UMD at low levels without cheese=useless?

[Fiery Diamond]

On these forums I see UMD trumpeted as the best of everything, that skill which can make one a better healer than a healer, which can give one the powers of a wizard, etc.

I've never found UMD to be useful, in my experience. Why? Because I usually play at lower levels (say, 1-7). If you assume that a character only uses his ranks in UMD and his associated ability (Cha), with no other buffs (except, once you reach the number of ranks, synergy) to UMD (and in all games I've played thus far, including ones I have run, this is the standard assumption - a masterwork tool would be silly, and any other boosts (except directly from spells, which almost defeats the purpose) are considered cheesy), using UMD at low levels is extremely risky. For one, you have a chance of failure. In a time crunch, that in and of itself is bad. For another, if you fail by too much, bad things happen to you.

At higher levels, where the failure chance becomes slim to none, UMD usefulness skyrockets. But at lower levels, I fail to see why one would consider it great.


Explanation?

[Starbuck_II]

On these forums I see UMD trumpeted as the best of everything, that skill which can make one a better healer than a healer, which can give one the powers of a wizard, etc.

I've never found UMD to be useful, in my experience. Why? Because I usually play at lower levels (say, 1-7). If you assume that a character only uses his ranks in UMD and his associated ability (Cha), with no other buffs (except, once you reach the number of ranks, synergy) to UMD (and in all games I've played thus far, including ones I have run, this is the standard assumption - a masterwork tool would be silly, and any other boosts (except directly from spells, which almost defeats the purpose) are considered cheesy), using UMD at low levels is extremely risky. For one, you have a chance of failure. In a time crunch, that in and of itself is bad. For another, if you fail by too much, bad things happen to you.

At higher levels, where the failure chance becomes slim to none, UMD usefulness skyrockets. But at lower levels, I fail to see why one would consider it great.


Explanation?

What do you mean bad things? Only scrolls do bad things I think.
Wands are safest (DC 20 always).

[peacenlove]

At low levels (1-7) UMD is less useful not only because of the checks but also because of the low monetary funds (although the magic item compendium makes huge steps to alleviate this problem by introducing low cost effective items).
Also most players i have seen spend their funds first on permanent magic items and then on limited number of uses ones (where the use of UMD is dominant there).
Lastly UMD is used on specialized situations (eg rogue vs undeads or a lack of cleric buffs and the bard must compensate) which are unusual to appear on low level games.

[Ernir]

At higher levels, where the failure chance becomes slim to none, UMD usefulness skyrockets. But at lower levels, I fail to see why one would consider it great.

I don't think it's such a great tool at low levels. More for reasons of UMD-reliance being friggin' expensive than the DCs being too high, though.


Also, it is possible that your group simply doesn't conform well to the standards which CharOp usually assumes. Like WBL being conformed to, games reaching levels > 5, and the words "silly" and "cheese" not being defined game terms.

[Zherog]

I've never found UMD to be useful, in my experience. Why? Because I usually play at lower levels (say, 1-7). If you assume that a character only uses his ranks in UMD and his associated ability (Cha), with no other buffs (except, once you reach the number of ranks, synergy) to UMD (and in all games I've played thus far, including ones I have run, this is the standard assumption - a masterwork tool would be silly, and any other boosts (except directly from spells, which almost defeats the purpose) are considered cheesy), using UMD at low levels is extremely risky.

Skill Focus and/or Magical Aptitude can help get your UMD higher at low levels without being cheesy, especially if your table allows the retraining rules from PHB2 so you can replace it once it becomes less meaningful.

That said, I do agree with you. Every game has a spoken or unspoken level of optimization. (for example, in my one game, a blaster wizard -- the dreaded evoker -- is perfectly functional.) And in games where a masterwork tool for UMD is cheesy or wealth by level is pretty closely adhered to, UMD is difficult to make useful at low levels. When I plan on using UMD in those games, I consider the low-level skill ranks I invest a "cost" for my effectiveness later.

[Keld Denar]

UMD's most useful function at low levels is for Out-of-Combat use of the Wand of Lesser Vigor (or CLW) when your cleric or druid is knocked out. Such a wand is pretty cheap, and invaluable at low levels, something that a smart party would pool money together to have one around the time they ding 2nd level.

Again, not really useful in combat, due to the high fail chance, but most of the time you can just retry in a non-pressure situation assuming you don't botch it too bad.

