Then why does meta-magic feats work on SLA's? Why can you create a magic item using a SLA? Your whole arguement is based on because a SLA cannot be countered and has not components it is different. The magic item creation rules say differently because you can use a SLA in the creation of a magic item. So the wand could be created with a SLA but not triggered by one?
You are not the first to make this mistake and you won't be the last.
Meta-magic feats don't work on spells is the first thing I am going to go after.
You might need a quote about a dev saying otherwise because to be honest, that is not how it works.
You are not the first to make this mistake and you won't be the last.
Meta-magic feats don't work on spells is the first thing I am going to go after.
You might need a quote about a dev saying otherwise because to be honest, that is not how it works.
Well, should I start with the feat augment summoning, with regard to the Summoner's spell like ability to summon creatures?
Is that a good enough example or will someone say, "THAT IS THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE NOT THE RULE FIND ANOTHER EXAMPLE!"
The general rule for SLAs and Metamagic feats is that if the feat doesn't raise the spell level of the spell the Feat will work on the SLA.
As a GM you can always make that choice, but RAW it cannot, as SLAs are not spells.
The exception, explicitly stated in its description is the Summoner's Summon Monster SLA - why would the extra wording if all SLAs had that functionality?
So yes I have already said its the exception to the rule, given in its description that it acts like a spell, not an SLA. I belive that was the angle used to get Augment Summoning Feat to work with it.
Can you link to the DEVs allowing Feats that do not modifly the Spell Level work with SLAs. As I have previously said, I would like for this to work, but I have not been able to find the proof, only arguments against it.
The general rule for SLAs and Metamagic feats is that if the feat doesn't raise the spell level of the spell the Feat will work on the SLA.Where would one find this general rule?
-James
This took a while to find, so try to be satisfied with it.
The post was by Owen so search for him on this thread.
Owen K. C. Stephens (Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games)
Spell like abilities and meta magic feats
The text specifically is:
---------------------------------------------------------------
There is a distinction here, and it's subtle, but important. When you add a metamagic feat to a spell-like ability, you end up having to use a spell-like slot one or more levels higher. Since there is no such thing as a spell-like slot, you can't use your metamagic enhanced spell-like ability. (If you add metamagic feats with a +0 level modifier from some other source, they'd work fine with spell-like abilities).
Augment Summoning, however, along with Spell Focus, Spell Penetration and the greater versions of same, has no need for a spell-like slot to function. Thus they work just fine with spell-like abilities in addition to spells.
----------------------------------------------------------------
In short, SLAs can be used with feats. I have also shown that they can be used to fulfill the requirements to make magic items, so it stands to reason that you can use a SLA as a spell trigger, for said magic items that were created which hold the SLA.
Or in other words a monster can use a SLA to create a wand, and use that same knowledge of SLAs to cast with the wand.
A few points.
1. The ability to cast a spell-like ability is sufficient for spell-trigger and spell-completion items. This is because spell-like abilities function in all ways as spells, except for the differences listed in the section on SLAs. Metamagic feats of course don't work, since they modify an aspect of spells that SLAs don't have - spell slots. However, any other feat or ability or mechanic that requires spellcasting will work with SLAs as well, since it still is spellcasting for most rules purposes.
2. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT ALL THOSE SPELL LIKE ABILITIES ARE ON THE EIDOLON'S LIST. There's a rogue talent to cast a given level 1 sorc/wiz spell as a SLA. This does not mean the rogue has all level 1 sorc/wiz spells on its class spell list. The rogue does not have a class spell list, so he does not naturally have the ability to use spell completion or spell trigger items. However, he can manage to gain the ability to cast those spells (as SLAs) through an optional class feature, so IF he chooses that class feature, he could use spell trigger or spell completion items for those specific spells he chose.
Likewise, to use a wand or scroll of vanish, an Eidolon would need to first take the evolution which grants him access to vanish as a SLA.
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, this is where things get dicey.
The PF RPG core states
Spell-like abilities can be dispelled and counterspelled as normal.The bestiary states
Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled....so which is right?
This has not been clarified (we did not have a FAQ button back then).
