Ring of Lingering Blood Magic and Spell-Like Abilities

[NewtonPulsifer]

If I have a Ring of Lingering Blood Magic, can I use it with Spell-Like Abilities? For example the blur spell-like ability for 4th level arcane bloodragers?

Now what about the Bit of Luck Luck Domain power spell-like ability?

Paizo PRD - Ring of Lingering Blood Magic
Item info:
"RING OF LINGERING BLOOD MAGIC
When the wearer of this ring is bloodraging, he can expend 1 round of bloodrage to extend the duration of a beneficial spell affecting him by 2 rounds. This is a free action the wearer can take once per round."

Domain Power Info:
"Bit of Luck (Sp): You can touch a willing creature as a standard action, giving it a bit of luck. For the next round, any time the target rolls a d20, he may roll twice and take the more favorable result. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier."

Please hit the FAQ button if you believe this needs a FAQ answer (I do).

[Scythia]

From what I've seen, especially after the SLA faq reversal, SLA are not considered spells, so they would not be affected by the ring.

[Calth]

Scythia wrote:

From what I've seen, especially after the SLA faq reversal, SLA are not considered spells, so they would not be affected by the ring.

SLA's don't count for purposes of spellcasting, but they still generate spell effects. That is why they work for crafting prerequisites. As a Ring of Lingering Blood Magic only cares about the spell effect, it should work with SLAs. However, as a houserule, I would recommend not allowing it with all the domain/bloodline 1 round touch buffs, as they tend to be too strong to practically indefinitely extend with rage rounds.

[Scythia]

Calth wrote:

Scythia wrote:

From what I've seen, especially after the SLA faq reversal, SLA are not considered spells, so they would not be affected by the ring.

SLA's don't count for purposes of spellcasting, but they still generate spell effects.

So they aren't casting spells, but they should be treated as spells?

I suppose that's one way to look at it.

[zza ni]

they do cast spells. but they lack the knowledge of a real spellcaster.
the fact that your snot blows up like a fireball doesn't make you a level 5 wizard

[Calth]

Scythia wrote:

Calth wrote:

Scythia wrote:

From what I've seen, especially after the SLA faq reversal, SLA are not considered spells, so they would not be affected by the ring.

SLA's don't count for purposes of spellcasting, but they still generate spell effects.

So they aren't casting spells, but they should be treated as spells?

I suppose that's one way to look at it.

Normal spellcasting and SLAs are different paths to the same end. Using a SLA doesn't count as spellcasting, but, for example, there is no difference between the effect of haste as a spell or as SLA. The spell effects are identical. You could use the ring to extend both. In real world terms let's say you need an apple pie. You can either buy one(SLA) or make one(spellcasting), but in the end you still get the same thing.

[Scythia]

Calth wrote:

Scythia wrote:

Calth wrote:

Scythia wrote:

From what I've seen, especially after the SLA faq reversal, SLA are not considered spells, so they would not be affected by the ring.

SLA's don't count for purposes of spellcasting, but they still generate spell effects.

So they aren't casting spells, but they should be treated as spells?

I suppose that's one way to look at it.

Normal spellcasting and SLAs are different paths to the same end. Using a SLA doesn't count as spellcasting, but, for example, there is no difference between the effect of haste as a spell or as SLA. The spell effects are identical. You could use the ring to extend both. In real world terms let's say you need an apple pie. You can either buy one(SLA) or make one(spellcasting), but in the end you still get the same thing.

That's not how I would interpret it. As a counterpoint to your analogy, I would say that it's more like the ring lets you get extra pieces out of an apple pie (spells), but doesn't do anything for apple crisp (SLA), despite the fact that they're both apple (magic).

They went down the rabbit hole of considering SLA to be spells, and decided they didn't like it. SLA do still count as spells in some select circumstances, when they match specifically named requirement. This ring doesn't affect or call out a specific spell, only "spells", which SLA are explicitly not.

[NewtonPulsifer]

It seems that spell-like abilities aren't technically "cast" in the same way scrolls are "completed" and wands are "activated" and wondrous magic items are "used" - and thus don't qualify for prestige classes or class features (like you can't use a scroll and combine it with the "share spells" class feature) that require "casting".

However for everything else spell-like abilities seem to work as "In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell" so the ring would work.

Seems the developer might not have intended they work with spell-like abilities though, but then again they might have (probably not as it is only a 2000 GP item).

It seems strong enough that it should probably be banned in Pathfinder Society.

P.S.

From the PRD

Special Abilities: Spell-Like Abilities

Spell-Like Abilities: Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

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.

[Calth]

The effect generated by a SLA is still a spell effect, and follows all the rules of spell effects. They follow all the rules for spells. Otherwise you break parts of the game. For example, Dragon Disciples gain Form of the Dragon as an SLA. By your interpretation, they could stack this with enlarge person because in this case Form of the Dragon isn't a spell.

Edit: Thanks for the link Newton, I was looking for that line and just couldn't find it. I was looking at the Universal Monster Rules SLA entry which is missing it, forgot to look in the Magic rules.