[Aharon]

Well, it depends what you want to use it for. If you just want to have some buffs operating on you, failure to activate wands doesn't do any harm. You just keep trying to hit the DC 20 till you do. The 5% failure chance is annoying, but doesn't outweigh the advantages. For example, there are several sorcerer only 24 hour buffs in Races of the Dragon that are useful for anyone (one of these bestows a +5 unnamed bonus to initative, for example).

You get access to buffs your group might otherwise not have, and you allow the casters to preserve their resources for the actual fights. Doesn't sound bad, does it?

Edit: Ninja'd by Keld

[jguy]

well Warlock can always take a 10 on UMD at level 4 even in combat, assuming you have about a 16 in charisma than you can always activate a wand. Artificer's a pretty powerful for the same reason too and the whole "make stuff for free" thing

[Tyrmatt]

well Warlock can always take a 10 on UMD at level 4 even in combat, assuming you have about a 16 in charisma than you can always activate a wand. Artificer's a pretty powerful for the same reason too and the whole "make stuff for free" thing

Seconded. Warlock is the UMD-king, which largely makes up for their limited options to my mind.

[Draz74]

UMD's most useful function at low levels is for Out-of-Combat use of the Wand of Lesser Vigor (or CLW) when your cleric or druid is knocked out. Such a wand is pretty cheap, and invaluable at low levels, something that a smart party would pool money together to have one around the time they ding 2nd level.

Again, not really useful in combat, due to the high fail chance, but most of the time you can just retry in a non-pressure situation assuming you don't botch it too bad.

Agree with this. Also, there's a few other effects around that are similarly useful out-of-combat, which makes failing the UMD check not too painful.

[Sinfire Titan]

Using just base modifiers, UMD is very difficult to use by anyone who isn't an Incarnate, Artificer, or Bard. WBL restrictions, high DCs, etc, make the skill somewhat impractical.


But this is usually for Scroll use. No one should use scrolls. Staves aren't available until the mid-levels anyway, so UMD's best use is Wands at the lower levels. Wands are available through random treasure generation as early as 2nd level in the MIC's treasure charts, so UMD is able to help the party by reducing healing costs.

[sofawall]

UMD is very difficult to use by anyone who isn't an Incarnate, Artificer, or Bard.

Warlocks would like to have a word with you.

[Sinfire Titan]

Warlocks would like to have a word with you.

Warlocks are somewhat good at it, but those three classes have an advantage before 4th level due to a higher bonus.

[raitalin]

I think this is a holdover from 2e, when rogues (thieves and bards) got the ability to read scrolls at 9th~10th level. It is intended to be a high-level ability.

[sofawall]

Warlocks are somewhat good at it, but those three classes have an advantage before 4th level due to a higher bonus.

And Warlocks are at least as good from 4 until, oh, 7-ish.

[Glimbur]

Seconded. Warlock is the UMD-king, which largely makes up for their limited options to my mind.

I'd claim artificers are better than Warlocks for UMD shenanigans because of the Artificer's superior ability to make things to UMD.

[Slayn82]

Well, my level 4 factotums are always scroll happy. But i limit myself to use first level scrolls mostly. 25 gp isnt that costly, and i can pull that off 65% of time. The key is to use spells with at least 1min/level duration, or those who dont increase effects with leveling. If you have spell compendium, thats plenty. And 65% of effectivenes is ok in my book, averages with the melee guys.

[Zaq]

UMD isn't something you use in combat until you hit higher levels (or you have a really tense and desperate moment, but those can be fun with a good GM). It's what you use out of combat. Wands don't have a mishap chance aside from a nat 1 turning them into sticks for a day (which does suck, but there's not much you can do about it), and it's pretty well agreed-upon that a wand of CLW (or better, Lesser Vigor) is the king of HP refilling for a very large chunk of the game. You UMD the scroll of Remove Curse you need (scrolls are a lot harder than wands, but you shouldn't be using them as often at low levels anyway); you UMD the healstick you use between fights; you UMD the wand of Undetectable Alignment you use every morning to cut the pally's evildar off at the knees; you UMD the wand of Augury or Omen of Peril you use when you get totally lost in the dungeon. You don't start UMDing combat spells for a very long time; the only exception I can think of is if your rogue is lucky enough to get his mitts on a wand of Grave Strike, which is worth the risk.

[JaronK]

This whole thing is one of the reasons I always sigh when someone claims that low level Rogues don't have problems with undead because they can just UMD a wand of gravestrike. It just doesn't work effectively at all.

JaronK

[Ashiel]

I've found UMD to be great in my group's tabletop games. This is purely anecdotal, but I believe that a big reason for its effectiveness is due to a mixture of the following:

1) It's usually used out of combat for buffing, healing, or (for those specializing in it) combat spells like entangle and grease, which tend to work decently even if the saves are made (having secondary effects such as 1/2 speed, or flat-footed for example).

