore eligible for emulation.

These are just ad hoc house rulings. Use the same ruling for every instance, and you will arrive at a consistent use of UMD.

Look at the context of what UMD is used for. It tells you.

*To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability.
*Some magic items have positive or negative effects based on the user’s alignment.
*Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item.
*Some magic items work only for members of certain races, or work better for members of those races.
*Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list.

What it doesn't say is that you get secondary benefits. UMD gives you what is explicitly granted, not anything else. Under your interpretation, someone with a Domain Staff is firing it off for free. Under mine, everything works perfectly consistently in every scenario. Which is more likely?

[RandomPeasant]

These are just ad hoc house rulings.

What? Here is the SRD section on damage (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#damage). Here is the SRD section on magic weapons (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm). You'll note that it is the former which describes adding your STR bonus to damage, not the latter. So, no, I am not house ruling things when I say that magic weapons do not cause you to add your STR bonus to damage.


What it doesn't say is that you get secondary benefits.

You have no coherent definition of "secondary benefits". Apparently, "increase the DCs to reflect an INT of 16 if your INT is at least 16" is a "secondary benefit" that is eligible for emulation, but "increase DCs to reflect an INT of whatever INT you happen to have" is not. What is the distinction there, other than "redking is okay with A but not B"?


Under your interpretation, someone with a Domain Staff is firing it off for free. Under mine, everything works perfectly consistently in every scenario. Which is more likely?

Let's consider another example: wish. Here are two possible interpretations:

1. wish allows you to create a magic item of any cost.
2. wish allows you to create only magic items that cost less than 50 GP.

Under the first interpretation, an XP-free wish has game-destroying power, as it can be used to create magic items of nearly arbitrary capabilities. Under the second interpretation, such a wish is almost perfectly harmless. Yet it is demonstrably true that the former interpretation is the one that is consistent with the text of the rules. I agree that the precedent that you can emulate expending abilities is bad, particularly since many magic items are unnecessarily written with expending abilities as a part of their activation. But it is demonstrably a part of the rules, and ignoring it because we don't like it is abandoning the entire edifice that the rules can be understood from the text.

[redking]

A wish could create any magical item, but the wish spell assigns an additional cost for magical item creation outside of the normal 5000 XP that must be paid somehow. It's also clear that wishing for an item of a caster level higher than the wish itself is a "greater effect" and subject to the potential downsides. Scroll of 100 CL simulacrum, for example.

The wish spell defines itself, and you "must pay" for magical item creation. I'm guessing this all hinges on a called Solar or something of that nature. The Solar would have to pay the item creation costs.

Anyway, I'm not ignoring anything, just following UMD as it is written and not making inferences.

Edit: there are also people that say you can produce any psionic item for costing under 50,000 gp using wish because it's "not a magical item". Context, plus common sense resolves all these problems.

[RandomPeasant]

A wish could create any magical item, but the wish spell assigns an additional cost for magical item creation outside of the normal 5000 XP that must be paid somehow.

No it mustn't. Both the regular XP and the additional XP for more expensive items are described as part of the "XP Cost". Any effect that negates the 5000 XP therefore also negates any additional XP.


It's also clear that wishing for an item of a caster level higher than the wish itself is a "greater effect" and subject to the potential downsides. Scroll of 100 CL simulacrum, for example.

What line of text do you think makes that clear? Because I don't see anything in "Create a magic item, or add to the powers of an existing magic item." that says word one about caster levels, nor anything in the greater effects clause that would cause it to trigger in such a case.


Anyway, I'm not ignoring anything, just following UMD as it is written and not making inferences.

Except, you know, for the example that says that you can emulate expending uses of class features. You're ignoring that one pretty hard. You are also inferring that ability scores can be emulated in contexts other than scrolls, just not in ways you don't like.

[Gruftzwerg]

Yeah I was really pissed off.
Sorry to hear that. Not my intention, but sadly these kind of things happen in rule discussions...



Is the bold part written somewhere or is it common sense?
as said in check we have:

...
You must consciously choose which requirement to emulate. That is, you must know what you are trying to emulate when you make a Use Magic Device check for that purpose. The DCs for various tasks involving Use Magic Device checks are summarized on the table below.
As said multiple times now (*this is what pisses me off.^^ When it boils down to the same argument again and again and again.. *):
"Check and its Table" set the general rules when and if you may roll.

And the sole requirement mentioned here to roll UMD is that you "activate a magic item". The magic item does not need to have requirements for this. Otherwise many items with additional effects for certain alignments or races wouldn't be UMD-able. (see further below)

Everything what follows after "Check & its Table" show "some" examples ("some" = not all).



I think you are over interpreting because of the "Sometimes". Now, my interpretation. As far as activating an item with a class feature is concerned, there are only two mutually exclusive possibilities: 1) yes, the item needs a class feature to be activated; 2) no, it doesn't. But some items are in the first categories and some are in the second. "Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item" refers to the first category and is a generic rule that covers all the possibilities. Put together with the sentence "In this case, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20.", it is the same meaning as "When an item needs to be activated with a class feature, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20.".
...
..

This interpretation does not create weird stuff like "not a rule" in the Check section and "example of an example".
Imho you are underestimating the power of "sometimes" here. As in real life, we use special keywords that are indicating a "mechanical principle" (dunno how else to describe/word this..) . Some examples "sometimes; always; never;..." (note the hint I try to give here with the bold parts. I did hide an example an in example here^^)
Especially for "examples" it is important to know if the example is meant exclusive or not. Does it represent all possible examples or not. And here the word "sometimes" play a very big roll if you ask me. Otherwise you are ignoring a very important piece of rule relevant information imho.




This seems to be related to my question about "does the emulation carries from the activation to the effect of the item?". There are two contradicting view point here to me:

the emulation (well except the race and alignment emulation which can be used outside of activation) is about activation. Activation and effect are not the same line of the description so are different;
it is one single action so there is no reason to separate activation and effect. But there is also an example of such a case: attack roll and damage roll;
it is unclear if "activating an item" is actually the same as "using an item".


To your question about "does the emulation carry over to the effect":
If it wouldn't, you couldn't get any better bonuses for having a certain race or alignment.

Think about aligned magic items that have a negative effect for having the wrong alignment. If the "pretended alignment" (fake input by UMD) wouldn't carry over to "the effect the item is producing", you would get the penalties and never the benefits with UMD.

Imho we can see this as a prime-example that the "faked input by UMD" carries over to the produces effect of the item.
(Note: the effect produced by the ITEM not the ABILITY! This is the important distinction UMD makes. The item is producing the effect, not the faked ability/alignment/stat/whatsoever!)

And while we are at this:
Aligned items with negative effects for those with the wrong alignment are also a Prime Example that UMD can be used on items that can be activated without UMD. It is possible to activate such an item and to face the penalties due to wrong alignment. UMD is not needed to activate the item. As always with UMD (read "Check:"), "you are free to roll any UMD roll as soon as you try to activate a magic item". This permission given in Check is still untouched. The "examples" given, show that "sometimes" items may have requirements to fulfill, but that doesn't make a rule out of it, nor has it the permission to change the general rule presented in "Check:".

Have a look below:


These are just ad hoc house rulings. Use the same ruling for every instance, and you will arrive at a consistent use of UMD.

Look at the context of what UMD is used for. It tells you.

*To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability.
*Some magic items have positive or negative effects based on the user’s alignment.
*Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item.
*Some magic items work only for members of certain races, or work better for members of those races.
*Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list.

What it doesn't say is that you get secondary benefits. UMD gives you what is explicitly granted, not anything else. Under your interpretation, someone with a Domain Staff is firing it off for free. Under mine, everything works perfectly consistently in every scenario. Which is more likely?

I just quoted this to point out the things I was referring to in my response to Nerfin. But this goes to everybody too.
Think about the full mechanical impact of these examples as explained above (imho).


I am under the impression that RAW reading is a tag science (i.e. "use", "activation" and "effect" are 3 different things) so I am enclined to say "no, it does not carry over to the effect". But you seem to say the inverse. Why?
? They are also 3 separate things for me:
- I activate a Monk's Belt by donning it.
- I use the Monk's Belt when I use my Unarmed Strike Damage or my AC
- the effect gives me higher US dmg and an AC bonus

or in the case of a "staff":
- I use the staff by activating it...
- ... producing an effect if my attempt didn't fail.

I don't see how this should affect my argument? But maybe I didn't get your intention here? If not, please rephrase your question.

[KoDT69]

Wow so sorry if I'm chiming in super late, and I admit I only skimmed from page 5. Here's my totally correct (unsolicited) opinions on a few points!

Lidda emulating Turn Undead. Not only does the example not expressly state that an actual use of Turn Undead happened or that it was even required! Channeling the energy is a language choice maybe misused. My interpretation would be like "channel positive energy" would be like the prayer or mental state preparing for the TU attempt, and the TU is ACTUALLY expended when the gathered energy is released. Like Goku charging a Kamehameha (which is the condition the chalice is checking for) but can choose not to release that energy.

The Monk Belt is a fairly oddball item as written. At first I was like "nah you can't increase your bonus with UMD" but reading the arguments actually changed my mind! The belt grants AC bonus and US damage that is the same type and calculated the same as the Monk class abilities but are not expressly those abilities but similar ones that override the class abilities if they are higher. The belt does a lookup on the table to determine it's strength. It does not expressly state that the 15 emulated levels are required to power the item. It would seem logical in a sense but is distinctly an amount based on a check which can be faked with UMD.

[Nelfin]

Unless you can explain why I interpret wrongly what you said, please don't make double standards.

If it wouldn't, you couldn't get any better bonuses for having a certain race or alignment.

If the "pretended alignment" (fake input by UMD) wouldn't carry over to "the effect the item is producing", you would get the penalties and never the benefits with UMD.
In your interpretation of the rules, it doesn't matter that some skills (I am referring to the Knowledge skills) are dysfunctional. Why it should matter now that another skill would be dysfunctional?


But maybe I didn't get your intention here? If not, please rephrase your question.
You argue about the structure of the skills description, in essence the general skill description being in a different place than the Check section to end with the general skill description not being a rule. But I cannot argue about activation being in a different place than the effect in an item description and ending up with "the activation emulation does not carry over to the effect". Why?