And yes, I agree the ring is unbalanced when used with the 1 round duration effects for its cost. I saw it, realized it worked, and decided I wouldn't ever use it that way because it was broken. It should definitely be errated to only work with effects that have a starting duration longer than one round.

[GM Aram Zey]

spell-like abilities wrote:

Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

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 gained.

Emphasis mine.

RING OF LINGERING BLOOD MAGIC wrote:

When the wearer of this ring is bloodraging, he can expend 1 round of bloodrage to extend the duration of a beneficial spell affecting him by 2 rounds. This is a free action the wearer can take once per round."

Again, emphasis mine.

It's quite clear-cut. If he wants to burn his precious blood-rage rounds that quickly, all I can say is good luck to him.

As for arcane blodrager, the ring does not trump this line:

arcane bloodline wrote:

These effects last for as long as you continue bloodraging, regardless of the spell's normal duration.

One you end your bloodrage, the extra effect ends as well, regardless of the spell's normal duration.

[Byakko]

SLA are not spells.

They work like spells, they function like spells, and generate effects which mimic spells, but are ultimately not actual spells themselves.

[GM Aram Zey]

But if it "functions just like a spell", as the rules say that they do, effects that interact with spells should affect them in the same way.

Metamagic rods are a specific exception because the rules for metamagic feats specifically state that they do not affect spell-like abilities.

There is no such limitation for the ring of lingering blood-magic, therefore the general rule that a spell-like ability "functions just like a spell" should apply. Unless a contrary rule is made.

[dragonhunterq]

GM Aram Zey wrote:

But if it "functions just like a spell", as the rules say that they do, effects that interact with spells should affect them in the same way.

Metamagic rods are a specific exception because the rules for metamagic feats specifically state that they do not affect spell-like abilities.

There is no such limitation for the ring of lingering blood-magic, therefore the general rule that a spell-like ability "functions just like a spell" should apply. Unless a contrary rule is made.

+1 This

[Byakko]

Just because something generates effects like a different thing, doesn't mean the two things are the same or that that can be affected similarly.

For example, say there was a pack of gum on sale for a dollar. You could use a dollar bill to pay for it or you could use 4 quarters. While both things generate the same result, and will create equally nicely blown bubbles, a dollar bill and 4 quarters are not the same thing. e.g. you can apply a flame to a dollar bill and it will burn, but good luck doing that with the coins.

[Calth]

Byakko wrote:

Just because something generates effects like a different thing, doesn't mean the two things are the same or that that can be affected similarly.

For example, say there was a pack of gum on sale for a dollar. You could use a dollar bill to pay for it or you could use 4 quarters. While both things generate the same result, and will create equally nicely blown bubbles, a dollar bill and 4 quarters are not the same thing. e.g. you can apply a flame to a dollar bill and it will burn, but good luck doing that with the coins.

But your example is irrelevant for the item of concern. You admit that they both have the same purchasing power, which would be the spell effect in your analogy. The fact that you can do different things with spell slots (burning the dollar) doesn't change that they produce the same effect when used as intended. There is no difference between a spell effect from a SLA and from casting the relevant spell. Zero. The item does not mention spellcasting, which is how SLAs and spells differ. In fact, we have specific examples, in the form of FAQs, where SLAs count for meeting specific spell effect prerequisites. There are also NPCs that have spell focus for SLAs.

Basically, if an ability/feat/whatever cares about spellcasting, SLAs don't seem to count. If it cares about spell effects, SLAs count.

[Dekalinder]

That is a stupidly good combo. Not that the game isn't broken already,so who cares.

[Calth]

Dekalinder wrote:

That is a stupidly good combo. Not that the game isn't broken already,so who cares.

The original example was erratted to not work. The ring now requires a duration of longer than 1 round.

[Byakko]

Calth wrote:

Byakko wrote:

Just because something generates effects like a different thing, doesn't mean the two things are the same or that that can be affected similarly.

For example, say there was a pack of gum on sale for a dollar. You could use a dollar bill to pay for it or you could use 4 quarters. While both things generate the same result, and will create equally nicely blown bubbles, a dollar bill and 4 quarters are not the same thing. e.g. you can apply a flame to a dollar bill and it will burn, but good luck doing that with the coins.

But your example is irrelevant for the item of concern. You admit that they both have the same purchasing power, which would be the spell effect in your analogy. The fact that you can do different things with spell slots (burning the dollar) doesn't change that they produce the same effect when used as intended. There is no difference between a spell effect from a SLA and from casting the relevant spell. Zero. The item does not mention spellcasting, which is how SLAs and spells differ. In fact, we have specific examples, in the form of FAQs, where SLAs count for meeting specific spell effect prerequisites. There are also NPCs that have spell focus for SLAs.

Basically, if an ability/feat/whatever cares about spellcasting, SLAs don't seem to count. If it cares about spell effects, SLAs count.

