| 16 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Examples:
Send Senses (Sp): As a standard action, you place a scrying sensor at a point within medium range (100 feet + 10 feet/wizard level) that you can see and have line of effect to. You can see or hear (not both) through this sensor for number of rounds equal to 1/2 your wizard level (minimum 1). The sensor otherwise functions as a clairaudience/clairovoyance spell with a caster level equal to your wizard level. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Intelligence modifier.
Copycat (Sp): You can create an illusory double of yourself as a move action. This double functions as a single mirror image and lasts for a number of rounds equal to your cleric level, or until the illusory duplicate is dispelled or destroyed. You can have no more than one copycat at a time. This ability does not stack with the mirror image spell. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.
Please FAQ!
If this came up in a game today I would rule its the same level as the spell its based on.
Though I am having difficulty seeing when the spell level would matter since neither of these have a DC. Dispelling perhaps?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I personally think it's pretty clear that the rule, along with BOTH of the examples used in this FAQ, mean that "not based on a spell" means, you know, not based on a spell.
It's hard for me to understand looking at an SLA which you can't even use without being familiar with a specifically-mentioned spell and thinking it's not based on a spell.
I imagine the response, if any, that this thread gets will be "Answered in the FAQ".
Even so, I clicked the FAQ button.
@Avianfoo: It matters because of the new FAQ that allows SLAs to count as spells for prerequisites. If Sense Senses really counts as a 3rd level arcane spell, then any race can qualify for Eldritch Knight at 3rd level.
@Jiggy: I agree, but I'd like some explicit post or FAQ to point to if anyone questions it.
|
Thanks for starting this thread, RainyDayNinja. It's worth asking.
My guess is to the other side: I wouldn't be surprised if the answer came back that these spell-like abilities (SLAs) are not considered the same level as the spell they mention. This for a few reasons.
In the first place (1), it would just seem strange that a deliberately-weakened mirror-image-like effect would count as the same level as mirror image itself.
But also (2), I'm not sure that the phrase "based on" will carry the strong weight that would be needed to have a "same level as spell mentioned" ruling. Because (2.a) the phrase wasn't part of the FAQ answer but the FAQ question–so it wasn't SKR's own language, and his examples (elemental rays and whatnot) probably just mean he was thinking of that sort of SLA and not copycat sort of things. And because (2.b) "based on" could just as easily mean "duplicates," in the style of the Universal Monster Rules on SLAs, (2.b.i) especially under the old understanding of SLAs-aren't-spells-they're-just-similar-effects that was operative when the FAQ in question was written (2011).
So I'm inclined to think that the answer will come back that copycat et al. are not the same level as the spells they reference. But it's a good question to ask. The FAQ this question is based on–haha–is a couple years old and a lot of expectations have been upset with the recent SLA rulings.
So who knows? Nothing to do but FAQ it and see.
Examples:
Send Senses (Sp): As a standard action, you place a scrying sensor at a point within medium range (100 feet + 10 feet/wizard level) that you can see and have line of effect to. You can see or hear (not both) through this sensor for number of rounds equal to 1/2 your wizard level (minimum 1). The sensor otherwise functions as a clairaudience/clairovoyance spell with a caster level equal to your wizard level. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Intelligence modifier.Copycat (Sp): You can create an illusory double of yourself as a move action. This double functions as a single mirror image and lasts for a number of rounds equal to your cleric level, or until the illusory duplicate is dispelled or destroyed. You can have no more than one copycat at a time. This ability does not stack with the mirror image spell. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.
Please FAQ!
Copycat is its own SLA so it goes by when you actually get it. It does not function as the mirror image spell. It is just saying you get one mirror image.
So is the other one. When an SLA exactly duplicates a spell then you go by the the spell. As an example a fireball SLA would be a 3rd level SLA.
Fireburst: Fireburst functions as a fireball but only does half of the damage. As an example at if you roll 5d6 for 17 points of damage fireburst only does 8 points of damage.
PS:Fireburst is not a real SLA. I just made it up to use as an example.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Copycat is its own SLA so it goes by when you actually get it. It does not function as the mirror image spell. It is just saying you get one mirror image.
So is the other one. When an SLA exactly duplicates a spell then you go by the the spell.
What are you basing all this on?
What are you basing all this on?Copycat is its own SLA so it goes by when you actually get it. It does not function as the mirror image spell. It is just saying you get one mirror image.
So is the other one. When an SLA exactly duplicates a spell then you go by the the spell.