So, the complete argumentation about the general skill description not being a rule is

Check: What a character (“you” in the skill description) can do with a successful skill check and the check’s DC.
in conjunction with what is written in the Check section for specific skills. This is consistent now at least. This would indeed means that Knowledge skills for instance are unusable.

I am not ignoring what you are saying

"Check and its Table" set the general rules when and if you may roll.
This is still an assertion without any reason given. I could assert that it is not the case and I would be done. Is the reason that the "name of the actions" appear there for the first time in the table? What about text taking precedence over table then?

(By the way, with my current reading, I agree with "Check and its Table" set the general rules when and if you may roll, or at least that Emulate a class feature section, for instance, does not give all the possible conditions, and by default these general conditions are in "Check and its Table". But this is for consistency reasons and not ruling reasons. See below.)


With my current understanding of UMD (it is still full of unreferenced rulings but it is the most conssitent reading I can come up at the moment), it is possible to use UMD to (OK category)

have the AC and unarmed damage of a level 20 monk with the Monk's belt;
have +3 enhancement bonus with the Dwarven Thrower.

It is not possible to use UMD to (NOK category)

heal ability damage with the Caduceus bracers;
to cast spells with runestaves.

It is unclear if it is possible to use UMD to (fuzzy category)

make 2 additional damage per hit with the Badge of Glory;
set the DC of staves.


You can actually do two things with UMD:

activate an item;
emulate a quality in an ongoing manner.

So arguing about activation and effect being different, the first usage of UMD does not apply to the effect of an item (even though I am thinking now that this distinction may be inneffective). Actually, I think that the first usage is for activation and the second usage is for effect. The only quality example given is alignment. I guess that everything that is Emulate , the [something] is a quality. So UMD let you emulate a race, an alignment, an ability score and a class feature in an angoing manner. Being emulation in an ongoing manner, I think that it is intended to work for items with an ongoing effect, that is use-activated in DMG and -- in MIC.

(By the way, if Emulate a class feature were to be giving all the possible conditions for its usage, it would not be possible to emulate a class feature in an ongoing manner. That's the consistency reason I previously mentioned.)

Before going further in my reasoning, I'll also give the following description


Activation: channel positive energy into the chalice;
Effect: turn regular water into holy water.


which in textual form is

... 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.
using the cooking rule [effect] when [activation]. Now Lidda is activating the chalice using her emulated turn undead class feature but does not actually use turn undead.

So now, for the OK category, both examples are use-activated item. You use the ongoing emulation of UMD (and not the activation) of a race and class feature. In both cases, you only pretend to be something but don't actually use what you pretend to be.

For the NOK category, you also emulate in an ongoing manner a class feature. But for these items, you need to actually use the class feature for the effect to work properly.

For the fuzzy category, it is uncelar how they fit in my current reading. The Badge of Glory has a command activation method and the effect is on the next melee attack. For the Badge of Glory, you could argue that you activate it, then emulate a smite class feature ability in an ongoing manner and then try to hit someone with a melee attack to obtain the 2 additional damage. Staves have a spell trigerred activation method and the effect is casting a spell so it is even more problematic. With my current interpretation, you would want to know if it is possible to emulate a quality in an ongoing manner on unactivated items or if this emulation would have an effect on the item at all, if you can activate a staff and emulate an ability score to set the DC... If you can only emulate a quality on an ongoing manner on already activated items, it means that the Badge of Glory needs an emulation each time it is activated. If the ongoing emulation is possible on an unactivated item or even in a vacuum (i.e. even without an item at all), then there's no real question.

Edit: got everything to be consistent now if the only condition for using UMD is activating an item. Can set staff DC and obtain the 2 additional damage with the Badge of Glory although an emulation roll is required each time the Badge is activated. So what are the reasons for the "Check and its Table" thing?

[S]Edit2: or actually, no you cannot set the DC of a staff with UMD because it is said in the staff description that you use your caster's level. Actually unclear.... The actual wording is use the caster level at activation so emulable.

[Nelfin]

Dissecting UMD even further, I am wondering now if, from a ruling point of view, it is possible to use several usages of UMD for an activation in the first place (except if specifically written as in Emulate a class feature with the alignment requirement):

You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand. If you are using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner (to emulate a neutral evil alignment in order to keep yourself from being damaged by a book of vile darkness you are carrying when you are not evil, for example), you need to make the relevant Use Magic Device check once per hour.
(emphasis is mine).

Edit: I interpreted the if in "If you are using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner..." as contrasting "in an ongoing manner" with something related to activation. I think the if is contrasting Emulate [something] and the other possible usage such as Use a Wand. Every Emulation is in an ongoing manner so that they all apply to activation and effect. But activation and effect are still different things.

[Gruftzwerg]

Unless you can explain why I interpret wrongly what you said, please don't make double standards.


In your interpretation of the rules, it doesn't matter that some skills (I am referring to the Knowledge skills) are dysfunctional. Why it should matter now that another skill would be dysfunctional?
Dunno if I have missed to say this (that I changed my mind from my initial statement!), but if you reread the definition of the general feat description line carefully, you should see that there is no dysfunction at all. Not for UMD, nor for Knowledge..

The skill name line is followed by a general description of what using the skill represents. After the description are a few other types of information:
The first part defines this as "general description of the ability". The second sentence denies itself to provide/trump any rule-information that belongs into the following categories.
Is the general description of Knowledge providing rules that belong into the other categories? No, as such the presented info are to be taken as general description rule.
My UMD interpretation is still untouched, since there we have a conflict between the general description and what "Check:" says. And by its own definition, the "general skill description" excludes itself to provide rules for that topic. That is not the job of the general skill description to provide additional rules for Check. It can provide general rules outside of "Check" and the other mentioned categories.
So can we just agree that this line (general skill description) may not trump "Check:"?
After that, everything functions without any dysfunctions imho.

[Nelfin]

Dunno if I have missed to say this (that I changed my mind from my initial statement!), but if you reread the definition of the general feat description line carefully, you should see that there is no dysfunction at all. Not for UMD, nor for Knowledge..
Nope, or at least I didn't see it. Thanks, it would have been detestable otherwise.


So can we just agree that this line (general skill description) may not trump "Check:"?
Agreed. I guess your reason is

You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand.
saying you make an UMD check per activation contradicting

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.
and apply "Specific trumps general"? Although I agree on the reading "Specific trumps general", where is it coming from? Extrapolation of PSR?


After that, everything functions without any dysfunctions imho.
Don't know about that. The above quote says "a UMD check". Not "You make UMD checks" or "one or several". If only one single UMD check is allowed per activation, you cannot even activate a scroll. I don't think that this is what is meant. But why (I mean from the rules)?

I also agree on the general idea you have given previously

I've the impression that some still struggle with the difference between the legal and illegal "use" of "Emulating a Class Feature":

(1) "pretending that you use an ability to active the magic item"

and

(2) "using an ability to alter a magic item's effect"

I guess the problem is the specifics and the sibylline

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.
You can interpret this as "don't use your emulated class feature in a vacuum". But there is nothing of the sort for ability score. In principle, you could also emulate charisma and make a bluff check. This would also be actually using your emulated ability score.

And the emphasis can also be interpreted as Emulate a class feature applies only to the activation line of an item in which case Monk's belt is not "emulable" either. The chalice example is not helpfull here. It is supposed to illustrate a class feature requirement for activation.

And before you say that I ignore stuff, yes, I know, the source of the effect. But the effect of the Caduceus Braceus, for instance, is not changed either. So everything in there

Caduceus bracers allow you to convert your innate healing powers into other forms of restorative magic. By sacrificing 5 points of healing (derived from lay on hands, wholeness of body, or any similar ability that measures your ability to heal as a daily limit of points), you can remove 1 point of ability damage or remove the dazed, fatigued, or sickened condition from one creature.
is actual, or can be interpreted as actual at the moment, and so would be the "sacrificing points". It boils down to is "sacrificing points" an actual use or not of Lay on Hands. Basically, you can also interpret that everything in the effect of an item is actual (since not in activation and the effect being unaltered) in which case Monk's belt is not "emulable" either.

So it is still unclear.

Edit : what does [activating an item] means to you? To me, it means [fulfilling the requirements written in the activation part of the description of the item].

[Gruftzwerg]

Nope, or at least I didn't see it. Thanks, it would have been detestable otherwise.
Sorry if I haven't been clear enough (or missed to say it). No ill intentions here.


Agreed. I guess your reason is

saying you make an UMD check per activation contradicting

and apply "Specific trumps general"? Although I agree on the reading "Specific trumps general", where is it coming from? Extrapolation of PSR?
Yes and yes.
Specific Trumps General thrives originally from the Primary Source Rule and was later implemented into the RC for reasons. Sadly it boils down to literary 2 words in the PSR that "tell you" the "Specific Trumps General"-rule.
And that is: "Topic Precedence".
Since the PSR doesn't mechanically limit or redefine what is a topic, anything "more specific" creates a "more specific topic" (specific trumps general), while still obeying general rules for that topic that haven't been trumped.
And yeah, hiding this rule into these 2 words didn't help the community as expected and thus the rule was then implemented into the Rules Compendium. Note that the RC contains everything from the ERRATA, but its not a single section anymore and got scattered all over the book.
The "Specific Trumps General" rule is on page 5 of the RC: "Order of Rule Application"





Don't know about that. The above quote says "a UMD check". Not "You make UMD checks" or "one or several". If only one single UMD check is allowed per activation, you cannot even activate a scroll. I don't think that this is what is meant. But why (I mean from the rules)?
Imho they use "a UMD check" because the example in that sentence is a wand, which sole needs one check by default (unless you roll for additional stuff like alignment, race or bla). I don't see any indicator to take this as a "hard rule" for everything.




I also agree on the general idea you have given previously

I guess the problem is the specifics and the sibylline

You can interpret this as "don't use your emulated class feature in a vacuum". But there is nothing of the sort for ability score. In principle, you could also emulate charisma and make a bluff check. This would also be actually using your emulated ability score.
The General Rule requirement of "activating a magic item" still applies.

Check

You can use this skill to read a spell or to activate a magic item.
As such, the bluff example doesn't work.



