Arcane Strike allows someone that can cast arcane spells to get a +1 to hit and damage with any weapon held and used. The weapon is also considered magic. As your caster level goes up, the bonus goes up.
Overall this is a great feat for Bards, and an OK feat for most other arcane casters.
But here is the rules question. Could a rogue take this feat if they have the talent Minor Magic? (Minor Magic allows a rogue to select catrips from the wiz/soc spell list to cast 2/day.) I know it would never go above +1, but it could be useful to allow any weapon to bypass magic DR with a little bit to hit and damage.
|
Arcane Strike allows someone that can cast arcane spells to get a +1 to hit and damage with any weapon held and used. The weapon is also considered magic. As your caster level goes up, the bonus goes up.
Overall this is a great feat for Bards, and an OK feat for most other arcane casters.
But here is the rules question. Could a rogue take this feat if they have the talent Minor Magic? (Minor Magic allows a rogue to select catrips from the wiz/soc spell list to cast 2/day.) I know it would never go above +1, but it could be useful to allow any weapon to bypass magic DR with a little bit to hit and damage.
First, to clarify, Arcane Strike only provides a bonus to damage, not to the attack roll, and it is a swift action to use each turn.
As for whether or not a rogue could use this, it is arguable. It says 'the ability to cast arcane spells'. A rogue may get a spell or two usable a certain number of times per day as a spell-like ability.
My initial response is to say 'yes, they may'. I only offer a 67.419% accuracy rating with this though.
Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys
|
But here is the rules question. Could a rogue take this feat if they have the talent Minor Magic? (Minor Magic allows a rogue to select catrips from the wiz/soc spell list to cast 2/day.) I know it would never go above +1, but it could be useful to allow any weapon to bypass magic DR with a little bit to hit and damage.
Since the Prerequisite is the Ability to cast Arcane Spells, and Minor/Major Magic gives the ability for rogues to cast sorcerer/Wizard spells, I personally would say Yes they could take the feat.
No. A pure Rogue cannot cast spells. They can get the ability to use spell-like abilities, but spell-like abilities are not spells.
|
|
No. A pure Rogue cannot cast spells. They can get the ability to use spell-like abilities, but spell-like abilities are not spells.
This is why I said yes...
Minor Magic (Sp): 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.
Arcane Strike (Combat)
Prerequisite: Ability to cast arcane spells.
Since Minor/Major Magic as per its description allows the Rogue to Cast Arcane magic even if it is casting them as a spell-like ability, rogues that take these talents qualify IMO for Arcane Strike.
If you take some of the rulings put out in 3.5 spell-like abilities will qualify you for prestige classes and feats in some situations.
However, please note the working very carefully:
"Prerequisite: Ability to cast arcane spells."
"A rogue with this talent gains the ability to cast a 0-level spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."
While it is true the rogue talent draws from the sorcerer/wizard spell list it makes no mention of the spell-like ability being arcane itself. At this point, from a rule lawyer perspective I would rule against a Rogue using Arcane Strike with Minor or Major Magic rogue talent.
If you take some of the rulings put out in 3.5 spell-like abilities will qualify you for prestige classes and feats in some situations.
However, please note the working very carefully:
"Prerequisite: Ability to cast arcane spells."
"A rogue with this talent gains the ability to cast a 0-level spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."
While it is true the rogue talent draws from the sorcerer/wizard spell list it makes no mention of the spell-like ability being arcane itself. At this point, from a rule lawyer perspective I would rule against a Rogue using Arcane Strike with Minor or Major Magic rogue talent.
Ditto.
Quit stealing the bard's only freakin' damage boost!
If you take some of the rulings put out in 3.5 spell-like abilities will qualify you for prestige classes and feats in some situations.
However, please note the working very carefully:
"Prerequisite: Ability to cast arcane spells."
"A rogue with this talent gains the ability to cast a 0-level spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."