Forget it Jiggy, it's Wraithstrike. He posts his (poorly researched or argued) opinions and calls them explanations.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Here's another way of thinking about this:
What is the actual rule? Is it "go by the level you get the SLA, unless it duplicates a spell, then you go by the spell level"? No. The rule starts with an assumption (doesn't even state it outright) that an SLA's level is based on the corresponding spell, and then the rule in question says that if it's not based on a spell, calculate the level instead.
So the default is that SLAs automatically have a spell level defined by the spell. That's the starting point.
The rule in question, then, is not a baseline, it's a contingency for when the default assumption doesn't work. You're going along, assuming the normal spell levels, until suddenly you don't know the spell level and need a rule to tell you how to calculate one.
And what situation would you need to calculate a spell level? When there's no spell involved. It's my contention that if every SLA was either an exact spell duplicate or a modified spell, then the level-calc rule wouldn't even need to exist. The reason it does exist is to cover the situations where you can't determine the spell level without it.
|
|
Here's another way of thinking about this:
What is the actual rule? Is it "go by the level you get the SLA, unless it duplicates a spell, then you go by the spell level"? No. The rule starts with an assumption (doesn't even state it outright) that an SLA's level is based on the corresponding spell, and then the rule in question says that if it's not based on a spell, calculate the level instead.
So the default is that SLAs automatically have a spell level defined by the spell. That's the starting point.
The rule in question, then, is not a baseline, it's a contingency for when the default assumption doesn't work. You're going along, assuming the normal spell levels, until suddenly you don't know the spell level and need a rule to tell you how to calculate one.
And what situation would you need to calculate a spell level? When there's no spell involved. It's my contention that if every SLA was either an exact spell duplicate or a modified spell, then the level-calc rule wouldn't even need to exist. The reason it does exist is to cover the situations where you can't determine the spell level without it.
It's definitely a contingency rule. I like your setup of default assumption and exception. But maybe we're thinking of the default assumption differently.
You're saying (I think) that the default assumption is that: spell-like abilities (SLAs) are either exact spell duplicates or modified versions of spells and in either case we use the level of the mentioned spell to find the level of the SLA.
But–though it could go either way!–when I read the Universal Monster Rules (UMR) on SLAs, I get the impression that the default assumption is different, that: SLAs are exact spell duplicates and we use the level of the spell they duplicate to find the level of the SLA.
A spell-like ability usually has a limit on how often it can be used. A constant spell-like ability or one that can be used at will has no use limit; unless otherwise stated, a creature can only use a constant spell-like ability on itself. Reactivating a constant spell-like ability is a swift action. Using all other spell-like abilities is a standard action unless noted otherwise, and doing so provokes attacks of opportunity. It is possible to make a concentration check to use a spell-like ability defensively and avoid provoking an attack of opportunity, just as when casting a spell. A spell-like ability can be disrupted just as a spell can be. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.
For creatures with spell-like abilities, a designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature's caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature's Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is 10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature's Charisma modifier.
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.
Whether or not the contingency is triggered in the copycat case depends on what you take as the default. Looks to me that the default is that SLAs full-on copy spells. But of course it's easy to see how the UMR also supports what you take to be the default assumption ("resembles or duplicates", "based on"). So you could definitely be correct here, though I'm not quite on-board yet.
In any case, either way, I'd be more comfortable with an FAQ. (Especially since I'm starting in on a PFS Theurge build right now; it'd be nice to have a bit more assurance of what my options are ...)
Joe M's point of "SLAs are exact spell duplicates and we use the level of the spell they duplicate to find the level of the SLA." is what I was trying to say.
The ones that duplicate spells are the same level as the spell they duplicate which follows Joe's statement, which is what I was saying, even if I did not word it well.
Now copycat is not mirror image so it is not following the duplicate rule.
If the SLA does not duplicate the spell then you check the monster entry to find the spell level. The summon spells for monsters are an example of this.
For SLA's gained from classes you go by the level at which the ability is gained.
How do I know this?
If a character class grants a spell-like ability that is not based on an actual spell, the ability's effective spell level is equal to the highest-level class spell the character can cast, and is cast at the class level the ability is granted.
I could not find a general rule for monsters, but the ability's spell level has always been listed, if it did not copy(duplicate) a spell unless it was a typo.
"Answered in the FAQ"
Uh... OK?
I'm guessing that since the only FAQ on the subject is about SLAs not based on spells, that means this falls in that category.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Jiggy I will address your question 2nd. Pupsocket will be dealt with first, but I have to restart my PC since my mouse is not cooperating, even when I use a different one.
While I am gone I would like for her/him to provide proof of her statements.
Sorry, that was uncalled for. My statement was both rude and inaccurate.