And the emphasis can also be interpreted as Emulate a class feature applies only to the activation line of an item in which case Monk's belt is not "emulable" either. The chalice example is not helpfull here. It is supposed to illustrate a class feature requirement for activation.
Sorry, but you are trying to change the magic items effect duration. Just because the Monk's Belt's effect isn't instantaneous and has an ongoing duration, you may not treat it different than the chalice. The "activation time" has nothing to do with the items "effect duration". You are trying to draw connections where there are none.
The sole rule for ongoing item effects and UMD we have is that you need to reroll one per h for ongoing effects (and hope that you don't roll a natural 1. Because that blocks the item form UMD for 24h).



And before you say that I ignore stuff, yes, I know, the source of the effect. But the effect of the Caduceus Braceus, for instance, is not changed either. So everything in there

is actual, or can be interpreted as actual at the moment, and so would be the "sacrificing points". It boils down to is "sacrificing points" an actual use or not of Lay on Hands. Basically, you can also interpret that everything in the effect of an item is actual (since not in activation and the effect being unaltered) in which case Monk's belt is not "emulable" either.

So it is still unclear.
Caduceus Bracers
Imho as long as it is part of the "activation" process, it's legal "use" for UMD. It's not a passive effect that gets triggered when you do something else (an ongoing passive effect, which would be "activated" by donning the item). It gets activated by intentional "skill use" for the magic item. As far as I see it, it should be legal and work.

Monk's Belt
As said, just because you UMD the item, it doesn't change the effects duration. As ongoing effect we are forced by the UMD rues to roll a "check" once per hour. And that's it.
Activation time != effect duration


edit: regarding how often you may roll UMD
We have a rule that limits rerolls and that is the "try again" section. But we don't have any limitation for how many aspects of UMD you may roll on activation. And if we take the examples, it is indicated that multiple rolls may apply to a situation. Imho the "a UMD roll" is referring to each aspect you wanna roll. You make "a UMD roll" for each aspect you wanna roll. See that "a UMD roll" can be used without limiting the amount of different UMD rolls you can do.
It is also an indicator that you need to make these rolls separately and may not use a single physical roll for everything.

[Nelfin]

Seems my brain did something on its own this night.

I think I finally found why there is such a huge difference in reading between people, at least between you and me (and potentially why you think that I was changing duration and time in my previous post). I don't remember anyone in the thread defining properly what [Activate an item] means. You seem to have a broader meaning than me. This produces a totally different end result for UMD. You don't seem to have seen my edit in my last post either. Anyway, to me

[Activate an item] means to [fulfill the requirements of, that is what is written in, its activation method].
And that's also true that I didn't question this meaning until yesterday. This is a sensible way to define [activate an item] though.

If you take this definition, a "ruling reading" gives the same result as a "face value reading" for the Rule's Compendium version of UMD (well, at least I think). Which is pretty good for a writting that is supposed to clarify the rules. And these results are also the same as the UMD general skill description of the PHB version, well except for Emulate an alignment and Emulate a race (and for Use a scroll depending if multiple usages are not allowed). Which is also good. I still agree that the general skill description has no bearing on a rule reading of the UMD skill even if it holds rule value. But it is also supposed to be a description of what the UMD represents and can certainly be used for adjudicating the readings.

For the PHB version of UMD, a "rule reading" gives a slightly different result than a "face value reading" and the general skill description (for Emulate an ability score).

In any case, I'll detail my current reading and you let me know if something is wrong in term of rule reading, and more importantly why. Actually, I will not detail the reading for Decipher a written spell which is in its own category, nor Activate blindly, Use a scroll, Use a wand which are tied to the activation methods and do not create difficulties, at least are not debated. The single or multiple checks allowed aspect does not have anything on what I am going to detail. All emphasises are mine.


If you’re trained in this skill, you can use it to read spells and activate magic items as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.
This tells you what you can do with UMD, i.e. that you are allowed to fulfill the requirements of the item's activation method as if [stuff].


You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a magic item as part of the action required to activate that item.
This tells you when you perform the UMD check(s).

For

Emulate Ability Score

To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard spells, Wisdom for divine spells, or Charisma for sorcerer or bard spells). Your effective ability score, appropriate to the class you’re emulating when you try to cast the spell from the scroll, is your Use Magic Device check result –15. If you already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability, you don’t need to make this check.
and

Emulate 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 –20. This skill doesn’t 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’re emulating has an alignment requirement, you must meet it, either honestly or by emulating an appropriate alignment with a separate Use Magic Device check.

You can use the skill in this way to make a caster level check with an item. Your effective caster level is your check result –20. See Caster Level Checks, page 31.
I don't have anything to say at the moment. Just follow the general rule of UMD.

For

Emulate Alignment

Some magic items have positive or negative effects based on the user’s alignment. Use Magic Device lets you use these items as if you were of an alignment of your choice. You can emulate only one alignment at a time.
and

Emulate Race

Some magic items work only for members of certain races, or work better for members of those races. You can use such an item as if you were a race of your choice. You can emulate only one race at a time.
The use contradicts the UMD description before so that it is applicable to some new conditions.

Note that it doesn't matter if you interpret "To cast a spell from a scroll", "Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item", "Some magic items have positive or negative effects based on the user’s alignment" and "Some magic items work only for members of certain races, or work better for members of those races" as examples or not, they constitute the only interesting cases.


Now if you take the PHB version of the skill:

You can use this skill to read a spell or to activate a magic item. Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.

In this version, the use makes things different for Emulate an ability score and Emulate a class feature. And now it is understandable why there is this sibbyline line in Emulate a class feature.

Emulate a Class Feature:

Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item. In this case, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20. [Chalice example]

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).


The only difference between both versions with this reading is for Emulate an ability score which is allowed for item usage in the PHB (and for which the "To cast a spell..." being an example or not is important) while it is allowed for item activation in RC.

[Gruftzwerg]

Seems my brain did something on its own this night.

I think I finally found why there is such a huge difference in reading between people, at least between you and me (and potentially why you think that I was changing duration and time in my previous post). I don't remember anyone in the thread defining properly what [Activate an item] means.

Because we have a definition for "Activating a Magic Item".
So lets dive into that:

Have a look at Magic Item Basics (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm)

Using Items

To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly. In most cases, using an item requires a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. By contrast, spell completion items are treated like spells in combat and do provoke attacks of opportunity.

Activating a magic item is a standard action unless the item description indicates otherwise. However, the casting time of a spell is the time required to activate the same power in an item, regardless of the type of magic item, unless the item description specifically states otherwise.

The four ways to activate magic items are described below.

Spell Completion

This is the activation method for scrolls. A scroll is a spell that is mostly finished. The preparation is done for the caster, so no preparation time is needed beforehand as with normal spellcasting. All that’s left to do is perform the finishing parts of the spellcasting (the final gestures, words, and so on). To use a spell completion item safely, a character must be of high enough level in the right class to cast the spell already. If he can’t already cast the spell, there’s a chance he’ll make a mistake. Activating a spell completion item is a standard action and provokes attacks of opportunity exactly as casting a spell does.

Spell Trigger

Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Anyone with a spell on his or her spell list knows how to use a spell trigger item that stores that spell. (This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin.) The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Command Word

If no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.

A command word can be a real word, but when this is the case, the holder of the item runs the risk of activating the item accidentally by speaking the word in normal conversation. More often, the command word is some seemingly nonsensical word, or a word or phrase from an ancient language no longer in common use. Activating a command word magic item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Sometimes the command word to activate an item is written right on the item. Occasionally, it might be hidden within a pattern or design engraved on, carved into, or built into the item, or the item might bear a clue to the command word.

The Knowledge (arcana) and Knowledge (history) skills might be useful in helping to identify command words or deciphering clues regarding them. A successful check against DC 30 is needed to come up with the word itself. If that check is failed, succeeding on a second check (DC 25) might provide some insight into a clue.

The spells identify and analyze dweomer both reveal command words.

Use-Activated

This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.

Many use-activated items are objects that a character wears. Continually functioning items are practically always items that one wears. A few must simply be in the character’s possession (on his person). However, some items made for wearing must still be activated. Although this activation sometimes requires a command word, usually it means mentally willing the activation to happen. The description of an item states whether a command word is needed in such a case.

Unless stated otherwise, activating a use-activated magic item is either a standard action or not an action at all and does not provoke attacks of opportunity, unless the use involves performing an action that provokes an attack of opportunity in itself. If the use of the item takes time before a magical effect occurs, then use activation is a standard action. If the item’s activation is subsumed in its use and takes no extra time use activation is not an action at all.

Use activation doesn’t mean that if you use an item, you automatically know what it can do. You must know (or at least guess) what the item can do and then use the item in order to activate it, unless the benefit of the item comes automatically, such from drinking a potion or swinging a sword.
As you can see, we have well defined rules for "Activating a Magic Item".
Now lets see what this means for UMD and our two example items we have been discussing here mainly about:

Monk's Belt:
Is a continually functioning item that gets activated by donning it. UMD adds the rule that for these items you have to make a roll each hour.
Under normal (non-UMD) conditions, the item is activated once and works according to the input given at the moment when you donne it. This means by RAW that you would have to reequip it after each levelUp to update the bonus it gives. (DM: "Does your character change cloth before going to bed? And where do you have your sleeping outfit written on your equipment block?" ^^)
The UMD user instead has to give each hour a new fake input to set the bonus the item gives for the next hour. And he must hope to not roll a natural 1, or he may not use the item with UMD for the next 24h (!hours, not next day!). Hopefully he is a warlock with Deceive Item and can always take 10 (to prevent rolling a natural 1 and to have a constant UMD roll result).

Staffs:
These work like wands for UMD (for the most part..). But as said before, nothing stops you from doing other UMD rolls beside from the required "wand roll". So, you can UMD to emulate class levels to pretend to have caster levels. And you can pretend to have a high ability score for casting. The item takes the fake input and produces an effect in the according strength.

I finally want to point out again that the item has to work accordingly to the fake input. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to benefit from UMD-ing alignments or races. The item works as if the fake input was real. All examples presented in "UMD" work under this assumption.

Are we "done" now? Kindly asking^^
If questions should remain, I'm up for it. :)

[Nelfin]

First, did I read the rule correctly from your point of view? That is the PHB version of UMD allows to

activate an item with faked class feature;
use an item with faked ability score, alignment and race.

whatever activate an item and use an item really means.