While it is true the rogue talent draws from the sorcerer/wizard spell list it makes no mention of the spell-like ability being arcane itself. At this point, from a rule lawyer perspective I would rule against a Rogue using Arcane Strike with Minor or Major Magic rogue talent.
Ditto.
Quit stealing the bard's only freakin' damage boost!
Only?
So um... what happened to Inspire Courage? Good Hope?
If you take some of the rulings put out in 3.5 spell-like abilities will qualify you for prestige classes and feats in some situations.
However, please note the working very carefully:
"Prerequisite: Ability to cast arcane spells."
"A rogue with this talent gains the ability to cast a 0-level spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."
While it is true the rogue talent draws from the sorcerer/wizard spell list it makes no mention of the spell-like ability being arcane itself. At this point, from a rule lawyer perspective I would rule against a Rogue using Arcane Strike with Minor or Major Magic rogue talent.
Ditto.
Quit stealing the bard's only freakin' damage boost!
Only?
So um... what happened to Inspire Courage? Good Hope?
Everybody in the party gets those.
To the point, would you allow Gnomes or Tiefling to take Arcane Strike regardless of class. the Gnome especially only has spell like abilities that are found on two(three) Arcane class lists, and none Divine. Does that qualify the Gnome to take Arcane Strike?
In my book that's no, as again neither SPs actually say they are Arcane.
A Dragon would be a different matter as they cast spell like a Sorcerers (or however they will cast in the PFB).
It's a nice question.
Probably I'd say no, mainly becuause it's a spell-like ability, and not necessarily arcane (the gnome example fits well).
And also because a free +1 damage (although not broken) seems a bit overpowered, expecially at lower levels, where it can make difference.
I would say that he can but not because on magic talent but with UMD as any other class can.
Just say that you are using feat and roll your UMD check to set your caster level, for the check of 21 you get +1, for 25 +2, for 30 +3...etc.
UMD doesn't apply at all. You can't use that to qualify for feats. It applies only to reading spells (in scrolls or the like) and magic items that have restrictions. Arcane Strike is most defiantly not an item.
UMD doesn't apply at all. You can't use that to qualify for feats. It applies only to reading spells (in scrolls or the like) and magic items that have restrictions. Arcane Strike is most defiantly not an item.
That is true, but I would allow it as you take the feat and don't know will you get a bonus in any given round.
For +1 bonus to DMG you'll need +11 UMD on average and even if you have 16CHA as a rogue?? you need to be 5th level with max ranks and any 5th level caster allready gets +2.
While I am expecting Jason to say no to whether a rogue with Minor/Major Magic can select arcane strike I personally rule that a rogue can based on the words used in the PFRPG Core Rulebook. The same argument can be used to say a single classed rogue can qualify for Arcane Archer. So as I said earlier I expect Jason to rule it does not count as casting arcane spells.
|
I would interpret the Minor/Major Magic rogue talent as only giving a spell-like ability. Spell Like abilities, while they mimic spells, are not the same. The key here is that a spell-like ability is neither Divine nor Arcane. The feat requires that the character can cast Arcane spells, which a spell-like ability would not give you. On a second note - you have to think of whether having a CL from a Spell-Like ability grants you access to a prestige class with a requirement of "Able to cast arcane spells?" I would also say no to this.
Two quotes from the PRD:
Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.
A SLA is not an arcane spell, no arcane spell chance failure.
Some creatures actually cast arcane spells as sorcerers do, using components when required. Some creatures have both spell-like abilities and actual spellcasting power.
A SLA as per the SLA is not actual spellcasting power.
The rogue talent specifically says that they get to cast a 0-level spell. If they want to use a rogue talent and another feat to cheese into a +1 magic weapon then let them. Just don't let it grow in power.
If they go with the Arcane Trickster line this make allot more sense.
The rogue talent specifically says that they get to cast a 0-level spell. If they want to use a rogue talent and another feat to cheese into a +1 magic weapon then let them. Just don't let it grow in power.
If they go with the Arcane Trickster line this make allot more sense.
