Afraid not. The ability specifies "cast any spell from the magus spell list." You even need a special arcana ability to cast spells from another class using Spell Combat, so SLAs are right out.
That being said, if this is a home game, you might work with your GM to create a magus arcana that would let you do it.
They won't work. SLAs are not spells and don't qualify as spells for anything. You can see more information here. Also here.
RAW, I can see so as long as the SLA is of a spell already on the Magus spell list.
"cast any spell from the magus list" doesn't specify actually casting with magus spell slots.
I'm not sure what Cheapy means, SLAs are stated to work like spells except as stated and are stated to be cast ('casting time').
His first example is just about spell lists, clearly having an SLA doesn't give you a spell list or add a spell to it, but that's not the issue here (even if it did, it wouldn't be relevant to whether the spell is on the magus list), and the second one has nothing to do with SLAs... All the examples (e.g. Spell Focus) should work fine with SLAs AFAIK, because you are actually casting the SLA, unlike spell completion/trigger/use-activated items.
RAI, I'm not sure, likewise for Broad Study whether you are allowed to cast (via Spell Combat) using other class' slots without Broad Study as long as the spell is also on the magus spell list, or whether you're supposed to need Broad Study to be able to cast non-magus slots. If it's the latter, SLAs would be right out as they aren't magus slots, and Broad Study wouldn't do squat for SLAs since they aren't 'class spell slots' based off a class spell list. I suppose that kind of deserves it's own FAQ to make clearer.
Spell-like Abilities are not spells. The FAQ says this, as do the developers in other posts. Since the SLA they have, even if it resembles a spell on the magus spell list, is not a spell it cannot be used as part of Spell Combat.
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.
SLAs are not spells. You can only add metamagic feats to spells. So, no, you can't use metamagic feats to alter qinggong monk abilities that duplicate the effects of spells.
Emphasis mine in both cases :)
Since the SLA they have, even if it resembles a spell on the magus spell list, is not a spell it cannot be used as part of Spell Combat.
That's what I meant, although I probably should've went a bit further.
All those are discussing tangential things though. Spell lists, having caster level, and adding metamagic to cast spell slots. I'm just dubious of applying some turn of phrase as if it were the Bible, when the actual FAQ question is not whether SLAs are spells, and most of the FAQ answer is totally un-necessary if SLAs are simply not spells. Why would he not acknowledge the basic rules for SLAs which state they are cast and work like spells, if he was changing that? The rules for SLAs need to be changed if they are no longer spells, i.e. contingency doesn't work vs. them, sphere of invulnerability doesn't work, spellcraft/know:arcana can't ID their effects, etc.
Anyways, please FAQ the other thread, as it goes beyond just SLAs.
Personal opinion based on RAW: No, you cannot (unless the description of the SLA specifically says otherwise).
Additional personal opinion: For simplicity's sake, SLAs should be removed from the game; if they function as an existing spell, then the class gains access to cast that spell at-will and without modification a certain number of times per day, otherwise the SLA becomes a Su\Ex as appropriate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's been stated multiple times for multiple reasons in multiple places that SLAs are not spells. The CRB FAQ states that they are not spells three times. The context in which the statement "SLAs are not spells" was stated is not important because in each case, that was the reason why the answer to the question was so.They act in many ways like spells, but they are not themselves spells.
And plainly stating something is not a "turn of phrase".
Racial spell like abilities don't give you an actual caster level.
If you want to take magic item creation as a noncaster, you need to take the Master Craftsman feat.
The absolutely correct answer is "spell-like abilities are not spells, and therefore do not count as spells for anything that requires actual spellcasting."
This statement is pretty clear, and it's only tangentially related to something else. It's main focus is the relationship between SLAs, Spells, and things that requires spells.
Yes, there are some places where the divide between SLAs and spells need to be addressed, but this is not one of them.
Personal opinion based on RAW: No, you cannot (unless the description of the SLA specifically says otherwise).
Additional personal opinion: For simplicity's sake, SLAs should be removed from the game; if they function as an existing spell, then the class gains access to cast that spell at-will and without modification a certain number of times per day, otherwise the SLA becomes a Su\Ex as appropriate.
I'm struggling to find any case where a magical ability like a SLA should be turned into a munane(Ex) :)
I'm struggling to find any case where a magical ability like a SLA should be turned into a munane(Ex) :)Personal opinion based on RAW: No, you cannot (unless the description of the SLA specifically says otherwise).
Additional personal opinion: For simplicity's sake, SLAs should be removed from the game; if they function as an existing spell, then the class gains access to cast that spell at-will and without modification a certain number of times per day, otherwise the SLA becomes a Su\Ex as appropriate.
I don't really know of any off the top of my head either, but I don't know all of 'em so I thought I'd cover my bases. :)
Well the biggest difference between spells and SP, in my opinion is the lack of components. Not having to drop thousands of gold on a material component or the ability to get the effect off while being bound and gagged are a big enough mechanical difference to keep SP abilities around.
Unless that is your 'gripe' about them I don't really see why you'd lobby to remove SP abilities.
Well the biggest difference between spells and SP, in my opinion is the lack of components. Not having to drop thousands of gold on a material component or the ability to get the effect off while being bound and gagged are a big enough mechanical difference to keep SP abilities around.
Unless that is your 'gripe' about them I don't really see why you'd lobby to remove SP abilities.
To avoid questions like the one that the thread originated with, primarily.
I feel like SLAs could behave exactly as they do now, but could fit into a category like Su (or as bonus spells similar to domains) without having to have a completely separate label that requires additional clarification on how they interact with other mechanics.
But they are different, significantly so. SU abilities don't provoke AoOs or worry about SR. If making all SP abilities SU fixes the problem of someone asking if an SLA works with something that explicitly states it only works with spells from 'X class spell list' it causes other problems. It destroys the effectiveness of one of the classic defenses SR and shifts the balance of powers as well as removing the effectiveness of things like AoOs (combat reflexes is reduced in effectiveness). To fix that issue you'd have to start stating that these SU abilities do get influenced by SR and these others don't, which ends up causing more confusion as the SU category abilities aren't operating the same. Which leads us back to creating a category to simplify the issue and cut down the confusion.
That happens to be where we are right now, and it makes sense (at least to me). I'd rather answer a straight forward and obvious question like the OP than have to hunt through each ability to see how it operates. The current system seems the simplest and most effective. Your proposed solution doesn't really fix anything, it would essentialy just shift the problem.
This isn't me trying to knock your suggestion, just bouncing around the idea and seeing if it had more merit than the current implementation, which I don't think it does.
You raise some good points. I don't know that they would necessarily 'break' balance; those spells that are based on spells would become 'bonus' spells (similar to how domains function), and so the question of AoOs and SR would not be an issue, because they are spells. For anything that isn't based on a specific spell? Then they're treated like all other Sus - no AoO, no SR, no variance from other Sus.
Are there really that many that would fall into that category that it would 'weaken' SR and cheat so many AoOs? If so, then I would agree with you, but my assumption (based on recollection) is that the majority would fall into the former category (at-will 'spells') rather than the latter.
SLA's also do not belong to any caster's spell list, and spells do. If they did they would have a divine or arcane type. They have neither because they are not spells.
Nowhere in the rules does it say they "count as" spells. It says they work as spells. The two are not similar, but not synonymous.
And as SKR said if actual spell-casting is required SLA do not qualify.