Can You Take Arcane Strike If...


Rules Questions


You have taken the trait Magical Talent?

Here is what the trait does

Benefit: Choose a 0-level spell. You may cast that spell once per day as a spell-like ability. This spell-like ability is cast at your highest caster level gained; if you have no caster level, it functions at CL 1st. The spell-like ability’s save DC is Charisma-based.

The requirement for Arcane Strike is the ability to cast arcane spells. It doesn't say anything about how many.

What do you think?


Yes, but it would never progress beyond a simple +1 that does not stack with pre-existing magical bonuses on the weapon.

Edited: I stand corrected by Shisumo's reply in regard to Spell Like Abilities.

Liberty's Edge

Having a spell-like ability is not the same as being able to cast a spell. SLAs do not qualify you for Arcane Strike. (The FAQ covers this specifically with regard to wands, but the same logic applies.)


Shisumo wrote:
Having a spell-like ability is not the same as being able to cast a spell. SLAs do not qualify you for Arcane Strike. (The FAQ covers this specifically with regard to wands, but the same logic applies.)

Thanks Guys

I was thinking that could be fun thing to put on an NPC that specializes in throwing things, a delightful little surprise that would be :)

Liberty's Edge

Malafaxous wrote:

Yes, but it would never progress beyond a simple +1 that does not stack with pre-existing magical bonuses on the weapon.

Edited: I stand corrected by Shisumo's reply in regard to Spell Like Abilities.

Also, worth mentioning Arcane Strike provides an untyped bonus to damage and would stack with weapon enhancements.

"...your weapons deal +1 damage..."


Shisumo wrote:
Having a spell-like ability is not the same as being able to cast a spell.

...unless the spell like ability is to cast a spell...

The wording of the feat actually gives you the ability to cast.
It's just ...as a spell like ability instead of a class ability.
If the wording of the SLA was to produce the effects of the spell then I would directly agree with you here but the SLA gives you the ability to cast it as quoted by the trait. If there is a specific FAQ somewhere that overrules this wording then I would like to examine it otherwise I would say calling it anything other than casting is house ruling.


A spell like ability is not a spell.

A spell like ability specifically is not an arcane spell.

Therefore it fails on all levels.

spell like abilities wrote:

Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

Some creatures actually cast arcane spells as sorcerers do, using components when required. Some creatures have both spell-like abilities and actual spellcasting power.

Spells wrote:


A spell is a one-time magical effect. Spells come in two types:

Arcane (cast by bards, sorcerers, and wizards) and
Divine (cast by clerics, druids, and experienced paladins and rangers)

Some spellcasters select their spells from a limited list of spells known, while others have access to a wide variety of options.

Most spellcasters prepare spells in advance-whether from a spellbook or through prayers-while some cast spells spontaneously without preparation. Despite these different ways characters use to learn or prepare their spells, when it comes to casting them, the spells are very much alike.

The Exchange

It's true: SLAs are in most cases far superior to conventional spells (no arcane spell failure, no verbal/somatic/material components), but in this case you specifically need arcane spellcasting ability, not a spell-like ability.


Lincoln Hills wrote:
It's true: SLAs are in most cases far superior to conventional spells (no arcane spell failure, no verbal/somatic/material components), but in this case you specifically need arcane spellcasting ability, not a spell-like ability.

Also spell like abilities don't count for being able to use spell trigger items, spell completion items or crafting magic items (since you have to expend a spell slot to craft).

Fortunately in most casts you don't actually need to have the spell to craft an item -- it simply makes it easier.


Abraham spalding wrote:

A spell like ability is not a spell.

A spell like ability specifically is not an arcane spell.

Therefore it fails on all levels.

spell like abilities wrote:

Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

d20pfsrd wrote:


:Spell-like abilities can be dispelled and counterspelled as normal.

.

I need to cross reference our references....

Edit: just the last part about the counter spelling.


Yup -- you'll find it says differently in a few places -- but in the spell like ability section it has this:

Quote:

Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

Some creatures actually cast arcane spells as sorcerers do, using components when required. Some creatures have both spell-like abilities and actual spellcasting power.

But they can be dispelled.


Vuvu wrote:
I was thinking that could be fun thing to put on an NPC that specializes in throwing things, a delightful little surprise that would be :)

Just remember, if you are the GM you are allowed to change the rules to suit your game, so if you wanted to make it work with a spell like ability you can.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
TheDoomedOne wrote:
Just remember, if you are the GM you are allowed to change the rules to suit your game.

Agreed (though agree with the rest that it does not work). The biggest issue to remember if you allow it is that Rogues can get minor magic rogue talent and get caster level = rogue level. That's a *lot* of free damage with Arcane Strike (all for a swift action that rogues rarely use).

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

thats not a lot of free damage. its a feat, and its +1 to damage , with a swift action, for every 5 caster levels. its not a bonus to hit, its just a bonus to damage.

and should probably be an enhancement bonus to damage, so it doesn't stack with magic weapons. i hope they wanted it to be independent.

but now that i know its not typed, i'll be using it a lot more with my dragon disciple


Very few people would take it if it didn't stack with magic weapons. It would be nigh pointless.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Seraphimpunk wrote:
thats not a lot of free damage. its a feat, and its +1 to damage, with a swift action, for every 5 caster levels.

It's +2 to damage at 5th level (+1, *plus* +1 per 5 caster levels), and higher later, with every weapon you wield, and making all of them considered magical.

Weapon Specialization is +2 to damage with *one* kind of weapon. No increases, no other benefits.

It's a lot of free damage (for anyone who qualifies, and doesn't use swift actions constantly).

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

yeah, but to qualify you're typically on a 3/4 or 1/2 bab scale.
my dragon disciple is 8th level. CL 6th. gets his +2 on damage, but only has a BAB of +5.

The higher caster level you want, the lower your BAB will be.

An Arcane Duelist cohort i have in another campaign is a bard which gets arcane strike for free ( otherwise i'd never really spend a feat on it ), and by 10th level she's got a +3 damage. but her base attack is only +7.

There's no full bab/full arcane caster level base classes. so there's no danger of someone with the best chance of hitting, getting a +5 to damage with every swing.

There ARE fighters at 20th level with +20 bab, and +6 to damage with every swing from weapon training/specialization etc.
Since those characters can't take this and get a bump to 5th or even 20th caster level, its a balanced and fair feat.

its not free damage, its paid for in blood sweat and bab.


short version, No. having SLA's does not make you a caster. This horse has been beaten to death over several threads.


Arcane Duelist starts with a BAB of +7 at 10th level... then there's good hope and inspire competence which puts you at +11 with +4 on damage before weapon focus, arcane strike or anything else (after which you are +12 to hit and +7 on damage, power attack means +10 and +11~13).

The fighter has +11 with +10~13 after weapon focus, specialization, greater weapon focus and weapon training.

All in all I would call it even since since the bard also can make the fighter better if he decides to.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can You Take Arcane Strike If... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.