Yes, it does...they can cast a single spell selected from the sorcerer/wizard spell list. But it does not say they can cast arcane spells. Every spellcasting class clearly states that it is divine or arcane that they cast. The rogues class feature states they cast as a spell like ability. Therefore, it should follow the rules for spell like abilities, which are neither arcane or divine.
As awesome as that would be, I'd say the answer is no.
The "spells" that a rogue can cast are actually classified as spell-like abilities.
Since they're "spell-like" and not actual "spells", the rogue is not considered a caster.
Bummer.
Not exactly right. Again, like I said before it was clarified back in 3.5 that Spell-Like abilities can qualify you for some feats and PrCs depending on the condition.
For example a Rogue with Minor Magic of Mage Hand qualifies for that part of the Arcane Trickster. His actual caster class would not need to have that spell, say if he was a Sorcerer and didn't "know" that spell.
Here is an alternate question. Could you use this ability to quality for a Prestige class that required "Ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells."?
As awesome as that would be, I'd say the answer is no.
The "spells" that a rogue can cast are actually classified as spell-like abilities.Since they're "spell-like" and not actual "spells", the rogue is not considered a caster.
Bummer.
Agreed. It's a bummer for the rogue, but the magical feats are still good. Spell-like abilities have no "verbal, somatic or material component, nor does it require a focus."
That gives the rogue an essentially stilled, silent, material-free use of the ability. Perfect for acid splash 1d3+ Xd6 sneak attack damage! No save, no SR, 3 times a day. Not many acid immune/resistant creatures out there. Just throw a dagger at those. :)
Here is an alternate question. Could you use this ability to quality for a Prestige class that required "Ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells."?
Seeing as it is a spell like ability and not a spell no. Indeed no again because it is not arcane.
However if the prestige class called for a "caster level x" and your spell like ability had a caster level of x I would let that go through, since you do have an actual caster level of x which is all that is called for.
Not exactly right. Again, like I said before it was clarified back in 3.5 that Spell-Like abilities can qualify you for some feats and PrCs depending on the condition.
For example a Rogue with Minor Magic of Mage Hand qualifies for that part of the Arcane Trickster. His actual caster class would not need to have that spell, say if he was a Sorcerer and didn't "know" that spell.
But even during 3.5, a spell like ability couldn't qualify you for PrC's that required spellcasting, or spellcasting coming from a certain source (arcane or divine). If all the PrC/Feat required was a specific spell, then it could.
Here is an alternate question. Could you use this ability to quality for a Prestige class that required "Ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells."?
Seeing as it is a spell like ability and not a spell no. Indeed no again because it is not arcane.
However if the prestige class called for a "caster level x" and your spell like ability had a caster level of x I would let that go through, since you do have an actual caster level of x which is all that is called for.
To Dennis, no it would not let you qualify for "Ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells" because you cannot cast arcane spells, of any level. The ability is not Arcane or Divine.
Abraham, it being a spell-like ability has nothing to do with it, if holding to older 3.5 rulings. If the requirement was "Ability to cast 1st-level spells" or a little less iffy "Ability to cast at least one spell of 1st level or higher", the answer would be yes. Although the first case is cutting it close because it requires spells, plural.
I have had a rather unfortunate amount of experience having to arbitrating Spell-Likes and qualification for feats/PrCs. I had a Warlock obsessed player and almost every game he was trying some new concoction of crazy. The truly off path one that comes to mind was Enlightened Fist. Then again the Warlock breaks the rule here by having Spell-Like Abilities and counting as an Arcane caster instead of a 'null' caster for lack of a better term.
My apologize Krigare, I was trying to respond to Shadow13.com and forget sometimes that is board can sometimes have a delay in showing some posts.
Except that it has everything to do with it.
You are not casting a spell like ability. Spell like abilities are not arcane. This is explicitly explained in the description of spell like abilities and really I can't see how anyone can say a gray zone exists here.