A smattering of arguments:
SKR has already affirmed that yes, some PRCs are now available earlier.
If the SL of modified SLAs are equaltothe unmodified spells, the issue is resolved. If it's not, every slightly altered SLA is a new question, and since there's no cat left in the bag to escape - why bother?
If modified SLAs were meant to use the acquisition level method, the original FAQ would have said so.
Yeah, "answered in the FAQ" isn't very helpful when the question is asking for clarification of the FAQ.
I think the phrasing of the question was the issue. Maybe you should have asked does an SLA that borrows from a spell operate as a duplicate of that(the spell it is borrowing from) spell for the purpose of it's spell level or is it granted its spell level per the rules in the magic chapter.
If a character class grants a spell-like ability that is not based on an actual spell, the ability's effective spell level is equal to the highest-level class spell the character can cast, and is cast at the class level the ability is granted.
PS:I know my wording is not perfect either, but I think that is closer to what you were trying to ask...Then you could have listed your example..
Sometimes they will mark the question as answered in FAQ, if they dont like the wording or they misunderstand it.| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Q: What is the spell level of a Spell-Like Ability that acts as an existing spell, but with some changes?
A: If it cites an existing spell, and you know the spell level of that spell, what effective spell level do you think the spell-like ability is? And if it doesn't cite an existing spell, is there a rule or FAQ telling you how to determine its effective spell level?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes they will mark the question as answered in FAQ, if they dont like the wording or they misunderstand it.
Actually, we now have a "question unclear" button for that.
Q: What is the spell level of a Spell-Like Ability that acts as an existing spell, but with some changes?
A: If it cites an existing spell, and you know the spell level of that spell, what effective spell level do you think the spell-like ability is? And if it doesn't cite an existing spell, is there a rule or FAQ telling you how to determine its effective spell level?
Hey, thanks! Now I have about 10 FAQs and clarifications to print out and attach to this character sheet when I make it.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Q: What is the spell level of a Spell-Like Ability that acts as an existing spell, but with some changes?
A: If it cites an existing spell, and you know the spell level of that spell, what effective spell level do you think the spell-like ability is? And if it doesn't cite an existing spell, is there a rule or FAQ telling you how to determine its effective spell level?
Thanks, Sean!
Actually, we now have a "question unclear" button for that.Sometimes they will mark the question as answered in FAQ, if they dont like the wording or they misunderstand it.
Thanks.... :)
So is copycat a 1st or or 2nd level SLA?
Sean's response flew over my head.
|
|
So is copycat a 1st or or 2nd level SLA?
Sean's response flew over my head.
Its pretty obvious he is attempting to ask a rhetorical question and the answer is that copycat counts as a 2nd level spell.
Although personally I think the answer is REALLY "Well, a spell that is like mirror image but only creates 1 image for 1 round? Sounds about 1 level lower to me. So, first".
So is copycat a 1st or or 2nd level SLA?
Sean's response flew over my head.
He said was 2nd level.
": If it cites an existing spell, and you know the spell level of that spell, what effective spell level do you think the spell-like ability is?"So yeah, 2nd level.
If it didn't cite Mirror Image, is there a rule or FAQ telling you how to determine its effective spell level? Yes, you go by when it is gained to determine highest level spell.
So if Copycat didn't mention Mirror Image: it would be a 1st level SLA.
But it does so it is a 2nd level SLA.
Although personally I think the answer is REALLY "Well, a spell that is like mirror image but only creates 1 image for 1 round? Sounds about 1 level lower to me. So, first".
It only is Dur 1 rd if 1st level, it is 2 rds when 2nd level.
So is copycat a 1st or or 2nd level SLA?
Sean's response flew over my head.
Its pretty obvious he is attempting to ask a rhetorical question and the answer is that copycat counts as a 2nd level spell.
Although personally I think the answer is REALLY "Well, a spell that is like mirror image but only creates 1 image for 1 round? Sounds about 1 level lower to me. So, first".
That is what I thought...
That changes the progression for determining an SLA level for me, but that is fine...
It seems like a pretty coherent, not to mention honest and well-put together question (with bolding!),
so I'm not sure why it couldn't have just gotten a straight answer. If you are going to answer, be respectful to the questioner.
There's PLENTY of precedent for 'toned down' modifications of spells having a lesser spell level, e.g. Vanish/Invisibility.
In fact, imagine an SLA of Vanish: based off a 1st level spell, but that is based off a 2nd level spell.
So what's the SLA now, it's effect is based off a 2nd level spell?
But it is based off a 2nd level spell, just indirectly thru a 1st level spell.