I am under the impression that you think that what I said above does not allow to have a +3 enhancement with the Dwarven thrower. You can totally do that because Emulate a race is for item usage. Emulate a race allows to fake the input of the effect.

[Nelfin]

I'll expand a little bit further to clarify my reading. Let's take the Monk's belt example.

Your class emulation gives you an emulated 15 level of monk because you are allowed to do so, even if being a monk is not a requirement of the Monk's belt.

Now you are trying to use these 15 emulated class level to obtain the AC and unarmed damage of a 20 level monk. The class feature emulation is for activation. Ask yourself: does my usage of the 15 emulated level is for activating the Monk's Belt?
[Edit: or ask yourself, does what you are trying to do fit into "activate the Monk's belt as if you were a level 15 monk"?]
No, so this usage of the emulated level is not legal.

[redking]

Staffs:
These work like wands for UMD (for the most part..). But as said before, nothing stops you from doing other UMD rolls beside from the required "wand roll". So, you can UMD to emulate class levels to pretend to have caster levels. And you can pretend to have a high ability score for casting. The item takes the fake input and produces an effect in the according strength
.

It doesn't say that in the rules for UMD. That's what you've inferred or extrapolated.

[RandomPeasant]

It doesn't say that in the rules for UMD. That's what you've inferred or extrapolated.

It also doesn't say you can only make a single UMD roll when activating an item. Can you UMD a wand that requires you to be a particular race? A staff that only works for people who are Lawful? Something that requires you to be a Dwarf and have an INT of 18? I would say that you can, and I don't see anything in the text that prevents you. But if you can do those things, it seems quite difficult to argue that you cannot activate a staff and emulate a class level for doing so.

[redking]

It also doesn't say you can only make a single UMD roll when activating an item. Can you UMD a wand that requires you to be a particular race? A staff that only works for people who are Lawful? Something that requires you to be a Dwarf and have an INT of 18? I would say that you can, and I don't see anything in the text that prevents you. But if you can do those things, it seems quite difficult to argue that you cannot activate a staff and emulate a class level for doing so.

You are conflating different types of activation with what happens when the magical device is activated.

You can roll for any of those things you list above, but not get any extra benefits that you are not due when activating the item.

For example, if a staff works better for a dwarf with 25 intelligence by giving access to a meteor swarm (denied to all others), and the UMD rolls are successful, then the user that activated the staff in this way gets that benefit. What the user doesn't get is some sort of pseudo intelligence that grants DCs based on over 25 intelligence. Same with caster level. You could have a staff that required a minimum caster level for activation. Once you meet that requirement via UMD, you use the caster level of the staff. You don't get extra benefits.

The UMD check for activation doesn't provide anything beyond what should have. You are on an equal basis with, not a better basis, with a qualified character.

[RandomPeasant]

You are conflating different types of activation with what happens when the magical device is activated.

How on earth could I conflate "activation" with "being activated"? They're the same thing! I understand that your theory of the rules is that there is somehow an extra step between "activate item" and "item generates effect", but that's just not the case. Staffs explicitly pick up their caster level "when activating", which is exactly the time at which you can have an emulated caster level limited only by your UMD check.

[redking]

How on earth could I conflate "activation" with "being activated"? They're the same thing! I understand that your theory of the rules is that there is somehow an extra step between "activate item" and "item generates effect", but that's just not the case. Staffs explicitly pick up their caster level "when activating", which is exactly the time at which you can have an emulated caster level limited only by your UMD check.

You can emulate an ability score. You can make a DC 20 +CL to activate a scroll, which isn't precisely the same as emulating a caster level.

1. You activate the item.
2. There is a magical effect.

What we disagree on is point 2. Or rather, how the magical effect plays out.

[RandomPeasant]

You can emulate an ability score. You can make a DC 20 +CL to activate a scroll, which isn't precisely the same as emulating a caster level.

A caster level is a class feature and can be emulated.


What we disagree on is point 2. Or rather, how the magical effect plays out.

No, what we disagree on is that there is no "point 1" and "point 2". You activate the item, which creates a magical effect. It's like saying there are separate "you roll Diplomacy" and "the target's attitude changes" events. You're splitting hairs in a way that is on no level supported by the text. As I have pointed out repeatedly, the rules for staves quite clearly say that the caster level replacement happens during activation. Given that there is simply no room for a caster level to be emulated for activation (as UMD quite explicitly allows you to do), but not set the CL for the spell from the staff, even if we accept your invented distinction.

[Nelfin]

I don't see a more tautologic wording for

[Activate an item] as if [stuff]
than

you can use [stuff] to fake the input of the [item's activation]
...

Nor a more tautologic wording for

[Use an item] as if [stuff]
than

you can use [stuff] to fake the input of the [item's use]
...

[Gruftzwerg]

I'll expand a little bit further to clarify my reading. Let's take the Monk's belt example.

Your class emulation gives you an emulated 15 level of monk because you are allowed to do so, even if being a monk is not a requirement of the Monk's belt.

Now you are trying to use these 15 emulated class level to obtain the AC and unarmed damage of a 20 level monk. The class feature emulation is for activation. Ask yourself: does my usage of the 15 emulated level is for activating the Monk's Belt?
[Edit: or ask yourself, does what you are trying to do fit into "activate the Monk's belt as if you were a level 15 monk"?]
No, so this usage of the emulated level is not legal.
&

You are conflating different types of activation with what happens when the magical device is activated.

You can roll for any of those things you list above, but not get any extra benefits that you are not due when activating the item.

For example, if a staff works better for a dwarf with 25 intelligence by giving access to a meteor swarm (denied to all others), and the UMD rolls are successful, then the user that activated the staff in this way gets that benefit. What the user doesn't get is some sort of pseudo intelligence that grants DCs based on over 25 intelligence. Same with caster level. You could have a staff that required a minimum caster level for activation. Once you meet that requirement via UMD, you use the caster level of the staff. You don't get extra benefits.

The UMD check for activation doesn't provide anything beyond what should have. You are on an equal basis with, not a better basis, with a qualified character.

As said, we have evidence that magic items work according to your fake input. Otherwise items that work better/different for some races/alignments wouldn't be UMD able.

Example:
Take an aligned weapon that has negative effects for having the wrong alignment.
You can UMD to fake your alignment.

Under your assumptions, you "sole activate the item but your fake input doesn't change the effect"
Under my assumption "the item works (for at least 1h if it is ongoing) according to your fake input"

It has to take your fake input for real, otherwise UMD wouldn't be able to do the things mentioned in its own rule text.

As such...
The Monk's Belt creates an effect according to the (fake) input given.
The Staff produces an effect according to the (fake) inputs given.

:::::::::

I want to point out that the final interpretation that I presented fits all presented examples. It also explains the (at first glance) contradicting usage of the word "use" in the UMD-class-feature section.
In fact, I don't see any dysfunctions at all. Not for UMD nor even for other skills like Knowledge.

The sole thing that might leave a bitter taste in your mouth is the power level of UMD in certain niche scenarios. But as said, that is imho intentional and is based on the high powerlvl of magic overall in 3.5
And you get "better" at using skills when you have a higher rank/modifier. As such it is normal for UMD to have at least some scaling involved. Here we have found some examples (Monk's Belt, Staffs...).

Do you think that this is to strong, and that mundanes shouldn't get access to nice and strong abilities?
("those perky rogues shouldn't be able to wild wands better then a mage" is that the problem here?^^)
I don't get why you seem to have problems to accept this as intended powerlvl. We are talking about a 3.5(!) skill with is effectively named "cheat magic items". And you have problems to accept the high power level.
Ain't that a bit absurd?
(no offense here. I sole want to point out, that in my 3.5 book this is as "balanced" as it is normal for "magical 3.5 stuff").

!!! Again (for the lurking still readers here^^), this is not a play-advice. Just my humble interpretation of what RAW dictates. Discuss this with your DM/table and try to agree upon a ruling for each table/campaign. !!!

[Darg]

It also doesn't say you can only make a single UMD roll when activating an item. Can you UMD a wand that requires you to be a particular race? A staff that only works for people who are Lawful? Something that requires you to be a Dwarf and have an INT of 18? I would say that you can, and I don't see anything in the text that prevents you. But if you can do those things, it seems quite difficult to argue that you cannot activate a staff and emulate a class level for doing so.

Rules are permissive. If they don't allow you to roll more, then you can't roll more. In order to use a staff, you roll to see if you can fake having the spell on the list (not a class feature). That's it. The staff already has all the other necessary stuff baked in. A 6th level spell is treated as if you have an ability score of 16 (+3) and a caster level of 11 (minimum).

In fact, if we look really close the skill tells you you only roll once normally:


You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand. If you are using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner, you need to make the relevant Use Magic Device check once per hour.

[RandomPeasant]

Rules are permissive. If they don't allow you to roll more, then you can't roll more.

One right, one wrong. Rules are permissive. But they don't have to say "you can do X and Y" for you to be able to do both X and Y at the same time. Nowhere does it say explicitly that you can employ both Power Attack and a mountain hammer in the same action, but you are nevertheless able to do so. Similarly, the fact that you use the "Use a Wand" function of UMD to activate a staff at all does not preclude you from using some other function of UMD as well when you activate it. If it did, it would say so, much as the rules do say that you can't apply the same metamagic feat more than once.


In fact, if we look really close the skill tells you you only roll once normally:

Yes, you only need to roll once to activate a staff. No one disputes that, and the way you keep bringing it up is somewhat confusing to me. "You can do X if you roll once" doesn't mean "you can't roll more than once for different things if you want". But let's apply this theory consistently. Do you believe that it is impossible to use UMD to activate a spell-trigger item that requires its user to be a Dwarf? After all, "Emulate a Race" is an additional check just as "Emulate a Class Feature" is. Similarly, "Emulate a Class Feature" says that you can, well, emulate "a class feature". Does that mean that UMD is powerless to help you activate an item that requires two class features to work? Or are "a" and "only one" perhaps different things with different meanings.

[Nelfin]

@Darg

I don't think that you can take the "once" here to be meant as only one single UMD check per activation. The "a" is more obscure but you can't activate a scroll if you rule one single UMD check per activation. This is certainly not what it is meant to be, that is it is not RAI at least.



@Gruftzwerg


As said, we have evidence that magic items work according to your fake input. Otherwise items that work better/different for some races/alignments wouldn't be UMD able.

