Jadeite |
In general, SLAs use the sor/wiz spell level for DCs if the spell is on multiple spell lists, so you should assume that an SLA is arcane unless the source of the ability suggests otherwise (such as a spell that's only on the cleric list, or an SLA from a cleric domain, or uses Wisdom to determine DCs instead of Charisma).
Yora |
For some unknown reason, the explainations of what constitutes spell-like and supernatural abilities and how they behave in special situations like these, got cut down considerably when they were ported into Pathfinder. The d20 SRD has a few more sentences that answer many of these questions that seem to be popping up lately. In the Pathfinder version, these things are no longer explained.
MechE_ |
I've marked it as FAQ. Personally, it seems a TERRIBLE idea to make them either Arcane or Divine, and an even WORSE idea to make them count as either. It should seem obvious that they are neither, and regardless of Paizo's ruling, I will rule it that way at my table. It sure would be nice to NOT have to extend my house rules though - especially for something that seems so dubious... What would be the possible implications here?
Early entry into Mystic Theurge. I'm not sure exactly how but it has to be possible. Probably a Druid or Cleric who's 6th level Domain Power is a Spell-like ability - Because those should completely count as Arcane if you want them to... ... ...
Non-spellcasters grabbing Arcane Strike because they happen to have a Spell-like ability, possibly from a feat, etc. Because Weapon Specialization is fighter only and other classes should be able to get BETTER bonus damage for the cost of a swift action (which some builds never use otherwise.)
I'm sure there's a million and one ways to abuse feats here too... Anyone else got any good idea for exploits? I suggest we point out the massive quantity of exploits so the guys down at Paizo will realize that the only logical answer here is that Spell-like abilities are NEITHER arcane or divine. I suspect there will be plenty enough exploits with just getting a caster level from Spell-like abilities. (Does this make a 5th level Paladin a 5th level caster when he gets Divine Bond? etc.)
Jadeite |
wraithstrike |
It is in a FAQ.
As posted above.
No isn't. There is no FAQ saying they count as divine or arcane. If there were such an FAQ it would have to let us know when they are divine vs when they are arcane. SKR said we should assume they are divine, but nothing in the rulebook or FAQ backs his statement. Since not everyone comes to the boards this is something that should be in the book if Paizo wants it to work that way.
Lincoln Hills |
I must admit it had been my impression that since spell-like abilities are not true spells, the question of what "kind" of spells they are is nonsensical. The line Jadeite quotes - though it mentions that SLAs should be considered 'arcane' - seems to be doing so in the context of determining what 'level' of spell an SLA is equivalent to when matters of relative spell level come up. Unfortunately, in making that point it essentially says SLAs are arcane unless they don't appear on any arcane caster's list, which I strongly suspect was not the writer's intent...
RainyDayNinja RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16 |
blackbloodtroll |
SKR's comments really needs solid confirmation in a FAQ.
Before putting forth anything towards PFS, or just about any DM, this needs it.
Usually, I can take SKR's comments to any one of my DMs, and get the okay.
This is a whole new ball game.
This is one of the biggest WTF rulings I have ever seen, at least, for me.
Xaratherus |
No kidding. Although someone earlier mentioned Mystic Theurge being a bad PrC, I'd point out that with this ruling, an Aasimar Cleric 3/Wizard 1 could take its next 10 levels in Mystic Theurge and be the casting equivalent of a Cleric 13/Wizard 11 - basically, having all the spells it would have gotten by going pure Cleric, and half a class progression's worth of Wizard spells to boot.
Joe M. |
No kidding. Although someone earlier mentioned Mystic Theurge being a bad PrC, I'd point out that with this ruling, an Aasimar Cleric 3/Wizard 1 could take its next 10 levels in Mystic Theurge and be the casting equivalent of a Cleric 13/Wizard 11 - basically, having all the spells it would have gotten by going pure Cleric, and half a class progression's worth of Wizard spells to boot.
Actually, if this exchange is correct, it looks like it might be possible (in an extreme case) to get MT 1 at level 4 via the Fiendish Heritage feat and the variant Tiefling abilities.
Robert A Matthews |
FAQ'd. I have a feeling they are going to say that SLAs are neither arcane nor divine. This would effectively end the problem with aasimars being able to take Eldritch Knight at level 2. It also wouldn't overturn the FAQ that spawned all this. Able to cast dimension door as a SLA would still allow the Barghest to take Dimensional agility. This last part is kind of a stretch, but it technically wouldn't invalidate SKR's post about Minor Magic and Arcane Strike either.