2) We generally do follow the RAW unless it's game-breaking. A MW tool is pretty much open season for any sort of skill, and we have fun fluffing them up for our characters (such as a crystal on a tiara that helps focus your mind for Concentration). However, that's just a +2, but it's worth mentioning since the OP mentioned MW tools. It's nice having mundane stuff to buy that's worth something. Additionally, at 1lb per item, it can quickly add to your carrying capacity (which we do follow) if you're picking up a lot of them.

3) The big one is that wands with less than 50 charges exist and can be purchased. Additionally, we don't require that you make a full 50 charges in a wand when creating it (so if you wanted to make a 1-charge cure minor wounds wand, you could). This allows players to stock up on a few items which they hold for a rainy day.

4) We follow the pricing formulas pretty closely; and allow x/day wands by that measure. Ultimately a 50 charge wand is the same price as a 5/day wand; so sometimes if the party has a spell they like to keep around for emergencies (say neutralize poison), they may all chip in to get a 1-5/day wand of it to carry around with them.

----

That being said, UMD is also not really that special in our games because often half the party at least has some ability to activate stuff like wands without using UMD. A party with a Bard, a Ranger, a Cleric, and a Paladin for example can all use a wand of cure light wounds; so UMD becomes less special. Most of them can use buffs. Most of them can cast restoring spells.

That being said, it remains merely a useful skill that can open a lot of doors, but not an overpowered skill; since it is often redundant.

On A Related Note
As a GM, I find that I really like x/day charged items. Dropping wands, staffs, and other nick-nacks into the treasure pool, or allowing them to be purchased, has a lot of fun uses. For players, I've noticed it never feels like you're wasting your funds. Some of us really hate the fact that shiny magic item you're getting is going to simply burn out; and this makes it feel like more of an investment rather than an expense.

Additionally, I find it makes GMing easier since I can easily anticipate what they have at their disposal. If they have a wand of fireball 1/day, and it re-charges each day, then I'll not be surprised to see them use it. At the same time, they're less likely to surprise me by running out of charges unexpectedly, or by super-nuking an encounter by blowing more charges than I expected.

Additionally, it's fun to make staffs in a similar method. A 10/day charged staff, with a few minor spells using 1 charge, a few medium using 2 charges, and a few major using 3-5 charges can be some sweet treasure. Again, you can have this ancient staff of awesome-sauce, and never need to worry about it burning out - but you're more limited in how much juice you can bring to bear at once.

Also...it works wonders for keeping Blastificers from nuking the world, and they still get to be happy about their toys.

[Optimystik]

This whole thing is one of the reasons I always sigh when someone claims that low level Rogues don't have problems with undead because they can just UMD a wand of gravestrike. It just doesn't work effectively at all.

JaronK

And that's even assuming they can find/afford that wand.

[PhoenixRivers]

Well, in games where there isn't the money for magic items, it will be less useful.

However, a Cha focused character with 8 ranks?

16 cha (+3) + level 1 ranks (+4) + Skill Focus (+3) = +10, which gives you 50% activation on a wand (or to blindly activate an item).

Not enough for reliable combat use, but not so bad for out of combat utility.

[JaronK]

And that's even assuming they can find/afford that wand.

Yeah, like I said, the inability to reliably get the spell off is one of the reasons. There are a whole bunch of reasons why it doesn't work.

JaronK

[Ashiel]

Yeah, like I said, the inability to reliably get the spell off is one of the reasons. There are a whole bunch of reasons why it doesn't work.

JaronK

Yes. I feel that it's important to clarify my last post a bit. I agree with you JaronK. The skill really isn't all that great at low-levels; at least not to the point that it is often stressed on the internet. Even with the considerations for our tabletop group (such as being able to buy partially charged wands), it is merely a useful skill rather than a super skill.

Also, I agree that rogues requiring spells to get their SA on is stupid. One of the best changes that Pathfinder made to the system IMHO. Even in our groups; if a Rogue had to pop a charge from a wand every time s/he wanted to sneak attack some undead or something, it would quickly get too expensive to be worth it; especially since s/he could likely do something less expensive in resources by not sneak-attacking under such conditions.

[Optimystik]

Yeah, like I said, the inability to reliably get the spell off is one of the reasons. There are a whole bunch of reasons why it doesn't work.

JaronK

Indeed, I was agreeing with you.

I'd claim artificers are better than Warlocks for UMD shenanigans because of the Artificer's superior ability to make things to UMD.

Artificers are better at just about everything. That's what Tier 1 means.

[Eldariel]

Well, in games where there isn't the money for magic items, it will be less useful.

However, a Cha focused character with 8 ranks?

16 cha (+3) + level 1 ranks (+4) + Skill Focus (+3) = +10, which gives you 50% activation on a wand (or to blindly activate an item).

Not enough for reliable combat use, but not so bad for out of combat utility.

55%, even. Also, that's assuming Mw. Tools aren't allowed, no Aid Another from e.g. Familiar and such. Also, let's not forget that many objects you happen upon in dungeons and such can be hard to make work, but tend to be activatable with Use Magic Device.

And it allows you to basically use any item regardless of alignment restrictions or such, which is incredible for a bunch. And then there's the whole "Staff UMDing"-thing; so even if UMDable Wands and such were completely unavailable, it would still have its uses simply for interacting with the campaign world.

[Kurald Galain]

2) We generally do follow the RAW unless it's game-breaking.

Since you're saying that...

A MW tool is pretty much open season for any sort of skill,

...it is disputed, and frequently debated on these forum, whether the rules really allow you to buy MW tools for everything. At the very least, it's not rules-as-written, but rules-as-implied-by-other-rules (RAIBOR), because it isn't explicitly stated anywhere that "MW tools exist for all skills".

The big one is that wands with less than 50 charges exist and can be purchased.

...this certainly isn't RAW; by RAW, you can only buy smaller wands at character generation.

We follow the pricing formulas pretty closely; and allow x/day wands by that measure.

...and I have never heard of "x/day wands by that measure" by RAW, either. If you could get a 1/day wand for 20% of the price, that strikes me as an excellent deal.

[Sinfire Titan]

...this certainly isn't RAW; by RAW, you can only buy smaller wands at character generation.

He likely means the MiC's partially charged wand rules, which do allow you to buy them at a percentage discount. Only in 20% increments, no more, no less.

...and I have never heard of "x/day wands by that measure" by RAW, either. If you could get a 1/day wand for 20% of the price, that strikes me as an excellent deal.

Eternal Wands fit the bill. 2/day, it's a wand (up to 3rd level). Pricey, but worth it for some spells.

[Ashiel]

Since you're saying that...


...it is disputed, and frequently debated on these forum, whether the rules really allow you to buy MW tools for everything. At the very least, it's not rules-as-written, but rules-as-implied-by-other-rules (RAIBOR), because it isn't explicitly stated anywhere that "MW tools exist for all skills".

My apologies; I was unclear. I meant we don't generally restrict stuff that's already in the RAW unless it's broken. MW Tools aren't broken, so we have no problem with that.

...this certainly isn't RAW; by RAW, you can only buy smaller wands at character generation.

As I noted in my previous post, this portion deviates from the standard RAW mainly for logical reasons. It is entirely possible to sell wands and other charged items; so it's entirely logical that you should be able to purchase them as well. So purchasing items by the charge is allowed at our table. Incidentally, wands aren't the only thing that you can do this with. You could, for example, purchase a Luck Blade that doesn't have any wish spells left.

...and I have never heard of "x/day wands by that measure" by RAW, either. If you could get a 1/day wand for 20% of the price, that strikes me as an excellent deal.

By the item creation rules, an item that is priced based on 50 charges divided by the number of times per day it can be used; thus a 50 charge wand costs the same as a 5/day wand. Alternatively, a 1/day wand costs 1/5th the normal price. Also a 10/day wand costs the same price as a 100-charge wand or more specifically, two wands.

I noted this as a deviation from the standard; but it's is technically RAW. It could be argued that such items should be wondrous items, but they are wands, function like wands, and merely use a different but equivalent in value ability; so Craft Wand works fine.

Either way, yes, it is an excellent deal for a 1/day wand of spells you don't plan to use very often. Some of our favorite 1/day wands include secure shelter, knock, and so forth. A CL 1st, 1/day wand of a 1st level spell would be 150gp market value, or 75gp to create. It's a good buy, but nothing game-breaking.

As noted previously; it's surprisingly good at curbing blastificers while making them happy to be blastificers (a 5/day or even 10/day wand is expensive and can only be pushed just so far, but you get to use it again tomorrow).



EDIT: And yes, this does mean that wands and staffs are better than scrolls; because if you have the option to use wands/staves you likely should. Of course, then again, that doesn't change much.

[Just_Ice]

This can be fixed by making the UMD check based around the level of the spell.