Example:
Take an aligned weapon that has negative effects for having the wrong alignment.
You can UMD to fake your alignment.

Under your assumptions, you "sole activate the item but your fake input doesn't change the effect"
Under my assumption "the item works (for at least 1h if it is ongoing) according to your fake input"

It has to take your fake input for real, otherwise UMD wouldn't be able to do the things mentioned in its own rule text.

As such...
The Monk's Belt creates an effect according to the (fake) input given.
The Staff produces an effect according to the (fake) inputs given.
(Emphasis is mine). Why are you clinging to that "sole activate the item but your fake input doesn't change the effect" when I explicitly said that it is not the case here (emphasis is mine)?

First, did I read the rule correctly from your point of view? That is the PHB version of UMD allows to

activate an item with faked class feature;
use an item with faked ability score, alignment and race.

whatever activate an item and use an item really means.

I am under the impression that you think that what I said above does not allow to have a +3 enhancement with the Dwarven thrower. You can totally do that because Emulate a race is for item usage. Emulate a race allows to fake the input of the effect.
to explain the difference with Emulate a class feature, which is just above the post you were kind^^ enough to quote.

I'll expand a little bit further to clarify my reading. Let's take the Monk's belt example.

Your class emulation gives you an emulated 15 level of monk because you are allowed to do so, even if being a monk is not a requirement of the Monk's belt.

Now you are trying to use these 15 emulated class level to obtain the AC and unarmed damage of a 20 level monk. The class feature emulation is for activation. Ask yourself: does my usage of the 15 emulated level is for activating the Monk's Belt?
[Edit: or ask yourself, does what you are trying to do fit into "activate the Monk's belt as if you were a level 15 monk"?]
No, so this usage of the emulated level is not legal.

Actually, why are also ignoring the other post that doesn't fit your point of view, which is just above yours by the way, where I explain in different terms the reading? Now I have to quote myself, with a little expansion to be even clearer (in bold).

I don't see a more tautologic wording for

[Activate an item] as if [stuff]
than

you can use [stuff] to fake the input of the [item's activation]
...

Nor a more tautologic wording for

as if [stuff]
than

you can use [stuff] to fake the input of the [item's use], that is [item's activation] and [item's effect]
...
So that this reading of the rules fits every single example and points given in UMD. Yours doesn't fit for plenty of cases, such as the Monk's belt, as examplified again by your kind quote where it is exaplained why it cannot work: you are not activating the item with this usage of the emulated levels, and this

I want to point out that the final interpretation that I presented fits all presented examples. It also explains the (at first glance) contradicting usage of the word "use" in the UMD-class-feature section.
In fact, I don't see any dysfunctions at all. Not for UMD nor even for other skills like Knowledge.
is formally true (emphasis is mine) but is certainly misleading!

And please don't bring up the chalice example:

examples are supposed to be discarded for a RAW reading;
I have provided how to formally describe the chalice to fit, again, every single point of the rule.



I thought that you were arguying in good faith, but I have to return you your own question: do you like the outcome of a RAW reading?

I also had another point which was obscure in your supposed "RAW" reading, but there is no point in "discussing".

PS: by the way, this

We are talking about a [U]3.5(!) skill with is effectively named "cheat magic items". And you have problems to accept the high power level.
Ain't that a bit absurd?
is circular argumentation, that is no argumentation at all.

[Gruftzwerg]

@Gruftzwerg


(Emphasis is mine). Why are you clinging to that "sole activate the item but your fake input doesn't change the effect" when I explicitly said that it is not the case here (emphasis is mine)?

to explain the difference with Emulate a class feature, which is just above the post you were kind^^ enough to quote.


Actually, why are also ignoring the other post that doesn't fit your point of view, which is just above yours by the way, where I explain in different terms the reading? Now I have to quote myself, with a little expansion to be even clearer (in bold).

So that this reading of the rules fits every single example and points given in UMD. Yours doesn't fit for plenty of cases, such as the Monk's belt, as examplified again by your kind quote where it is exaplained why it cannot work: you are not activating the item with this usage of the emulated levels, and this

is formally true (emphasis is mine) but is certainly misleading!

And please don't bring up the chalice example:

examples are supposed to be discarded for a RAW reading;
I have provided how to formally describe the chalice to fit, again, every single point of the rule.



I thought that you were arguying in good faith, but I have to return you your own question: do you like the outcome of a RAW reading
Sorry but I don't agree with you that the "absence of the word use" justifies that you aren't using the the fake input for the effect. What about Caster level checks?

You can use the skill in this way to make a caster level check with an item. Your effective caster level is your check result –20. See Caster Level Checks, page 31.
According to your point of view, I could only "use UMD to fake the caster level check", but I "couldn't use the checks fake results as input for effect's results" or what? Just because it doesn't say that you "use" the effective caster level in the 2nd sentence you are now not "using" that effective caster level anymore?
Sorry, but I feel dizzy if I try to follow that logic.

Is it that hard to accept that UMD is faking input and that the item behaves accordingly? You are nitpicking here at a level where it ain't helpful anymore imho.

Activation and "use" of the item don't have to be simultaneously. But the "use" still works accordingly to the "fake input". I fail to see why this shouldn't be the case. Every presented "example" in UMD seem to follow the logic that the item takes the "fake input" for real.
Can you provide any contrary evidence by text that would indicate otherwise, besides from the absence of the word "use"?



I also had another point which was obscure in your supposed "RAW" reading, but there is no point in "discussing".

PS: by the way, this

is circular argumentation, that is no argumentation at all.

I added the blue color for a reason. It was meant as a lil joke to lighten up the mood. But I see that it failed its purpose... -.-

I try my best (intent) to argue in good faith. But as said, sadly the intention doesn't always reach all readers.

Imho easier said then done, to reach to everybody with your good intentions ;)

[Darg]

One right, one wrong. Rules are permissive. But they don't have to say "you can do X and Y" for you to be able to do both X and Y at the same time. Nowhere does it say explicitly that you can employ both Power Attack and a mountain hammer in the same action, but you are nevertheless able to do so. Similarly, the fact that you use the "Use a Wand" function of UMD to activate a staff at all does not preclude you from using some other function of UMD as well when you activate it. If it did, it would say so, much as the rules do say that you can't apply the same metamagic feat more than once.

Except the rules are system of processes and Power Attack and Mountain Hammer work with synergistic processes that do in fact explicitly say they can work together. "On your action" means something within the rules. Mountain Hammer is an action. So the rules do say they work together.

Making the assumption of what the rules would say if they meant something else is not a rules argument. The rules simply don't say you can. The rules don't say that you can roll more than a single check when you activate an item with some exceptions. Using a scroll gives permissions for 3 checks: decipher (as spellcraft), spell knowledge, and ability score. Emulating a class feature has 2: class feature and alignment.


Yes, you only need to roll once to activate a staff. No one disputes that, and the way you keep bringing it up is somewhat confusing to me. "You can do X if you roll once" doesn't mean "you can't roll more than once for different things if you want". But let's apply this theory consistently. Do you believe that it is impossible to use UMD to activate a spell-trigger item that requires its user to be a Dwarf? After all, "Emulate a Race" is an additional check just as "Emulate a Class Feature" is. Similarly, "Emulate a Class Feature" says that you can, well, emulate "a class feature". Does that mean that UMD is powerless to help you activate an item that requires two class features to work? Or are "a" and "only one" perhaps different things with different meanings.

I bring it up because it is important. You roll to use/activate an item. You don't roll to improve an item. Is there a spell trigger item that has a racial requirement to use the item? As far as I know there aren't any actual spell trigger items that have a racial requirement. It's similar to the Staff of Power argument. Is the luck bonus or the enhancement bonus spell-trigger activation? Obviously not. The spell trigger activation is only for casting the spells within the staff. We should keep the discussion within the realm of reality, not basing arguments on hypotheticals that aren't evidenced to exist.

If we want to be technical, the UMD rules even say you have to choose a requirement:


You must consciously choose which requirement to emulate. That is, you must know what you are trying to emulate when you make a Use Magic Device check for that purpose.

It's in the singular. If any assumption should be made, it's that they would have pluralized if they meant for you to roll more than once beyond the exceptions I mentioned above.


@Darg

I don't think that you can take the "once" here to be meant as only one single UMD check per activation. The "a" is more obscure but you can't activate a scroll if you rule one single UMD check per activation. This is certainly not what it is meant to be, that is it is not RAI at least.

I can and do as I mention above, except for the specific exceptions of course. As I brought up earlier, is there actually an item that requires multiple UMD checks that would break a RAW reading of the skill? I've never encountered one. There can be multiple activation methods on a single item like the staff of power where it has both use activated and spell trigger. I think I've come across an item with separate requirements like that, but it didn't require you rolling for different tasks at the same time.

[Nelfin]

@Gruftzwerg

OK, I'll take your words for granted and will take the blue part of your post as lighting the mood. Actually, I don't really understand what is so difficult to understand in my point of view. I'll try to be the most explicit possible. There may be a lot of typos. If there is something unclear, just let me know so that I can further explain or correct the typos. Also, if I forgot one of your point, again, let me know because this post will be long enough.

First it may be that, since you don't understand how the alignment/race can give the intended bonus, you are inferring that every [Emulate stuff] works the same so that [Emulate a class feature] also works in the same way as [Emulate an alignment] and [Emulate a race]. It may be because you are confused between [Activate an item] and [Use an item] which actually are different things. So forget about your reading of UMD. It is easier said than done! Otherwise, it creates a contradiction in your mind that you seem to resolve with "my point of view is correct".

Also,

Is it that hard to accept that UMD is faking input and that the item behaves accordingly?
yes it is, at least in your interpretation of "behaves accordingly", because of the huge warning

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.
which, from my point of view, says "Eh guys, be careful with [Emulate a class feature]".

You are nitpicking here at a level where it ain't helpful anymore imho.
Isn't RAW about nit picking words like "sometimes"?

We need to agree on the following reading: the PHB version of UMD lets you:

[active an item] with an [emulated class feature];
[use an item] with an [emulated alignment] or an [emulated class];

whatever [active an item] and [use an item] really mean. There is a hint that those two are different since they did change the wording from

Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.
to

If you’re trained in this skill, you can use it to read spells and activate magic items as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.
I'll come back later on about why I think those two are indeed different. But at the moment, let's say they are indeed different. You can re read the post once you agree (or not) that they are different and in which manner they are different. (By the way, I will not talk about [Emulate an ability score] because it is different for the two versions of UMD and more importantly because there is still something obscure in the reading.)

