D&D 5E My cleric can use a wand of lightning bolts?

Staffan

Legend
I wrote what the DMG stated, so they used "monster", instead of "opponent" or "creature" or "foe".

So you're saying that monsters should be the main focus with attuning to magic items, so the DMG went with focusing on them over the PCs? They could have chosen the word: foe, opponent, or creature in its place but used monsters.
If you're a PC, you count as a cleric if you have cleric levels. But monsters don't have class levels, not even humanoid monsters. An Orc Eye of Gruumsh is not a cleric, it's a monster. But since it has the Spellcasting trait and casts spells from the cleric list, it can attune to magic items as if it were a cleric.

Similarly, an Eldritch Knight fighter is not a wizard, so they can't use a staff of frost. They cast (a subset of) wizard spells, but that doesn't make them a wizard. They are, however, spellcasters, so they can use a wand of fireballs.

If the designers had intended that a wand of fireballs could only be used by sorcerers, wizards, and fiend-pact warlocks, they would have said so in the attunement requirement, much like on the staff of frost​.

Aramis Erak made a valid point, what if someone took the Magic Initiate Feat, let's say a Ranger, then he could use a Wand of Fireballs. If you think that's fine to do in your world, go for it. I'm not going to do that in mine.
Rangers are already spellcasters (from 2nd level on), so there's pretty much no interpretation of the rules in which they can't attune to an item requiring a "spellcaster."
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Henry

Autoexreginated
With regard to the magic initiate feat: remember that a character gets fewer feats than class levels - only 5 or 6 in the whole career; If just multiclassing for ONE level grants you ability as a spellcaster, i have no problem with the feat doing it too. Plus, the feat as written, says you "cast spells." Q.E.D.
 

Yes, I read that. It doesn't limit PCs the way you're saying it does. "Monster" has a specific meaning in D&D, and it's not the same as "any creature."

So for two reasons, that doesn't apply. 1) it's talking about monsters with specific spells but no class levels, like the aforementioned flameskull.

2) It's talking about prerequisites of a specific class. The prerequisite "spellcaster" is not a specific class.

As you said, though, play how you want to play.

There's a few things wrong here with this interpretation. First, this isn't 3rd edition, and monsters and PCs follow different rules. Most monsters don't pick up PC levels, but a lich should probably be able to use a wand that requires attunement by a wizard, so there needs to be a rule for that. This is that rule.

But here's the other, more important thing. "Spellcaster" is not a class. It is legally someone who can cast spells. Nothing more, nothing less. So that includes any class with full, half or even third spellcasting. It includes any monsters with the ability to cast spells. It includes the barbarian that took Magic Initiate or Spell Sniper or Ritual Caster.

Interestingly enough, it includes High Elves and Forest Gnomes and Tieflings too, which I think is pretty interesting commentary on the inherent magic of these races.

I see that I misinterpreted the terms being used in 5E. Granted I played a tons of 3rd edition and that may have corrupted my mind through the years.

I know Spellcaster is not a class. I totally was looking at the Magic item listing for what PCs could use, not what monsters can use. That has thrown me off quite a bit.

I'll have to see how it plays out in my campaign as time goes on. My intent was not to cause confusion in this thread, thought I knew the correct answer. lol, I did not.
 

If you're a PC, you count as a cleric if you have cleric levels. But monsters don't have class levels, not even humanoid monsters. An Orc Eye of Gruumsh is not a cleric, it's a monster. But since it has the Spellcasting trait and casts spells from the cleric list, it can attune to magic items as if it were a cleric.

Similarly, an Eldritch Knight fighter is not a wizard, so they can't use a staff of frost. They cast (a subset of) wizard spells, but that doesn't make them a wizard. They are, however, spellcasters, so they can use a wand of fireballs.

If the designers had intended that a wand of fireballs could only be used by sorcerers, wizards, and fiend-pact warlocks, they would have said so in the attunement requirement, much like on the staff of frost​.


Rangers are already spellcasters (from 2nd level on), so there's pretty much no interpretation of the rules in which they can't attune to an item requiring a "spellcaster."

It's my fault, 5E has gone out to simplify the rules and I was still caught in 3rd Ed/Pathfinder rules. I should have stepped back and seen perhaps I was making it more complicated with restrictions and it wasn't suppose to be. I may still add minor restrictions if the feel of my game with Rangers and Bards and Barbarians (with Magic Initiate feat) casting iconic wizards spells feels wrong.

I'll let it play a while and see.
 


Henry

Autoexreginated
I must admit that I've played 3e in some form for 14 years now, to the point that I keep on having to catch myself from making assumptions in other game systems completely unintentionally, from spellcasting procedures even down to turn structure (I was GMimg in a Savage Worlds game once before a player reminded me that we should be dealing cards each round instead of going round-robin With the first draw's turn :))
 

Given how many people refuse to even consider altering their original interpretation of something in these discussions, and the multi-page threads that have resulted, I want to applaud [MENTION=14884]BrockBallingdark[/MENTION] for being willing to reexamine when handed new information. :)

--Mouse-"Bloody sick of the blindsight thread but can't seem to look away from it"-feratu.
 

SkidAce

Legend
Supporter
If you're a PC, you count as a cleric if you have cleric levels. But monsters don't have class levels, not even humanoid monsters. An Orc Eye of Gruumsh is not a cleric, it's a monster. But since it has the Spellcasting trait and casts spells from the cleric list, it can attune to magic items as if it were a cleric.

Similarly, an Eldritch Knight fighter is not a wizard, so they can't use a staff of frost. They cast (a subset of) wizard spells, but that doesn't make them a wizard. They are, however, spellcasters, so they can use a wand of fireballs.

If the designers had intended that a wand of fireballs could only be used by sorcerers, wizards, and fiend-pact warlocks, they would have said so in the attunement requirement, much like on the staff of frost​.


Rangers are already spellcasters (from 2nd level on), so there's pretty much no interpretation of the rules in which they can't attune to an item requiring a "spellcaster."

This is the way...
 

Remove ads

Top