10

Warlocks and Sorcerers share Charisma as their spellcasting ability and both can use an arcane focus. The Rod of the Pact Keeper is a focus for warlocks. Can a multiclass Warlock/Sorcerer use the Rod of the Pact Keeper as a focus for both spell casting classes but without the extra abilities the rod give the warlock?

Eddymage
  • 28,645
  • 3
  • 76
  • 150
Jhyarelle Silver
  • 11,163
  • 13
  • 74
  • 150

3 Answers3

11

Yes.

Let's make a little checklist:

  • Requires Attunement by a Warlock. You are a warlock, check.
  • It's an arcane focus. Both of your classes can use an arcane focus, check.

There's no reason you wouldn't be able to use as an arcane focus for both classes since you have the only two requirements of the item. As you said, your sorcerer spells can't benefit from the bonus but the special ability only requires you to hold the rod, use an action and have a spent warlock spell slot.

Aguinaldo Silvestre
  • 8,222
  • 1
  • 30
  • 62
4

Rod of the pact keeper isn't a spellcasting focus.

Here's the complete, current rules text for the rod of the pact keeper:

While holding this rod, you gain a bonus to spell attack rolls and to the saving throw DCs of your warlock spells. The bonus is determined by the rod’s rarity.

In addition, you can regain 1 warlock spell slot as an action while holding the rod. You can’t use this property again until you finish a long rest.

Nowhere does it say that the rod can be used as a spellcasting focus for any class.

Community
  • 1
Marq
  • 27,342
  • 4
  • 111
  • 169
  • 7
    Nor does any wand, but Jeremy Crawford said in the Sage Advice that every wand can be used as such. I believe the same applies to magical rods and staves. – Aguinaldo Silvestre Aug 18 '18 at 08:45
  • 1
    @AguinaldoSilvestre Even an immovable rod, which has nothing to do with casting spells? Even a +1 quarterstaff? – Marq Aug 18 '18 at 08:48
  • 1
    While it would be a yes for the immovable rod, it is not true for a +1 quarterstaff. At least according to Mike Mearls. "A magic staff can be used as a quarterstaff, unless its text says otherwise (see DMG, 140). It is a magic weapon." - Jeremy Crawford - Sage Advice – Aguinaldo Silvestre Aug 18 '18 at 08:55
  • 1
    @AguinaldoSilvestre That's just saying that if I hit a werewolf with a staff of fire, it will take damage because the staff is a magic weapon. It doesn't mean that a +1 weapon that's a quarterstaff is also a spellcasting focus. – Marq Aug 18 '18 at 09:00
  • 1
    I've put the link with Mike Mearls answer on his name before, I'll leave it here this time: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/03/22/can-my-wizard-use-quarterstaff1-as-his-focus-and-gain-the-1-to-my-save-dc/ – Aguinaldo Silvestre Aug 18 '18 at 09:04
  • 2
    @Marq That's because a +1 Quarterstaff isn't a Staff. A Rod of the Pact Keeper or Immovable Rod is still a Rod, so it should be able to be used as a spellcasting focus. – nick012000 Aug 18 '18 at 09:16
  • 4
    @nick012000 My point is there is no written rules support for that. – Marq Aug 18 '18 at 09:20
  • 2
    @AguinaldoSilvestre: I think the issue here is over different interpretations of the equipment description An arcane focus is a special item ... a rod ... designed to channel the power of arcane spells –  Aug 18 '18 at 15:52
0

A magic item must specify that it can be used as an arcane focus.

There are several magic items that belong1 to the list (orb, wand, crystal, staff, rod) of arcane focus types, and each of them specifies that it can be used as an arcane focus: see for example the Astral Shard (crystal), the Orb of Shielding (orb), the Ruby Weave Gem (crystal).

Since the Rod of the Pact Keeper does not list this option, it cannot be used in first instance as an arcane focus.

An item designed for being an arcane focus could be used as such by a multiclass spellcaster.

If an item, magic or not, is specifically designed to be an arcane focus then it could be used as focus by both casting features. For example, the Orb of Shielding states:

If you're a spellcaster, you can use this orb as a spellcasting focus.

A Warlock/Sorcerer can hence use this magic orb as an arcane focus for spells belonging to both classes.

There are other magic items that are arcane focus for a specific class. See the Dark Shard Amulet:

You can use the amulet as a spellcasting focus for your warlock spells.

In this case, such item works as an arcane focus only for Warlock spells, and cannot be used for Sorcerer ones.

1 See this answer of mine for other magic items that do not belong to the types list of arcane focuses but they can be employed as such.

Eddymage
  • 28,645
  • 3
  • 76
  • 150
  • 3
    The 3 items you cite at the start of this answer all include text specifying that they can be used as foci because their usage as foci is non-standard. That is, they can all be used as foci in specific ways that nonmagical foci cannot. The Astral Shard can be used as a spellcasting focus while wearing it (normal foci must be held); the Orb of Shielding and Ruby Weave Gem can be used by any spellcasters, even those that can't normally use orbs/crystals as foci. Hence, these items are not evidence that a magic item must include such text to be used normally as a focus. – Ryan C. Thompson Oct 02 '23 at 02:50
  • @RyanC.Thompson I completely disagree. The shard text says: "You can use the shard as a spellcasting focus while you hold or wear it", so it specifies that you can use it as an arcane focus even with the usual way of usage. The Ruby Weave Gem and the Orb of Shieldgin are specifying this usage even for spellcasters that can use orbs for as focus. – Eddymage Oct 02 '23 at 05:46
  • 1
    If it just said "You can use the shard as a spellcasting focus while you wear it", it would be confusing. Does that override the normal rule that one must hold a focus to use it, or does it add to it? Wording it as "hold or wear" removes the ambiguity, at the very minor cost of being slightly redundant with the normal spellcasting rules. Likewise for the other items: the special rules for using these items as foci overlap with the normal rules, which is redundant but unambiguous. – Ryan C. Thompson Oct 02 '23 at 11:16
  • @RyanC.Thompson Again, I vibrantly disagree: the fact that has to specify it confirms that a magic item must list this property, it is not automatic. Indeed, the description of focuses says: "An arcane focus is a special item designed to channel the power of arcane spells." Magic items must be designed to be arcane focuses – Eddymage Oct 02 '23 at 11:25
  • A quick search through D&D Beyond's item list didn't turn up any items that simply restate the standard rules for using them as a spellcasting focus. As far as I can tell, an item's description only ever states that it can be used as a focus when the rules for using it differ from the standard rules. I find it hard to believe that not a single orb, wand, crystal, staff, or rod is usable as an arcane focus except for the few that happen to have non-standard rules for using them as foci. – Ryan C. Thompson Oct 02 '23 at 11:54
  • If you look in DND Beyond for the Orb entry it states "Type: arcane focus", and its description presents the wording reported in my previous comment. Not every orb, crystal, wand etc etc can be used as an arcane focus: otherwise, even a simple glass bottle can be used as such, since glass is actually a crystal. Of course, a DM and/or a table can rule otherwise, allowing any magic item (such as wands, etc) as focus. – Eddymage Oct 02 '23 at 13:14
  • 1
    Let us continue this discussion in chat. – Ryan C. Thompson Oct 02 '23 at 15:33