Everything I am saying boils down to: does what you are trying to do fits into

[Activate an item] as if [stuff]?
or

[Use an item] as if [stuff]?
depending on if [Activate an item] or [Use an item] is allowed in UMD. I'll take the two examples


Activation: use-activated;
Effect: This simple rope belt, when wrapped around a character’s waist, confers great ability in unarmed combat. The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. If donned by a character with the Stunning Fist feat, the belt lets her make one additional stunning attack per day. If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk. This AC bonus functions just like the monk’s AC bonus.


and

Activation: use-activated;
Effect: This weapon commonly functions as a +2 warhammer. In the hands of a dwarf, the warhammer gains an additional +1 enhancement bonus (for a total enhancement bonus of +3) and gains the returning special ability. It can be hurled with a 30-foot range increment. When hurled, it deals an extra 2d8 points of damage against giants or an extra 1d8 points of damage against any other target.

As said, you are emulating a class feature and you obtained 15 levels of Monk. You are trying to use these 15 emulated levels to obtain the AC and unarmed damage of a level 20 Monk. Since [Emulate a class feature] is allowed for activation, you ask "am I using these 15 emulated levels to [Activate the Monk's belt] as if [I were a level 15 Monk]? Even if [Activate an item] has not been defined yet, you intuitively know that it is linked to the acivation part of the description of the Monk's belt and not to its effect. So, the answer is no because you are using the effect of the Monk's belt to obtain the AC and unarmed damage of a level 20 Monk. So this usage of your emulated levels is not legal.

Now, you are emulating to be a Dwarf and you are trying to obtain the +3 enhancement bonus of the Dwarven thrower. Since [Emulate a race] is allowed for use, you ask "am I using the emulated Dwarf race to [Use the Dwarven thrower] as if [I were a Dwarf]? Even if [Use an item] has not been defined yet, you intuitively know that it has to encompass the effect, otherwise there is no point in using the item in the first place. So the answer is yes since you are indeed using the effect part of the description of the Dwarven thrower to obtain the +3 enhancement. So this usage of your emulated Dwarf race is legal.


Item description
For what we are interested in, there are two entries in item's description: Activation and what I call Effect. In addition to the hint above about changing "use" into "activate" in UMD, if you take the examples of the Monk's belt and the Dwarven thrower, the have both the same activation method (use-activated) but have different effects. So indeed, activation and effect have to be different.

[Activating an item] is linked to the activation method of the item, that is to the activation part of the item's description. I previously proposed a definition for [Activate an item]. Actually, the definition does not matter, the only important things are that the activation part of the description is different from the effect part of the description and that [Activate an item] is linked only to the activation part of the item's description.

[Using an item] is more fuzzy here. It has to encompass the effect because that is the very objective of using the item. But it is unclear if it also encompasses the activation or not. Again, it does not matter because there is no item which is activated with an alignment or with a race. The only thing that matters is that when we say [Use an item] it does encompass the effect of the item.


[Activate an item] and [Use an item] in UMD
When it is said in UMD [activate an item] as if [stuff], the [stuff] only applies to the activation part of the item's description: you can fake the input of the item's activation, that is you can fake the inputs that are described in the activation part of the item's description. When it is said in UMD [use an item] as if [stuff], the [stuff] can be applied to the effect part of the item's description: you can fake the inputs that are described in the effect part of the item's description.

That's why I said "[Activate an item] as if [stuff]" is the same as "you can use [stuff] to fake the input of the [item's activation]" and "[Use an item] as if [stuff] is the same as you can use [stuff] to fake the input of the [item's effect]" (for what really matters).

Said differently, [Activate an item] and [Use an item] in UMD delineates the type of input you are allowed to fake: input in activation for [Activate an item] and input in effect for [Use an item].

Said differently again, the item's activation behaves accordingly to the fake inputs when it is said [Activate an item] as if [input]. The item's effect behaves accordingly to the fake inputs when it is said [Use an item] as if [input] (the only two examples for which it is clear that the fake input has an impact on the effect of the item are the Book of vile darkness and the Dwarven thrower which are in [Emulate an alingment] and [Emulate a race]. Both say [Use the item] as if [alignment] or [race]).

So now, you can go back to the Dwarven thrower and Book of vile darkness examples to see that the interpretation here works, without needing to allow [Emulate a class feature] to fake the effect's inputs. If anything, you can see that there is at least another reading of the rules that is consistent with everything in UMD so that you can potentially stop thinking that the only way that UMD could work is to allow [Emulate a class feature] to fake the effect's inputs and go on from there.

You can also see the consistency of the reading because everything works as in [Activate the item] as if [stuff] or [Use the item] as if [sutff]. There is no extrapolation of what is written in UMD.

Caster's level check with UMD

According to your point of view, I could only "use UMD to fake the caster level check", but I "couldn't use the checks fake results as input for effect's results" or what?
Yes totally, because [Emulate a class feature] is for activation. When you try to activate a scroll with UMD, you need (in any reasonable circumstances, that is when you could not activate the scroll otherwise) to make a caster's level check.

Activation and "use" of the item don't have to be simultaneously
Yes, totally agree here. No discussion about that.


I hope that my point of view is clearer now.

[RandomPeasant]

So the rules do say they work together.

Show me where it explicitly says "you can use Power Attack and mountain hammer". I'll wait, because as far as I am aware, it says that nowhere. What it says, as you point out, is that they can both be used for the same type of thing. Much as UMD says you can both "Use a Wand" and "Emulate a Class Feature" when activating an item, allowing you to do both at once if you so choose.


The rules don't say that you can roll more than a single check when you activate an item with some exceptions.

The rules don't need to say that. They describe many checks you can roll when activating items, and proscribe no limit to how many of them you can roll. Are we to assume that because Sleight of Hand allows you to hide "a small object", it is only possible to have one hidden object on your person at a time? Or, perhaps, does "a" refer to a single instance of a roll, and you can hide as many small items as you'd like, with separate rolls to find each?


You roll to use/activate an item. You don't roll to improve an item.

This distinction does not exist. The staff explicitly picks up the caster level of the user when it is activated. The second step you and redking want to use to prevent people from UMDing staffs to generate giant CLs is nowhere in the rules.


Is there a spell trigger item that has a racial requirement to use the item? As far as I know there aren't any actual spell trigger items that have a racial requirement.

Well, as it turns out, I forgot that "race" wasn't one of the enumerated ways to reduce an item's cost in the "Creating Magic Items" rules. But alignment is. So let's suppose I have crafted a staff of holy word. And because it saves me money, and it's not really a good idea for anyone who isn't Good to stand in the middle of a holy word that's going off, I have given it the requirement that you be Good to activate it. So, can a Rogue both "Emulate an Alignment" and "Use a Wand" to activate this staff?


It's in the singular.

It is. Because it is taking about a singular roll, not because you are only allowed to make one roll. It is absolutely true that you cannot emulate multiple requirements with a single roll. Similarly, it is true that you must know the requirement you are emulating before you make the roll (as a DM, I would probably allow you to emulate an unknown requirement by rolling Activate Blindly first, but I acknowledge that to be a houserule). But none of that means you can only ever roll once, because why on earth would it? Why would having multiple requirements make it impossible to activate an item?


is there actually an item that requires multiple UMD checks that would break a RAW reading of the skill?

Of course not. Because RAW doesn't limit how many checks you can make. There are items you can have that break your reading of the skill, but since you advance interpretations that imply things like "you can't UMD a staff of power because it has functions that don't require UMD", I don't find your reading to be terribly compelling.

[redking]

Well, as it turns out, I forgot that "race" wasn't one of the enumerated ways to reduce an item's cost in the "Creating Magic Items" rules. But alignment is. So let's suppose I have crafted a staff of holy word. And because it saves me money, and it's not really a good idea for anyone who isn't Good to stand in the middle of a holy word that's going off, I have given it the requirement that you be Good to activate it.


A successful UMD check for activating the item as a creature of good alignment won't protect the non good creature from the negative affects of holy word any more than UMD grants a caster level for staffs, if that is what you are implying.

[RandomPeasant]

A successful UMD check for activating the item as a creature of good alignment won't protect the non good creature from the negative affects of holy word any more than UMD grants a caster level for staffs, if that is what you are implying.

Sorry redking, but you're wrong. An emulated alignment doesn't protect you from holy word. I'm not sure why you think it does just because you can UMD staffs for a higher CL. One is an input to the item, the other is an input to the spell. Those are different things, unlike "activation" and "activation", which are the same thing.

[Darg]

Much as UMD says you can both "Use a Wand" and "Emulate a Class Feature" when activating an item, allowing you to do both at once if you so choose.

You think it says "AND"?


Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.

Or is or. Combined with all the singulars and the skill telling you that you have to make a choice between requirements, it can't be anything but exclusive or.


The rules don't need to say that. They describe many checks you can roll when activating items, and proscribe no limit to how many of them you can roll. Are we to assume that because Sleight of Hand allows you to hide "a small object", it is only possible to have one hidden object on your person at a time? Or, perhaps, does "a" refer to a single instance of a roll, and you can hide as many small items as you'd like, with separate rolls to find each?

Should I refer you to the sleight of hand rules?


Action

Any Sleight of Hand check normally is a standard action. However, you may perform a Sleight of Hand check as a free action by taking a -20 penalty on the check.

So yes, hiding a single item is a standard action. If you are capable of making free actions you can use the skill as a free action; rolling for each action, one item at a time.

Yes, they do need to say if you can make the check more than once because the check is made as part of the action used to activate the item.


This distinction does not exist. The staff explicitly picks up the caster level of the user when it is activated. The second step you and redking want to use to prevent people from UMDing staffs to generate giant CLs is nowhere in the rules.

What do you mean? "This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class." Seems really explicit to me. You can house rule ignore it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


Well, as it turns out, I forgot that "race" wasn't one of the enumerated ways to reduce an item's cost in the "Creating Magic Items" rules. But alignment is. So let's suppose I have crafted a staff of holy word. And because it saves me money, and it's not really a good idea for anyone who isn't Good to stand in the middle of a holy word that's going off, I have given it the requirement that you be Good to activate it. So, can a Rogue both "Emulate an Alignment" and "Use a Wand" to activate this staff?

"Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Use"

There are many ways to use an item and a staff is no exception. By RAW, you can't use the staff at all unless you make a check. This means you roll when you start to wield the staff, not when you want to cast a spell from it. So yes, a rogue can do separate tasks to activate the staff. You just don't do it at the same time. Nor do you fit in emulating a class feature out of nowhere.


It is. Because it is taking about a singular roll, not because you are only allowed to make one roll. It is absolutely true that you cannot emulate multiple requirements with a single roll. Similarly, it is true that you must know the requirement you are emulating before you make the roll (as a DM, I would probably allow you to emulate an unknown requirement by rolling Activate Blindly first, but I acknowledge that to be a houserule). But none of that means you can only ever roll once, because why on earth would it? Why would having multiple requirements make it impossible to activate an item?

The skill calls them tasks. Normal parlance is that you don't perform multiple separate tasks simultaneously. At best, you put one on hold while you work on another.

The real question is why wouldn't it? Each of the tasks are you activating the item (or in the case of ongoing effects, once per hour.) "The Use Magic Device check is made as part of the action (if any) required to activate the magic item." Each time you perform a UMD task you are activating the item. Why would you be able to attempt to activate an item multiple times per action?


Of course not. Because RAW doesn't limit how many checks you can make. There are items you can have that break your reading of the skill, but since you advance interpretations that imply things like "you can't UMD a staff of power because it has functions that don't require UMD", I don't find your reading to be terribly compelling.

This quote makes absolutely no sense. *Goes back to reread what I wrote* Yeah, still makes no sense. How does, "It's similar to the Staff of Power argument. Is the luck bonus or the enhancement bonus spell-trigger activation? Obviously not. The spell trigger activation is only for casting the spells within the staff," imply anywhere about not being able to use UMD? All I did was point out that a single item can have multiple activation methods. If you misread what I wrote by such a wide margin, of course you don't find it terribly compelling. It's not even the right argument.

RAW doesn't have to limit how many checks you make unless it already gave permission for you to do it without limit. RAW is simple. You don't do something mechanically unless the rules tell you you can do something. If it tells you to make A check, you make A check. If it tells you you need to make multiple checks, you can make multiple checks.

No one has actually brought out one of these theoretical items which requires multiple separate tasks to activate a single activation method. You seem to know some. Any you want to share beyond custom items?

[RandomPeasant]

Or is or. Combined with all the singulars and the skill telling you that you have to make a choice between requirements, it can't be anything but exclusive or.

You are once again conflating what can be done with a single check with what can be done with multiple checks.


So yes, hiding a single item is a standard action. If you are capable of making free actions you can use the skill as a free action; rolling for each action, one item at a time.

I don't understand how that's responsive. The question here isn't "what action type is it", the question is "how many times can you take the action". Sleight of Hand says you can hide "a small object". Since "a" apparently means "only one", it is clearly the case that once you have hidden one small object, you cannot use Sleight of Hand to hide any further small objects. It doesn't matter whether the hiding takes a standard action or a free action or ten minutes or no action at all. At least, not by your meaning of "a".


What do you mean? "This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class." Seems really explicit to me. You can house rule ignore it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

You again seem to be arguing with something no one believes. No, you can't UMD something at a CL of 50 at then cast a CL 50 fireball out of your personal spell slots. What that has to do with emulating a class feature when activating an item for the purpose of activating that item I can't imagine.


So yes, a rogue can do separate tasks to activate the staff. You just don't do it at the same time. Nor do you fit in emulating a class feature out of nowhere.

So "Emulate an Alignment" is a "separate task", but "Emulate a Class Feature" is not? Can you show me any textual basis at all for that?


"The Use Magic Device check is made as part of the action (if any) required to activate the magic item." Each time you perform a UMD task you are activating the item. Why would you be able to attempt to activate an item multiple times per action?

Why would you need to? You make multiple checks as part of the action, just as you can use both Power Attack and mountain hammer as part of the same action.


All I did was point out that a single item can have multiple activation methods.

Yes, I understand that's the epicycle you applied to fix the way that your "you can only use UMD if it is mandatory" created bad results with staves of power. My question is why it is better to make that unsupported declaration and add an epicycle as a point fix than to simply not do that and enjoy rules that work without any additional fiddling.


No one has actually brought out one of these theoretical items which requires multiple separate tasks to activate a single activation method. You seem to know some. Any you want to share beyond custom items?

Those custom items are part of the rules. If your theory of the rules falls apart on them, it is a bad theory of the rules. Excluding new data because it makes you wrong doesn't make you right. In fact, it forfeits any possibility for you to be right.

[redking]

Why would you need to make multiple checks? If you have to meet two different UMD check DCs, say DC 20 to activate an item and the DC 35 being the gatekept power, if your UMD check is 30 then you activate the item, but fail to gain use of the gatekept power. If your UMD check was 35 or over, you activate the item and get to make use of the gatekept power. Anything below 20 DC and you can't use the item at all.


Except, you know, for the example that says that you can emulate expending uses of class features. You're ignoring that one pretty hard. You are also inferring that ability scores can be emulated in contexts other than scrolls, just not in ways you don't like.

Please recall the context of emulating an ability score for scrolls. It's to use the scroll, not to assign a DC based on an ability score bonus. You don't get the ability score. You just emulate an ability score to use the item and get in the front door, not gain a pseudo ability score that is actually used.

You don't gain any abilities, even to use in conjunction with an item. All you can do is be passively considered by the item to be meeting some requirement. Thus, runestaves cannot be fuelled by UMD. Nor can Cadaceus Braces.

When you make a UMD check, it's not a caster level check even. It's a UMD check of which the DC is partially set by the item you are trying to activate (if relevant). It doesn't say in UMD that you get to use an ability score in conjunction with an item so you don't.

[RandomPeasant]

Why would you need to make multiple checks? If you have to meet two different UMD check DCs, say DC 20 to activate an item and the DC 35 being the gatekept power, if your UMD check is 30 then you activate the item, but fail to gain use of the gatekept power.

That does run afowl of the "a" stuff. You can't emulate multiple requirements with a single check. That doesn't work.


You don't gain any abilities, even to use in conjunction with an item. All you can do is be passively considered by the item to be meeting some requirement. Thus, runestaves cannot be fuelled by UMD. Nor can Cadaceus Braces.

Except, you know, for the example that explicitly says you can do that.


When you make a UMD check, it's not a caster level check even. It's a UMD check of which the DC is partially set by the item you are trying to activate (if relevant). It doesn't say in UMD that you get to use an ability score in conjunction with an item so you don't.

It doesn't say that in UMD. But it sure does say that for staves. There is, as far as I can tell, no distinction between "ability score with which the staff is activated" and "ability score the staff uses for its DCs" (certainly this is true for caster levels). Neither you nor Darg has presented any text that suggests anything to the contrary.

[Nelfin]

@Gruftzwerg

I am also under the impression, for the Monk's belt, that you are thinking you have 15 emulated levels of Monk floating around. That may be also what is confusing. That is not the case. [Emulate a class feature] only says [Activate the Monk's belt] as if [you were a 15 level Monk]. So just perform the activation with 15 level of Monk.

[Darg]

You are once again conflating what can be done with a single check with what can be done with multiple checks.

There is no conflation whatsoever. The rules are permissive. You need permission to do something other than what it tells you. Making multiple incompatible checks is not given permission.


I don't understand how that's responsive. The question here isn't "what action type is it", the question is "how many times can you take the action". Sleight of Hand says you can hide "a small object". Since "a" apparently means "only one", it is clearly the case that once you have hidden one small object, you cannot use Sleight of Hand to hide any further small objects. It doesn't matter whether the hiding takes a standard action or a free action or ten minutes or no action at all. At least, not by your meaning of "a".

"how many times can you take the action" is not what you asked at all. You said, 'Are we to assume that because Sleight of Hand allows you to hide "a small object", it is only possible to have one hidden object on your person at a time? Or, perhaps, does "a" refer to a single instance of a roll, and you can hide as many small items as you'd like, with separate rolls to find each?' There is no mention of "action" in your question. You can hide as many items as you want, they don't require a check. Why would any one be able to spot what you have in a pocket or pouch? What requires a check is when you try to hide something from a search or an observant gaze. That requires a standard action which is only a single check for one object as per the skill.


You again seem to be arguing with something no one believes. No, you can't UMD something at a CL of 50 at then cast a CL 50 fireball out of your personal spell slots. What that has to do with emulating a class feature when activating an item for the purpose of activating that item I can't imagine.

If the item uses YOUR caster level, you don't just get to use the caster level of the class you are emulating. The item uses YOUR caster level. You don't actually use the caster level of the class you are emulating. "This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class." Why in the world would the item use the caster level of something that isn't YOURS if it wants YOUR caster level and you can't use the feature you are emulating? A lot of people believe this, multiple in this thread, and so your statement is false.


So "Emulate an Alignment" is a "separate task", but "Emulate a Class Feature" is not? Can you show me any textual basis at all for that?

Emulating a class feature IS a separate activation task. You can't just tack on emulating a class feature when trying to activate spell trigger items. I'd really like an example of a real item that has a separate requirements for a single activation type. I've brought real items into the discussion already that support my side of the argument, the burden is yours to find one to evidence YOUR argument.


Why would you need to? You make multiple checks as part of the action, just as you can use both Power Attack and mountain hammer as part of the same action.

You make one check. You only make multiple checks if the task you are performing gives you permission to do so. When using a staff you only make one check


Yes, I understand that's the epicycle you applied to fix the way that your "you can only use UMD if it is mandatory" created bad results with staves of power. My question is why it is better to make that unsupported declaration and add an epicycle as a point fix than to simply not do that and enjoy rules that work without any additional fiddling.

I don't understand your use of epicycle in this context. Is there an understanding beyond the dictionary definition?

I also don't understand how only using UMD when you can't use an item creates bad results with staves of power. Can you explain? There are 0 requirements for anything the item does except for the spell trigger aspect which only requires a single "Use a Wand" task roll. What fiddling exists in your mind?


Those custom items are part of the rules. If your theory of the rules falls apart on them, it is a bad theory of the rules. Excluding new data because it makes you wrong doesn't make you right. In fact, it forfeits any possibility for you to be right.

You're arguments are full of fallacious arguments that I have to refute before I can even get to the real arguments. Why would that make you more right than I? I can make a custom wand that requires sneak attack, a familiar, wild shape, a Con score of 20, and chaotic evil alignment. That does nothing to actually prove that UMD gives you permission to make 6 checks to use the wand. If one tries to make such an appeal to ignorance it only hurts their argument further. You have yet to actually bring any evidence to support your argument. RAW states that you make one check each time you activate a magic device. Show me where the rules contradict this because, "You make A Use Magic Device check EACH time you activate a device," is pretty straight forward.


Except, you know, for the example that explicitly says you can do that.

Break down that example grammatically and it doesn't actually say what you think it does. I've already done it multiple times in this thread already. If one wants to ignore proper grammatical understanding, feel free. It doesn't make one right.

[RandomPeasant]

You need permission to do something other than what it tells you. Making multiple incompatible checks is not given permission.

Where does it say that "Emulate a Class Feature" and "Activate a Wand" are "incompatible"? It says they are different things, but there's no indication they are incompatible. Much in the same way that Power Attack and mountain hammer being different things does not make them incompatible.


"how many times can you take the action" is not what you asked at all.

I mean, yes, I did not literally use the word "action", but it is reasonable to describe "you can do this multiple times" as being about "how many times can you take the action". But we still haven't resolved the basic question. How is it that "a" can mean "only one" when it refers to UMD checks made at a single time, but not items that you have hidden on your person at a single time?


If the item uses YOUR caster level, you don't just get to use the caster level of the class you are emulating.

The item offers a benefit (producing the spell effect at a higher CL) if you have a class feature (a particular CL). If you can't emulate that, what could you possibly emulate? If "do a thing because you have a class feature" isn't valid for emulation and "do a thing by expending a class feature" isn't valid for emulation, what the hell is.


A lot of people believe this, multiple in this thread, and so your statement is false.

It's interesting that you're about to complain about me making you refute "fallacious arguments" when this is a textbook argument ad populum.


I'd really like an example of a real item that has a separate requirements for a single activation type.

Tell me, do you think I can activate a scroll of blockade with UMD? This is, as far as I am aware, an item that is never explicitly listed in any rulebook as existing. Yet it is one that can demonstrably be created, and I think we can both agree you can UMD it. So perhaps your objection to commenting on items that can be legally created in this case has less to do with abstract principle and more with an understanding that your position is obviously not tenable if you are forced to acknowledge that, no, you don't think someone can UMD a wand that requires them to be a Dwarf.


You make one check. You only make multiple checks if the task you are performing gives you permission to do so. When using a staff you only make one check

Again, no. To use a staff you make one check. That check is made as part of the activation of the staff, and if you want or need to do some other UMD task when activating the staff you can do so as well by the simple expedient of making another check.


I don't understand your use of epicycle in this context.

So it used to be that people had this idea that was wrong: they thought everything revolved around the earth. This is, of course, not the case. Things (mostly, at the scale of the solar system) revolve around the sun. So there was stuff that empirically happened that didn't make sense if you assumed everything revolved around the earth (I believe the specific example is that stuff appeared to reverse relative direction, but don't quote me). Rather than re-assessing their theory, people added epicycles, little circles that stuff moved on in addition to their orbits so that the data fit the theory. So "epicycle" in the more general context means something that is added to a flawed theory as an ad hoc fix to avoid replacing it with a more parsimonious theory.

In this case, you had a theory that was wrong: you can only use UMD to activate an item if you can't use that item otherwise. And that sort of works if you're thinking about scrolls and wands and most staves. But, of course, anyone can use a staff of power. It's a magic weapon in addition to a staff, and you can hit people with it whether or not you can get it to pop out any spells. So under your theory, no one can UMD a staff of power, because they can use the "hitting people" function. So you added this epicycle, where instead of it being about items, it's about functions. So you can still only UMD a function if you need to, but if it happens that there's another function that doesn't require UMD that's fine. This is, of course, a much more complicated interpretation than the correct one of "you can use UMD to activate an item whenever you activate an item, even if you don't strictly need to".


I can make a custom wand that requires sneak attack, a familiar, wild shape, a Con score of 20, and chaotic evil alignment. That does nothing to actually prove that UMD gives you permission to make 6 checks to use the wand.

So you do believe that someone who adds a "must be Good" requirement to their staves thereby prevents anyone from activating them with UMD? That doesn't strike you as the sort of dysfunctional result we should avoid in our interpretation of the rules?


You have yet to actually bring any evidence to support your argument.

I don't need evidence. I have the rules. And the rules say that when you want to activate a magic item, you can use UMD to do so. They say that when you activate a staff, it uses the CL you activate it with (if that's better than it's CL). They say that CL is a class feature. They say that you can emulate class features. And that all voltrons together into me being right and you being wrong.

[Gruftzwerg]

@Gruftzwerg

OK, I'll take your words for granted and will take the blue part of your post as lighting the mood. Actually, I don't really understand what is so difficult to understand in my point of view. I'll try to be the most explicit possible.
....



First, let me say that I've read your entire post (and the other after that) to ensure I don't miss any important argument. Some parts literary more than a dozen times.

Imho I got how you "feel/think" about this topic and "your approach" to interpret it.
But where I do have a problem is "how you are getting to your interpretation".

Imho (!), you are assuming "hidden rules" where the item makes a "hidden check" of your stats. Your interpretation relies on hidden things that are not presented by the rules to function.

While my approach doesn't need any hidden rules or steps to get a functional interpretation.

Have a look at the Magic Item Basics (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm)again pls:

Most importantly the "Using Items" rule.

Using Items

To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly. In most cases, using an item requires a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. By contrast, spell completion items are treated like spells in combat and do provoke attacks of opportunity.

Activating a magic item is a standard action unless the item description indicates otherwise. However, the casting time of a spell is the time required to activate the same power in an item, regardless of the type of magic item, unless the item description specifically states otherwise.

The four ways to activate magic items are described below.

...
..
IMHO...

1: "Using Items" = "Using an Item's Effect"

Because there are no separate rules for a "Magic Item's Effect". You can look up the entire page or any book, errata or FAQ or whatsoever. This "mechanical step" is part of "Using Items".



2: "Activation" can provide the item with stats

This is the sole point described by the rules where you can provide stats to the item by RAW.
Note that for "continuously working items" UMD is more specific and adds the rule to repeat this process as UMD-user once every hour!

Unless you can show me where the rules for "a magic items effect" are, that separates it from "Using Item" (and therefore "Activation"), you have to assume that the stats provided at the point of activation are the values used for the items effect.

Sorry to say this, but you are implying rules that are simply not there. There is no separate step other than "Activation" to "use" the effect of a magical item.

I hope that you now maybe understand why I see your approach as illegal by RAW. The rules as presented don't allow such an interpretation. Even if it also leads to a functional interpretation, it is not supported by RAW.

It (your interpretation) could be used as a functional houserule to nerf UMD into the ground. If you want that, this would definitively be an option. But it would be a houserule and not RAW imho.

Dunno if I have missed any rule, but if you can provide any textual evidence that supports your "interpretation approach" somehow, pls point me to it. I don't claim that I'm aware of every text passage at any time. I mean, with the 3.5 rules being scattered all over the place (phb, dmg, srd, errata, rc...) we all share the same struggle here I guess...

[redking]

Nowhere does it say you get DCs based on an emulated ability score. I'm still waiting for quote that says you do instead of extrapolation and deduction.

[Gruftzwerg]

Nowhere does it say you get DCs based on an emulated ability score. I'm still waiting for quote that says you do instead of extrapolation and deduction.


Check

You can use this skill to read a spell or to activate a magic item. Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment.

I've shown in my last post how "using a magic item" is defined and that "Activation" is the sole moment where stats are provided to the item (see "Using Items" from the "Magic Item Basics").
"Using a magic item" includes its effect. Since there is no other separate "magic item effect" section, this is the sole option to have functional magic items (to include the effect into the "use of a magic item").
These are the mechanics presented by RAW.

UMD makes clear that you can use (the effect of) an item as if you had "X".

I've provided you the rules my argumentation is based on. On which parts of the rules is your interpretation based on. I would like to know the exact quotes so that I can be either convinced or address your argument. Where does it say that the values you provided are ignored by the items effect. As far as I see it, I have provides quotes that say the exact opposite of your statement.

[redking]

I've provided you the rules my argumentation is based on. On which parts of the rules is your interpretation based on. I would like to know the exact quotes so that I can be either convinced or address your argument. Where does it say that the values you provided are ignored by the items effect. As far as I see it, I have provides quotes that say the exact opposite of your statement.

You say it's RAW, but you are presenting inference and deduction.


Emulate an Ability Score
To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard spells, Wisdom for divine spells, or Charisma for sorcerer or bard spells). Your effective ability score (appropriate to the class you’re emulating when you try to cast the spell from the scroll) is your Use Magic Device check result minus 15. If you already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability, you don’t need to make this check.

And -


Use a Scroll
If you are casting a spell from a scroll, you have to decipher it first. Normally, to cast a spell from a scroll, you must have the scroll’s spell on your class spell list. Use Magic Device allows you to use a scroll as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. The DC is equal to 20 + the caster level of the spell you are trying to cast from the scroll. In addition, casting a spell from a scroll requires a minimum score (10 + spell level) in the appropriate ability. If you don’t have a sufficient score in that ability, you must emulate the ability score with a separate Use Magic Device check (see above).

This use of the skill also applies to other spell completion magic items.

From this, you make an inference that you would actually be able to use the ability score that you emulate to meet the requirements to activate the item. But note under the scenarios outlined in UMD, you cannot receive any benefits like setting DCs based on an emulated ability score. The text doesn't even hint that you can do that.

If you can emulate an ability score in an item that has that as a requirement, you can activate the item. But the emulated ability score isn't a real ability score - it only let's you activate the item as if you met the requirements.

[Darg]

It's interesting that you're about to complain about me making you refute "fallacious arguments" when this is a textbook argument ad populum.

*face meet palm*

If you can't even see how your claim was false, then we have nothing further to discuss.