Warlocks do have a special thing were they count their caster level for their spell like abilities as an arcane caster level, but that's all it does for them, and is specific to them, not a regular part of spell like abilities.
What I was pointing out is that if the requirement is simply a caster level then the character does indeed have a caster level now.
Abraham spalding, I never said they were Arcane. It was my stated opinion from the start that the Rogues Minor/Major Magic Talent does not qualify them for Arcane strike precisely because it is not Arcane, and that is the only reason.
Change that line to read "Ability to cast spells" so it omits Arcane. In that hypothetical case, for me, I'm now at a 50/50 yes/no level for various reasons.
However, to the question that OP posted, my answer is still no. No Arcane Strike for rogues.
[toughen-and-cheek]OP, Go Play a Bard :p[/toughen-and-cheek]
So we are on the same page, ok. I thought you switched tracks there for and that's what threw me.
|
|
Abraham spalding, I never said they were Arcane. It was my stated opinion from the start that the Rogues Minor/Major Magic Talent does not qualify them for Arcane strike precisely because it is not Arcane, and that is the only reason.
Change that line to read "Ability to cast spells" so it omits Arcane. In that hypothetical case, for me, I'm now at a 50/50 yes/no level for various reasons.
However, to the question that OP posted, my answer is still no. No Arcane Strike for rogues.
[toughen-and-cheek]OP, Go Play a Bard :p[/toughen-and-cheek]
+1.
They are indeed casting the spells (heck, the ability's description explicitely says so), but the spells are not categorized as Arcane, only as coming from the sorcerer/wizard list.
Thus no Arcane strike here.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Forgive my asking but, aren't all the spells on the Sorcerer / Wizard list arcane spells, by virtue of their being on that list?
Are people suggesting that the Rogue is gaining this power through divine means? Or that there is another source of spells, that spells can be neither arcane nor divine?
In any case, a Rogue who wanted to use this technique would need to devote both a rogue talent and a feat, as well as a swift action. That seems in-line for a +1 on damage.
|
|
Forgive my asking but, aren't all the spells on the Sorcerer / Wizard list arcane spells, by virtue of their being on that list?
Are people suggesting that the Rogue is gaining this power through divine means? Or that there is another source of spells, that spells can be neither arcane nor divine?
At First that was my thought... To Me the Definition of Arcane Spells is that they are Sorcerer/Wizard list, and therefore the Rogue qualifies. Then I started thinking more.
Sometime Clerics get access to spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard list through thier Domain Spells, but they are not Arcane Spells they are Divine Spells, so Sorcerer/Wizard list does not automatically mean Arcane Spells.
Still would like to hear Jason's ruling on this.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Sure, Dragonmoon, a particular spell can be either arcane or divine, depending on who's casting it. But I think, and I could be mistaken here, that all spells have to be one or the other. (No other sources of magic exist.)
So, are you suggesting that the Rogue is channelling divine power?
|
|
I think what it comes down to is this, you need to have the ability to cast spells. The arcane part isn't important if you can't do this part.
The rogue, the gnome, etc. can get some spell-like abilities, but these are specifically defined in the back as only being similar to spells, not spells themselves.
Seems clear enough.
|
|
I think what it comes down to is this, you need to have the ability to cast spells. The arcane part isn't important if you can't do this part.
The rogue, the gnome, etc. can get some spell-like abilities, but these are specifically defined in the back as only being similar to spells, not spells themselves.
Seems clear enough.
The Rogue is definitely using a spell-like ability. And we have many examples of creatures with spell-like abilities which do not seem either Divine nor Arcane in nature.
However, the exact wording of the Rogue's ability clearly states that he is casting those spells, even though it counts as a spell-like ability.
Mechanics here, it's spell like. It might be dressed up with fluff so he is "casting" (indeed the only real difference is the ASF, which is a clear and dividing line and the fact that spell like abilities are neither arcane or divine) but in the end it is still just another spell like ability.
Indeed if it did qualify him then it would also allow him to use spell completion items and craft items that are spell completion or spell trigger, which it does not.
|
|
Sure, Dragonmoon, a particular spell can be either arcane or divine, depending on who's casting it. But I think, and I could be mistaken here, that all spells have to be one or the other. (No other sources of magic exist.)
So, are you suggesting that the Rogue is channelling divine power?
There are actually three types: Arcane, Divine, And Spell-Like (Natural if you want to call it that).
A spell-like ability is neither an arcane spell (otherwise it would suffer from arcane spell chance failure), nor divine (The power is not granted from an outside being than the person). It is similar to how a sorcerer casts spells, but not the same.
Also, whether a spell is arcane or divine is actually a function of the class casting it rather than what list it is on. Remember that Cure Light Wounds can be an arcane or divine spell, as it is on both lists of bard and cleric; just as burning hands can be a divine spell cast from a cleric with the fire domain.
To see the reasoning for the three types, look at the end of the magic section in the PRPG, or look at the quote from the PRD that I quoted above.
Or Does it?...*Dum dum dummmmm*
Indeed if it did qualify him then it would also allow him to use spell completion items and craft items that are spell completion or spell trigger, which it does not.
Spell like abilities specify that they don't as it isn't spell casting.
There are actually three types: Arcane, Divine, And Spell-Like (Natural if you want to call it that).
Errr... no. How can spell-like abilities be a type of spell if they aren't spells? There are only two types of spells: arcane and divine. There are untyped spells, though. Rogues just don't get access to them (and it wouldn't matter if they did, because Arcane Strike requires arcane spellcasting).
I'm not sure what this talk of untyped spell is. There are really just Arcane and Divine spells. Spell-like abilities may mimic them, but they are not spells in and of themselves. They are a unique type of thing much like Extraordinary or Supernatural abilities.
I already gave an example. Warlocks get the ability to use their Imbue Item ability to make scrolls (among other things). Those scrolls contain actual, honest-to-God spells, but those spells are neither arcane nor divine. This is confirmed by one of the 3.5 FAQs. Artificers have something similar, IIRC.
It's an unusual case, but I never said untyped spells were common.
EDIT: Actually, it appears that I didn't give that example. The boards must have eaten it when I made the original post.
Warlocks get an ability called Imbue Item that allows them to "spoof" the requirements for knowing spells when they craft magical items. They can use this ability to make scrolls, wands, whatever. If they make scrolls via Imbue Item, those scrolls contain spells that are neither arcane nor divine, because scroll spell types are defined by the type of spells the scroll's creator casts, and warlocks cast neither arcane nor divine spells. This is confirmed in a 3.5 FAQ.
Also, whether a spell is arcane or divine is actually a function of the class casting it rather than what list it is on. Remember that Cure Light Wounds can be an arcane or divine spell, as it is on both lists of bard and cleric; just as burning hands can be a divine spell cast from a cleric with the fire domain.
This is exactly the case. A spell is not either arcane or divine inherently, rather it is arcane or divine based on how it is cast. Arcane casters cast arcane spells, divine casters cast divine spells. Just because a fire domain cleric can cast Fireball doesn't qualify him for prestige classes that require "third level arcane spells".
Warlocks get an ability called Imbue Item that allows them to "spoof" the requirements for knowing spells when they craft magical items. They can use this ability to make scrolls, wands, whatever. If they make scrolls via Imbue Item, those scrolls contain spells that are neither arcane nor divine, because scroll spell types are defined by the type of spells the scroll's creator casts, and warlocks cast neither arcane nor divine spells. This is confirmed in a 3.5 FAQ.
If I recall properly artificers also create items that are neither arcane nor divine, rather made of the raw stuff of magic itself.
I firmly believe that Rogues cannot qualify for Arcane Strike with Minor/Major Magic.
I do want to point out that if they *could*, then it *would* scale with their Rogue level. Minor/Major Magic: "The caster level for this ability is equal to the rogue's level."