I just searched the boards and there were some threads about this, but they were often mixed with other questions and were inconclusive.
My questions goes: Does a Spell-Like Abilitiy (like f.ex. the Clerics Fire Domain Power - Fire Bolt) and a Bloodline Arcana that enhance spell damage (f.ex. the Draconic Bloodline Arcana) actually work together? I.e. will the Spell-Like Ability get a +1 to damage per damage die?
Fire Bolt (Sp): As a standard action, you can unleash a
scorching bolt of divine fire from your outstretched
hand. You can target any single foe within 30 feet as a
ranged touch attack with this bolt of fire. If you hit the
foe, the fire bolt deals 1d6 points of fire damage + 1
point for every two cleric levels you possess. You can use
this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your
Wisdom modifier.
Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell with an energy
descriptor that matches your draconic bloodline’s energy
type, that spell deals +1 point of damage per die rolled.
Yes. I am basing this on the fact that Augment summoning works on the Summoner's Summon Monster SLA.
Hmmm, interesting take on it - I hadn't thought of that at all. That is a good point.
Thank you Wraithstrike :)
Anyone else with opinions for or against?
|
It will not work.
While Fire Bolt is in deed a fire effect it does not actually have an energy descriptor. That Fire Bolt is not at all a spell but a spell-like ability can also be considered a hindrance. I do not recall ever reading a ruling on where exactly the similarities between spell and spell-like ability stop. For this bloodline arcana I think it has to be an actual spell to work.
Why is that? SLA's are treatly like spells in every instance except there mechanically impossible. An example is that SLA's can not use metamagic feats because they don't have slots.
|
Fire Bolt (Sp): As a standard action, you can unleash a
scorching bolt of divine fire from your outstretched
hand. You can target any single foe within 30 feet as a
ranged touch attack with this bolt of fire. If you hit the
foe, the fire bolt deals 1d6 points of fire damage + 1
point for every two cleric levels you possess. You can use
this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your
Wisdom modifier.
I would say that is enough to say it adds to it.
|
|
Why is that? SLA's are treatly like spells in every instance except there mechanically impossible. An example is that SLA's can not use metamagic feats because they don't have slots.
That is absolutely true, but this Bloodline Arcana explicitly calls for a spell descriptor, which only spells or SLA which duplicate spells have.
The combo Derwalt is refering too will not fly at my table ;)
Good point. It does not have a descriptor.
Ah ok, I hadn't seen that. I can agree with what you're saying, Asharii :) ...and as I'll very likely be playing at your table, that matters :)
But! That actually muddles the debate, as I had not thought of the line referring to a "descriptor" and that was not my main question. So instead let us use the Arcana of the Orc Bloodline:
You gain the orc subtype, including darkvision 60 feet and light sensitivity. If you already have darkvision, its range increases to 90 feet. Whenever you cast a spell that deals damage, that spell deals +1 point of damage per die rolled.
(my bold).
Here it merely says +1 point of damage per die rolled. Would you guys then consider the Spell-Like Ability, Fire Bolt, in this regard to pass for a "Spell"?
Just a note, Augment Summoning works on the summoner's SLA due to Bulmahn-fiat.
And wraithstrike had it...kind of right about the metamagic thing. The first reason why you can't use metamagic feats on SLAs is because they aren't spells. The second reason is that they don't have spell-slots. But that second reason is less important than the first, because if it was the only reason, you could still use rods of metamagic on SLAs. Which they don't.
@Cheapy: Well, he IS the lead designer... :) And since the question is not in contention with any other rules, but merely a case of yes or no, then I believe it's not FAQ / errata material, and then I'll take his word for how it is to work. Unless someone else has opinions / rules to oppose that view? I'm always looking for optimization and to get as much out of the rules as I can, but I'm not looking to cheat or bend the rules. And I'm always open for argumentation :)
@Asharii: I don't care! :P
Further relevant FAQ answer. Of course, people are going to split semantic hairs about if using SLAs constitutes actual spellcasting.
However, based on that FAQ, I believe that the answer is no. SLAs are not affected by abilities that modify spells.
Derwalt: if you look at the post, it said it's been marked for being in the errata.
Your last FAQ reference is to magical items - and if feats or abilites work on those. I don't believe that has bearing here. What Jason says in the thread that you referenced, is that SLA's are (like) spell casting.
...hmmm - and it says "answered in the errata" - but what errata is that? The errata for Augment Summoning? Or for the Summoners SLA's?
The FAQ is in reference to magic items. However, the reason why it doesn't work is the following:
Unless they specifically state otherwise, feats and abilities that modify spells you cast only affect actual spellcasting, ...
The reason for why it doesn't work is not specific to magic items.
And I've been trying to figure out where it's been for a while.
Hmmm - annoying that the errata is "gone".
But the reason you quote there, I would say, is in direct opposition to what Jason says SLA's actually are. Hmmm or maybe I'm reading too much into it. Zurai writes in the thread: "...SLAs function exactly like a spell in every respect except that they do not take up spell slots and do not have V/S/M/DF components."
And later Jason says: "Zurai is correct here folks." And he does not say anything about Zurai being wrong further up. But his answer is of course in direct relation to Zurai referring to the SLA of the Summoner as being a duplicate of the spell of the same name (Summon Monster).
Hmmm. I guess that does make it less clear. It could be argued that what Jason intends, is that the only SLA's that are to be treated like spells are SLA's that actually duplicate spells... But that kind of waters down the concept of a "Spell-Like Ability" - only some of them are treated like spells? An easier ruling would be that in all other regards than in regards to meta magic - they are treated like spells. But it does not say that anywhere.
If only SLA's that duplicate spells, are to be treated like spells, that would make both of the Bloodline Arcanas incompatible with the clerics Fire Bolt power. But might mean that they could work with other Spell-Like Abilities.
So we're not that much closer to an actual answer.
@Asharii: Would you still say the Orc Bloodline power gives a +1 on dmg to the Fire Bolt power? I could see it go either way, and if I were the GM I think I would allow it (it really is not much of a power boost). But I know we're all sticklers for RAW - and I want to go with an interpretation we can agree on witihn the RAW :)
Jason's posts was in response to the post by Zurai. I wouldn't take that to mean everything Zurai said outside that post was correct.
Still don't think they work, and the Augment Summons bit is a specific exception due to lead-designer-fiat.
|
|
I am still of the oppinion that SLA are compareable with spells in most respects. All you need to know os writen in CRB p. 221.
SLA are to be treated as spells. They are even affacted by feats like Combat Casting and Spell Focus. The problem with SLA is that man of them, like Fire Bolt, do not follow the mold spells are cast in. I.e. They do not have an actual school, are neither arcane nor divine, do not have spell descriptors and spell levels. That means that Fire Bolt is not affected by neither the Draconic bloodline arcana nor the Spell Focus (evocation) feat even though all intuition would say that SLA is both a fire ability and evocation in nature. However it is like a spell and the orc bloodline arcana should without doubt affect it.
So. The tricky part with SLA are those abilities that do not duplicate spells, as they are not molded the way actual spells are. That means many abilities and magic items will affect some SLA bt not others.
I would like you to think back to the origins of SLA. Think back to AD&D. Drow for instance had darkness as SLA (or rather Innate Spell-like Ability, as it was called back then). Was it some sort of weird voodoo? No, it was innate magic. It was a darkness spell all drow could cast by virtue of their heritage. SLA are innate spells; i.e. spells you are "born" with.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They are like spells, but they themselves are not spells.
Spell-Like Abilities as Spells: Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as having that spell on its spell list for the purpose of activating spell completion or spell trigger items?
No. A spell-like ability is not a spell, having a spell-like ability is not part of a class's spell list, and therefore doesn't give the creature the ability to activate spell completion or spell trigger items.
—Sean K Reynolds, 08/22/11
Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components). They go away in an antimagic field and are subject to spell resistance if the spell the ability is based on would be subject to spell resistance.
Combat Casting works because of this:
You get a +4 bonus on concentration checks made to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability when casting on the defensive or while grappled.
It seems like half of the references to SLAs in the CRB are "cast a spell or use a spell-like ability" (for example: grapple).
The FAQ says that the reason why you can't use metamagic feats on SLAs is because the feats only work on spells.
It's abundantly clear at this point that SLAs are not spells.
From a different FAQ, we see this:
Unless they specifically state otherwise, feats and abilities that modify spells you cast only affect actual spellcasting
Since SLAs are not spells, I am certain that as it stands, spell-like abilities such as Fire Bolt are not affected by bloodline arcana that modify spells. Augment Summon / Summoner's Summon Monster SLA gets past that by explicit designer fiat :)
In this case would it be overpowered? Nah. It just isn't the rules.
It's abundantly clear at this point that SLAs are not spells.
From a different FAQ, we see this:
Unless they specifically state otherwise, feats and abilities that modify spells you cast only affect actual spellcastingSince SLAs are not spells, I am certain that as it stands, spell-like abilities such as Fire Bolt are not affected by bloodline arcana that modify spells. Augment Summon / Summoner's Summon Monster SLA gets past that by explicit designer fiat :)
In this case would it be overpowered? Nah. It just isn't the rules.
+1 to Cheapy. Also, big credit for doing all the search-fu footwork.
Yeah, nice search-fu there :) I think I'm on your side now Cheapy. But if Asharii will rule it differently when GM'ing, I'll go with that ruling in an actual game, if I participate ;)
|
|
I largely agree with Cheapy.
I will however point to this FAQ again and quote it in full:
Items as Spells: Does using a potion, scroll, staff, or wand count as "casting a spell" for purposes of feats and special abilities like Augment Summoning, Spell Focus, an evoker's ability to do extra damage with evocation spells, bloodline abilities, and so on?No. Unless they specifically state otherwise, feats and abilities that modify spells you cast only affect actual spellcasting, not using magic items that emulate spellcasting or work like spellcasting.
—Sean K Reynolds, 09/01/10
I do not see that this has any bearing on the matter at hand.
I maintain my position as stated in the post above (which is very close to what Cheapy is saying).
SLA are very much like actual spells. How SLA interact with feats, abilities etc. must be adjudicated on a case to case basis.
For this particular question Derwalt you have my green light on orc bloodline, but not draconic bloodline.