RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 17 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding this FAQ:
Most spell-like abilities should be considered arcane, unless the spell in question only appears on the standard cleric or druid spell list (such as holy smite) or something about the creature strongly indicates its spell-like abilities should be considered divine (such as a solar's spell-like abilities, as a solar usually directly serves a deity).
("Standard spell list" meaning "not altered in some way by an archetype, prestige class, racial ability, and so on.")
—Pathfinder Design Team
My question is about that second condition for an SLA being divine instead of arcane ("something about the creature strongly indicates its spell-like abilities should be considered divine").
Since the very nature of aasimar (and tieflings, since divinity in Pathfinder is not necessarily good) involves a tie to planes associated with deities, is that sufficiently "strongly indicating its SLAs should be considered divine"? Or does a creature have to be far more strongly tied to a deity than that?
Please click the FAQ button at the upper-right corner of this post if you'd like that answered.
Thanks!
I think he was referring to outsiders such as azatas, but more guidance would be nice. FAQ'd. :)
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I would think not. Tiefling ancestry can be any sort of fiend, not necessarily a Demon Lord or some other creature powerful enough to grant spells. The same is true of Aasimar ancestry: maybe your great-great-grandfather was a hound archon.
An outsider, yes. A god, no?
Nothing necessarily divine about that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We can't create a simple rule that covers all the possibilities about whether or not a creature's racial SLAs should be divine instead of arcane. GMs are going to have to make a judgment call for individual campaigns.
Edit: And we can't have a hundred individual FAQs (or one FAQ with a hundred line-items) specifying which are divine instead of arcane.
We can't create a simple rule that covers all the possibilities about whether or not a creature's racial SLAs should be divine instead of arcane. GMs are going to have to make a judgment call for individual campaigns.
thank you
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Sean,
The concern is, as often in these cases, Pathfinder Society Organized Play. If I play an aasimar fighter 1 / witch 1 / eldritch knight n for 16 game sessions under GMs who understand that the character fulfills the prestige class's requirements, then I'm in an awkward place when I run into a GM who rules that I need to translate all of those eldritch knight levels to witch in order to play at her table.
Once I revise my character for that GM, can I revise it back for the next table? Do I need to carry around two different versions of my PC, playing one or the other as the GM reads the arcane/divine nature of the race?
I know that general Paizo development is not in the business of making PFS run smoothly. But we were hoping that this doesn't need to be one of the rules defined by the PFS environment.
We can't create a simple rule that covers all the possibilities about whether or not a creature's racial SLAs should be divine instead of arcane. GMs are going to have to make a judgment call for individual campaigns.
Edit: And we can't have a hundred individual FAQs (or one FAQ with a hundred line-items) specifying which are divine instead of arcane.
As a critic of this FAQ, I'll point out that the a simple rule was the one we've used for the last 4 years... Spell-like abilities were neither arcane, nor divine. They were, by their very nature, not spells, but operated very similarily - spell-like, one could even say. (Being a tiny bit sarcastic here as it seems funny to me that we're making them "spell-almost-like-abilities-but-more-actual-spells-nowadays.")
I personally don't have problems with specific SLAs counting as the specific spell for the purpose of meeting crafting or feat pre-requisites, as that seems pretty straight forward. I do, however, think that defining them as arcane and divine opens an entirely new bag of worms, such as what if my PFS DMs disagree, etc.
For home games, it's simple to house-rule this away, which is what I will do. "Spell-like abilities count as the spell for specific requirements regarding that spell, such as a feat with the prerequisite "Able to cast dimension door", but as they are neither arcane nor divine and do not provide a caster level for use in any other application - feats that require "able to cast arcane (or divine) spells", feats that require "Caster level 3", prestige classes that require the ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells, etc."
Nice 'n Simple.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The FAQ already says "spell-like abilities should be considered arcane ... unless something about the creature strongly indicates its spell-like abilities should be considered divine."
Which means "unless you have a really good explanation for why it should be divine, it's arcane." The end.
Which means the PFS team doesn't even have to say, "the following PC-allowed races are considered to have divine spell-like abilities: A, B, C..."
By not saying anything to the contrary, they are accepting (and enforcing) the idea that all PC-allowed races have arcane spell like abilities.
What if the spell in question only appears on the cleric/druid list, like Summon Nature's Ally II? I assume that falls under the first sentence in the FAQ that states that it is divine? This would apply to the Idyllkin Aasimar.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
What if the spell in question only appears on the cleric/druid list, like Summon Nature's Ally II? I assume that falls under the first sentence in the FAQ that states that it is divine? This would apply to the Idyllkin Aasimar.
Given the context/scope of the question asked in this thread, I don't think any commentary herein is meant to overrule that line.
What if the spell in question only appears on the cleric/druid list, like Summon Nature's Ally II? I assume that falls under the first sentence in the FAQ that states that it is divine? This would apply to the Idyllkin Aasimar.Given the context/scope of the question asked in this thread, I don't think any commentary herein is meant to overrule that line.
I agree completely, but I thought it was worth mentioning now rather than running into it later.
|
I agree completely, but I thought it was worth mentioning now rather than running into it later.What if the spell in question only appears on the cleric/druid list, like Summon Nature's Ally II? I assume that falls under the first sentence in the FAQ that states that it is divine? This would apply to the Idyllkin Aasimar.Given the context/scope of the question asked in this thread, I don't think any commentary herein is meant to overrule that line.
I've created an unfortunate duplicate of this question over here.
The problem is, summon nature's ally is not only on the Cleric / Druid list. It's also on the Ranger list. Which, if we take the FAQ very strictly, makes it an arcane SLA:
Most spell-like abilities should be considered arcane, unless the spell in question only appears on the standard cleric or druid spell list (such as holy smite) or something about the creature strongly indicates its spell-like abilities should be considered divine (such as a solar's spell-like abilities, as a solar usually directly serves a deity).
Now it sounds a little silly at first to suggest that SNA could be arcane, but we've seen where "that's ridiculous!" first reactions have gone in the SLA discussion. Maybe it's completely intentional. (Though of course, what happens when new classes get added, do once-divine SLAs then become arcane?)
Which is to say that priority rules like the rules for determining effective level would be helpful, instead of the current FAQ wording. Or just a re-affirmation of the FAQ wording in the case of summon nature's ally, so we at least know how it's supposed to work!
Discussion over here
|
You really would think that instead of insisting that the spell only appear on the Cleric or Druid spell list, it would be only on the spell list of a divine casting class, which would include Paladins, Rangers, and Inquisitors.
It's kind of strange that an SLA of a Paladin-only spell would be considered arcane...
|
|
You really would think that instead of insisting that the spell only appear on the Cleric or Druid spell list, it would be only on the spell list of a divine casting class, which would include Paladins, Rangers, and Inquisitors.
It's kind of strange that an SLA of a Paladin-only spell would be considered arcane...
Yup. Some priority rules would be helpful.
But I'm opting for maximum caution after a couple days of the SLA threads blowing up. So until we hear otherwise, I'm assuming that an SLA of, say, bless weapon would be considered arcane.
|
|
Request for a quick clarification of the "arcane or divine" FAQ: SLA FAQ Clarification Request: Arcane / Divine
Please hop over there and click the FAQ flag!