Like how French is directly based off Romana Lingua, then Vulgar Latin, then classical Latin.
Is it based off Latin? Most people think so.
|
|
Q: What is the spell level of a Spell-Like Ability that acts as an existing spell, but with some changes?
A: If it cites an existing spell, and you know the spell level of that spell, what effective spell level do you think the spell-like ability is? And if it doesn't cite an existing spell, is there a rule or FAQ telling you how to determine its effective spell level?
Thanks for the quick follow-up, Sean!
***
Actually, we now have a "question unclear" button for that.Sometimes they will mark the question as answered in FAQ, if they dont like the wording or they misunderstand it.
Neat. Sounds useful.
It seems like a pretty coherent, not to mention honest and well-put together question (with bolding!),
so I'm not sure why it couldn't have just gotten a straight answer. If you are going to answer, be respectful to the questioner.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day.
Teach a man to fish...
But it is based off a 2nd level spell, just indirectly thru a 1st level spell.
Using that logic:
• Ultra Healz (Sp) At level 7, you can make a melee or ranged touch attack against any ally within 30 feet. If you hit, you heal them as if using cure critical wounds. Your caster level for this ability is equal to your character level.• Ultra healz refers to cure critical wounds.
• Cure critical wounds is based on cure light wounds.
• Therefore, ultra healz is based off a 1st-level spell, just indirectly through a 4th-level spell, and therefore is a spell-like ability with an effective spell level of 1.
|
|
But it is based off a 2nd level spell, just indirectly thru a 1st level spell.Using that logic:
• Ultra Healz (Sp) At level 7, you can make a melee or ranged touch attack against any ally within 30 feet. If you hit, you heal them as if using cure critical wounds. Your caster level for this ability is equal to your character level.• Ultra healz refers to cure critical wounds.
• Cure critical wounds is based on cure light wounds.
• Therefore, ultra healz is based off a 1st-level spell, just indirectly through a 4th-level spell, and therefore is a spell-like ability with an effective spell level of 1.
I believe they poorly worded their question. I think they were referring to this:
It's pretty obviously this ability is based off vanish, but is said its based off invisibility, going strictly of your previous statement, this would appear to be an effectively 2nd level SLA even though it's effect is strictly of a first level spell.
But it is based off a 2nd level spell, just indirectly thru a 1st level spell.Using that logic...
So the point of that is when determining if an SLA is 'based off' a spell, being DIRECTLY based off is what really matters.
That leads back to the SLAs that aren't direct copies of spells, they are no longer DIRECTLY based off of it,they're a modification, just as CMW is a modification of CLW. What does the UMR actually say here?
"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."
The derivation from existing spells is for when the SLA duplicates them, not just is vaguely 'based off of' them. If there isn't a spell being duplicated, you can always use the 'class level granted at' guideline.
First of all, sorry for the thread necromancy ;P
But it is based off a 2nd level spell, just indirectly thru a 1st level spell.Using that logic:
• Ultra Healz (Sp) At level 7, you can make a melee or ranged touch attack against any ally within 30 feet. If you hit, you heal them as if using cure critical wounds. Your caster level for this ability is equal to your character level.• Ultra healz refers to cure critical wounds.
• Cure critical wounds is based on cure light wounds.
• Therefore, ultra healz is based off a 1st-level spell, just indirectly through a 4th-level spell, and therefore is a spell-like ability with an effective spell level of 1.
What Quandary meant is more like:
Stealth Trick, V.1 (Sp): Once per day, you can become invisible for 1 round. This works like Invisibility, except the duration is only 1 round.
Stealth Trick, V.2 (Sp): Once per day, you can become invisible for 1 round. This works like Vanish, except the duration is only 1 round.
Both do exactly the same and it's clear which effects are gained and what breaks the invisiblity because everybody can look that up in the spell description, but the duration is changed (which also is the main difference between the two spells). So the first version would be 2nd level and the second version would be 1st level?
If you want to use that logic, please make up an SLA that actually changes the stuff listed after "except" in the spell description, in your example, the HP healed would have to be fixed to 2d8+5, for example.
I also think it's a bit difficult to say an SLA should be the same spell level as the spell a part of it works like, mainly because there are differences in power level. For example, "Copy Cat", while being activated as a move action, creates only 1 image (very much weaker than Mirror Image) and has a shorter duration.
Also, are there any instances of SLAs that mention more than one spell? Something like:
Invisible Pain (Sp): You may, as a standard action, create a spectral weapon that works like Spiritual Weapon. Instead of normal damage, the weapon deals 3d8+5 negative energy damage, which otherwise works like Inflict Critical Wounds.
Which level would that be?