It's completely relevant. If something cares about the effect (the thing purchased), it might not matter if it came from a spell or a SLA. But if something cares about the source of the effect, it suddenly becomes very pertinent. 4 quarters and a dollar bill are NOT the same thing. I'd like to see you operate a coin-only parking meter with your paper money.

The item states it affects a "beneficial spell". SLA are NOT spells. Thus it doesn't apply.

[Calth]

Except, you know, that SLAs count as spells for all purposes besides spellcasting, as evidenced by multiple sources.

[Byakko]

Calth wrote:

Except, you know, that SLAs count as spells for all purposes besides spellcasting, as evidenced by multiple sources.

Got a rules quote on that? (them counting as spells for ALL purposes (besides spellcasting, oddly)?)

[Calth]

Byakko wrote:

Calth wrote:

Except, you know, that SLAs count as spells for all purposes besides spellcasting, as evidenced by multiple sources.

Got a rules quote on that? (them counting as spells for ALL purposes (besides spellcasting, oddly)?)

The rule posted earlier: In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

The only exception is how the ability is used, aka its not spellcasting.

[Diego Rossi]

NewtonPulsifer wrote:

If I have a Ring of Lingering Blood Magic, can I use it with Spell-Like Abilities? For example the blur spell-like ability for 4th level arcane bloodragers?

Now what about the Bit of Luck Luck Domain power spell-like ability?

Paizo PRD - Ring of Lingering Blood Magic
Item info:
"RING OF LINGERING BLOOD MAGIC
When the wearer of this ring is bloodraging, he can expend 1 round of bloodrage to extend the duration of a beneficial spell affecting him by 2 rounds. This is a free action the wearer can take once per round."

Domain Power Info:
"Bit of Luck (Sp): You can touch a willing creature as a standard action, giving it a bit of luck. For the next round, any time the target rolls a d20, he may roll twice and take the more favorable result. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier."

Please hit the FAQ button if you believe this needs a FAQ answer (I do).

RING OF LINGERING BLOOD MAGIC wrote:

When the wearer of this ring is bloodraging, he can expend 1 round of bloodrage to extend the duration of a beneficial spell affecting him with a duration of 1 round per level or greater by 2 rounds.

Current text in the PRD. I suppose it has been corrected in an errata.

Here, we are, from the first to second edition:

errata wrote:

Page 217—In Ring of Lingering Blood Magic, in the description, after “affecting him”, add “with a duration of 1 round per level or greater”.

So SLA with a 1 round duration aren't a valid target for the effect.

[Byakko]

Calth wrote:

Byakko wrote:

Calth wrote:

Except, you know, that SLAs count as spells for all purposes besides spellcasting, as evidenced by multiple sources.

Got a rules quote on that? (them counting as spells for ALL purposes (besides spellcasting, oddly)?)

The rule posted earlier: In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

The only exception is how the ability is used, aka its not spellcasting.

Just because two things function in the same way doesn't mean they're the same thing.

[Snowblind]

Byakko wrote:

...

The item states it affects a "beneficial spell". SLA are NOT spells. Thus it doesn't apply.

That logic contradicts the SLA FAQ, where feats with specific spell prerequisites can be fulfilled by SLAs. It's only the blanket "Can cast (catagory) spells" requirements that SLAs can't fulfill. It also contradicts how Spell Focus has been used to increase the DC of spell-likes on bestiary monsters, despite Spell Focus only affecting spells. Oh, and the bestiary blocks aren't in error, because we have developer confirmation that it actually works that way.

EDIT: Later on in that thread, the developer even says that in his opinion that metamagic rods+SLAs are kocher by RAW. TIL.

[Diego Rossi]

Snowblind wrote:

Byakko wrote:

...

The item states it affects a "beneficial spell". SLA are NOT spells. Thus it doesn't apply.

That logic contradicts the SLA FAQ, where feats with specific spell prerequisites can be fulfilled by SLAs. It's only the blanket "Can cast (catagory) spells" requirements that SLAs can't fulfill. It also contradicts how Spell Focus has been used to increase the DC of spell-likes on bestiary monsters, despite Spell Focus only affecting spells. Oh, and the bestiary blocks aren't in error, because we have developer confirmation that it actually works that way.

EDIT: Later on in that thread, the developer even says that in his opinion that metamagic rods+SLAs are kocher by RAW. TIL.

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Feb 24, 2010,

I would absolutely allow metamagic rods to work with spell-like abilities. It's not unbalancing in any way, and in my opinion matches the RAW.

Owen wasn't a developer at the time, he was giving a gamer opinion.

From his page here at Paizo: "As of April 2014 he is a full-time employee of Paizo Inc."

Plus:

FAQ wrote:

Metamagic: Can I use a metamagic feat to alter a spell-like ability?

No. Metamagic feats specifically only affect spells, not spell-like abilities. Also, spell-like abilities do not have spell slots, so you can't adjust the effective spell slot of a spell-like ability.

Blanket statement: metamagic feats don't affect SLA. So you can't apply them to SLA, regardless of the origin (unless you pick a specific feat that do that, like Empower Spell-Like Ability).