4
\$\begingroup\$

A warlock character has a Rod of the Pact Keeper +1 and a Rod of the Pact Keeper +2: can they attune to the two rods, since one is a +1 and the other a +2?

If they can attune to both rods, can they use both to regain a spell slot from each, for two slots regained?

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
18
\$\begingroup\$

Additionally, a creature can't attune to more than one copy of an item.

DMG 138

As both items are referred to with the same name (as opposed to the +2 being called Greater Rod of the Pact Keeper or such) this rule could be called into effect. However what constitues the "same" item is not clarified, so this is not strictly RAW.

So RAI points to a character being unable to attune to both.

If the GM decides that he considers these items different and allows attunement, both could be used once per long rest to regain a spell slot, just as any other pair of items could be used independently of each other.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ That's RAW, not just RAI. Consider that the section on Attunement says “For example, a creature can't attune to more than one ring of protection at a time.” — notice that it's any ring of protection regardless of bonus, not “… more than one ring of protection +1…”. \$\endgroup\$
    – SevenSidedDie
    Jan 13, 2017 at 17:38
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ Seven, there is no such a thing as a ring of protection +1. It simply does not exist in 5e. There is only a ring of protection, so this is, unfortunately, not a good piece of evidence. I read the sections in question and noted the example - it was just as nebulous. If we assume that a Rod otPK +1 is the same (a copy as the text states) as a +2, then that means it's the same as a +3.. which it is not. Hence, my confusion on the topic and the request for assistance. \$\endgroup\$
    – Trance Kat
    Jan 13, 2017 at 18:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ @TranceKat, you can type @<Name> to send the person a notification that you've responded. \$\endgroup\$
    – Tin Wizard
    Jan 13, 2017 at 19:41
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @TranceKat by that same logic, a RotPK is listed as one entry in the DMG, rather than separate. So they are the same item, regardless of bonus given. \$\endgroup\$
    – daze413
    Jan 14, 2017 at 0:43
0
\$\begingroup\$

RAI is clear. Crawford considers both to have the same name. (Sage Advice.)

Because this is a Crawford twitterant (from the early period) some would consider this RAW.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .