I have a guy building a level 10 Monk, but he wants access to a feat that requires either Abundant Step or the ability to cast Dimension Door. He wants access to this feat quickly, so he was wondering if he can build a character with a good UMD skill to allow him access to Dimension Door.
My thought is that using a magical device like a wand or a rod will not count as "being able to cast the spell" and thus not able to obtain the feat like that.
Thoughts on this?
Thanks in advance!
Agreed, either SLA or spell slot. Once he gains the abundant step ability he can always retrain a feat to be Dimensional Agility.
|
By Da Rulebook, no not at all.
HOWEVER, I would also argue that if he's been using it for several levels, he knows just about as much about how it feels to use as most magic users. People would probably argue that a Wizard actually knows how it works, but Sorcerers can take this feat, and they sure as heck don't need to know how the magic does its thing; in fact, they probably know less than the person who has worked out how to use it consistently over many adventures.
SO, for character reasons alone, I'd say that if he can consistently make the check to use it (while taking ten, or even five), has been using it for several levels, and would take a penalty to his Use Magic Device check for the purposes of using the item for Dimensional Agility... he should be allowed to do it at a home table.
Just my opinion, however!
Have you considered an Unchained Monk? They can get the Abundant Step power at 8th level.
Since posting this, he's told me that he's making an Unchained Monk, so yes, he would get it at 8.
Thanks for the advice, everyone.
By Da Rulebook, no not at all.
HOWEVER, I would also argue that if he's been using it for several levels, he knows just about as much about how it feels to use as most magic users. People would probably argue that a Wizard actually knows how it works, but Sorcerers can take this feat, and they sure as heck don't need to know how the magic does its thing; in fact, they probably know less than the person who has worked out how to use it consistently over many adventures.
SO, for character reasons alone, I'd say that if he can consistently make the check to use it (while taking ten, or even five), has been using it for several levels, and would take a penalty to his Use Magic Device check for the purposes of using the item for Dimensional Agility... he should be allowed to do it at a home table.
Just my opinion, however!
You can't take 10 with UMD.
|
|
You can't take 10 with UMD.By Da Rulebook, no not at all.
HOWEVER, I would also argue that if he's been using it for several levels, he knows just about as much about how it feels to use as most magic users. People would probably argue that a Wizard actually knows how it works, but Sorcerers can take this feat, and they sure as heck don't need to know how the magic does its thing; in fact, they probably know less than the person who has worked out how to use it consistently over many adventures.
SO, for character reasons alone, I'd say that if he can consistently make the check to use it (while taking ten, or even five), has been using it for several levels, and would take a penalty to his Use Magic Device check for the purposes of using the item for Dimensional Agility... he should be allowed to do it at a home table.
Just my opinion, however!
I was meaning in theory. Like, assuming the dice rolled a ten (or five), you'd be able to do it. If your UMD was high enough to do that, then it'd go a long way to making me sure that taking this feat would be ok.
|
Cape of Mountebank gives you a "Once-a-day, Dimension Door."
Ultimately a mute point for this instance, but for future questions. The answer to wand (or any item based casting) is no.
The feat requires the player have the ability to cast the spell. While having any item activated (Cape of Mountebank, Wand, or anything else) the player is not technically casting the spell, they are only activating a magic item. This is why the player would not provoke an Attack of Opportunity if they used these items in melee. Casting a spell provokes an attack, activating a magic item does not. Since they are not casting the spell, they do not provoke. Since they are not casting the spell, they do not qualify for the feat!
Cape of Mountebank gives you a "Once-a-day, Dimension Door."Ultimately a mute point for this instance, but for future questions. The answer to wand (or any item based casting) is no.
The feat requires the player have the ability to cast the spell. While having any item activated (Cape of Mountebank, Wand, or anything else) the player is not technically casting the spell, they are only activating a magic item. This is why the player would not provoke an Attack of Opportunity if they used these items in melee. Casting a spell provokes an attack, activating a magic item does not. Since they are not casting the spell, they do not provoke. Since they are not casting the spell, they do not qualify for the feat!
Good to know. Thank you very much!
Ultimately a mute point for this instance, but for future questions.
I don't mean to be rude, but I just wanted to let you know you were looking for the word moot, not mute.
|
|
I don't meant to be rude, but I just wanted to let you know you were looking for the word moot, not mute.Ultimately a mute point for this instance, but for future questions.
If that's the worst thing there is to say about a post I make at 7:15am, then I'm good with that.
BTW, I think you wanted the present tense 'mean' not past tense 'meant'.
I don't meant to be rude, but I just wanted to let you know you were looking for the word moot, not mute.Ultimately a mute point for this instance, but for future questions.
If that's the worst thing there is to say about a post I make at 7:15am, then I'm good with that.
BTW, I think you wanted the present tense 'mean' not past tense 'meant'.
Actually a typographical error. I meant to type "don't mean to be rude", but I accidentally hit the t before hitting space, and then again after. Although, without that context I can see how you arrived at such a conclusion.
I only wanted to alert you to the mistake because many people do think the word "mute" is used this way and do not know of the word "moot". My hope was to alert you if you were unaware, though hopefully without causing embarrassment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Polite and caring about proper grammar. Wonderful community. I approve.