deleted

[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

Spoiler: Primary Sources

Show

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

Spoiler: Use Magic Device (CHA; Trained only)

Show

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.
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

1. read the rules carefully;
2. read the rules with its context;
3. use PSR to rule disagreements, when PSR is applicable;
4. 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

1. the general skill description is positioned in an undefined area by the Skill Description;
2. 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:

1. 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;
2. 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:

1. 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.
2. contrarily to UMD, some skill never says when to make a roll in the Check description, for example Climb.
   
   Spoiler: Climb, Check description

   Show

   
   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.
3. UMD is dysfunctional as I previously described.
4. 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":

1. Emulate a class feature makes reference to device activation whereas it is not the case for the two others;
2. 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)

Spoiler: Use Activated, DMG, p. 213

Show

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

1. 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.).
2. 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

1. you want to activate an item that you cannot activate otherwise;
2. 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:

1. the item needs a class feature to be activated;
2. 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:

1. 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;
2. ignore the activation method of the belt;
3. 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:

1. 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;
2. ignore the activation method of the belt;
3. 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.

1. 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;
2. 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".

1. 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.
2. 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.

1. 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;
2. 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".

1. 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.
2. 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.