Prerequisite: Intelligence 10
Benefit: A rogue with this talent gains the ability to cast a 0-level spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list. This spell can be cast three times a day as a spell-like ability. The caster level for this ability is equal to the rogue's level. The save DC for this spell is 10 + the rogue's Intelligence modifier.
Technically it gives him the ability to cast the spell. It also lets him cast it three times per day as a spell-like ability. I am suggesting here that, if the rogue had Rogue spell slots, he could slot that spell into them. This is me just reading it logically without applying any common sense to it whatsoever, so take it for what it is.
Edit: If they wanted, they could take it a step further, and just reaffirm that SLAs aren't spells, and can't be used to fulfill a prerequisite of "able to cast spells". "Able to cast spells" refers to spellcasting classes, Minor Magic being an exception due to the reasons I listed above. You could, however, still use SLAs to qualify for prerequisites that call out for a specific spell. "Able to cast Dimension Door" doesn't say you have to be able to cast it as a spell, so it is allowed.
Quandary |
If it was as cut and dried as the brief comment that spawned this, I don't see why they wouldn't have answered this already, if only with "yeah, it's exactly like I said in my comment". Since they haven't, I assume they are mulling the implications and RAW/RAI. I will wait before official FAQ before implementing it in play. Although that really goes for lots of things that they mention in threads (or Blogs) yet should easily qualify as FAQ entries.
I hit the FAQ button, you can hit the FAQ button.
Joe M. |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it was as cut and dried as the brief comment that spawned this, I don't see why they wouldn't have answered this already, if only with "yeah, it's exactly like I said in my comment". Since they haven't, I assume they are mulling the implications and RAW/RAI. I will wait before official FAQ before implementing it in play. Although that really goes for lots of things that they mention in threads (or Blogs) yet should easily qualify as FAQ entries.
I hit the FAQ button, you can hit the FAQ button.
I assume they've been overwhelmed prepping for PaizoCon this weekend.
And then for GenCon after that.
But yeah. A question like this has pretty serious rules implications, as everyone's pointed out! Some time to mull the implications and RAW/RAI is probably a good thing.
Drachasor |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Looking over the rules carefully, I think it is almost RAW that spell-like abilities are all arcane.
1. Spell-like abilities are just like spells in all ways except where they are explicitly defined differently.
2. All spells are arcane or divine.
3. Divine spells must come from a divine source.
4. Arcane spells are basically defined as "not divine."
5. (3) and (4) suggest a spell needs to explicitly be said to be from a divine source to be divine.
6. Spell-like abilities are not said to be from a divine source, therefore they are arcane.
(5) is the weak point in this like of reasoning.
Drachasor |
Alternatively, you could use the same logic flipped to say that all spells are divine.
The rules don't say one way or the other on this. These aren't so much drawing power from a certain source as much as the thing just happening.
I'm sure this'll be asked at the Rules Q&A at PaizoCon too.
You definitely cannot flip it around as easily, imho. Divine spells MUST come from a divine source. That's the definition. So a spell would have to say it comes from a divine source to be divine. Arcane is the catch-all group. So you'd have to argue that spell-like abilities are neglecting to mention their divine source. I think that's definitely the weaker argument. Not that I am saying the rules are clear, mind you.
As for spell effects that are neither arcane or divine, that would be a case of specific text over-ruling the general. The Magic Section explicitly defines all spells as either arcane or divine. Spell-like abilities do not say they are an exception to this, so they are definitely either arcane or divine (by RAW).
Cheapy |
By RAW, Spell-like Abilities aren't spells ;) Heck, the FAQ still says this.
We also have this quote:
Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.
Resemble is a pretty bad word choice, if they actually are arcane.
The whole thing is going to need to be fixed. Which is why FAQing this post would be so super awesome of you!
....well that's pretty annoying.
Defeat/slay arcane spellcasters (including spellcasting monsters and those that use spell-like abilities)
I'd be curious to see which of the two above is in error, although I'd generally err on the side of actual rules text as opposed to an entry in a random table for a mostly unused section of the rules.
Last year PaizoCon, if I went to the Rules Q&A forum, I was hoping to ask about the ability of the alchemist to take magic item creation feats. This year, I think I found my question.
Drachasor |
1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
By RAW, Spell-like Abilities aren't spells ;) Heck, the FAQ still says this.
I know they aren't technically spells. However, except where otherwise noted, they work just like spells.
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).
So by RAW, they are mechanically spells except where otherwise noted.
Oh, I can't believe I missed the following:
Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monster’s spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order.
So there we go. They default to arcane if there's a wizard version of the spell.