In 3e, core rule books took precedence over supplementary books. Handbook -> Monster Manual -> Anything else WotC -> Third Party stuff.
In Pathfinder, things kind of go along the line of "most recently released book likely has the most up to date rules". And the bestiary came second.
But then, you look at the core rulebook as a departure from 3.5e, while the bestiary is a simple copy-paste from 3.5e. This is implying that a change was intended, but a simple copy-paste error missed this when writing the bestiary.
It's enough to get your head dizzy.
.
I asked my DM about this one, and his response was:
F*** the player.
When I asked him to clarify, he says: "The core rules are for players, the bestiary is for DM run monsters. If a player gets his hands on a SLA, then he can be counterspelled. But the players can't counterspell a monster's SLA." Afterwhich, there was much maniacal laughter, and phantom moustache twirling.*
.
.
I'm FAQing this one. It's been years now, and I think it'd be nice to get some hard clarification on this.
*Please note this is a sarcastic response to the situation. I'm fairly certain he isn't being serious. 60-40, at least.
This took a while to find, so try to be satisfied with it.
The post was by Owen so search for him on this thread.
Owen K. C. Stephens (Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games)Spell like abilities and meta magic feats
The text specifically is:
---------------------------------------------------------------
There is a distinction here, and it's subtle, but important. When you add a metamagic feat to a spell-like ability, you end up having to use a spell-like slot one or more levels higher. Since there is no such thing as a spell-like slot, you can't use your metamagic enhanced spell-like ability. (If you add metamagic feats with a +0 level modifier from some other source, they'd work fine with spell-like abilities).Augment Summoning, however, along with Spell Focus, Spell Penetration and the greater versions of same, has no need for a spell-like slot to function. Thus they work just fine with spell-like abilities in addition to spells.
----------------------------------------------------------------In short, SLAs can be used with feats. I have also shown that they can be used to fulfill the requirements to make magic items, so it stands to reason that you can use a SLA as a spell trigger, for said magic items that were created which hold the SLA.
Or in other words a monster can use a SLA to create a wand, and use that same knowledge of SLAs to cast with the wand.
Very interesting. Guess meta-magic rod are your friend. Something with a really good SLA could take a 3 1 spell level meta-magic feats and get spell perfection allowing them to use a meta-magic feats.
It would have helped if both of you had linked to the post by Owen themselves Here. While he is not a "Designer" of the Core Rulebook he is listed with James Jacobs and Sean K Reynolds in the APG. I assume that he is listed in the Bestiary as a designer as well. [I assume that Designer=Developer]
Blood out of the stone, finally :) Now all we need is a FAQ to allow it for PFS play.
This took a while to find, so try to be satisfied with it.The post was by Owen so search for him on this thread.
Owen K. C. Stephens (Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games)
Well I appreciate you taking your time, to find a post by a third party that makes supplements. I take it then that this is nothing, anywhere, by anyone from Paizo or in the core rules that say any of this then?
It opens a can of worms as there are a number of things that can bypass this then, so I'm thinking that Paizo would not care for this rule all that much as it doesn't fit in well together with the material that they are publishing as opposed to SGG perhaps.
-James
Wow thanks for the back handed compliment, I took my time to find a Developer's opinion and you dismiss it by saying "Doesn't count!" The link posted is actually on this message board and had you scrolled to the appropriate link in the post you could have found it, so here it is again.
Link to SLA and Metamagic Feats
As for your main complaint, Owen K. Stephens is a freaking developer, or do we now have a list of approved developers?
Link to Owen Stephens Post on SLAs and Metamangic Feats vs Set's later postings.
Does an eidolon keep it’s gear between summonings?
You are not the first to make this mistake and you won't be the last.
Meta-magic feats don't work on spells is the first thing I am going to go after.
You might need a quote about a dev saying otherwise because to be honest, that is not how it works.Well, should I start with the feat augment summoning, with regard to the Summoner's spell like ability to summon creatures?
Is that a good enough example or will someone say, "THAT IS THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE NOT THE RULE FIND ANOTHER EXAMPLE!"
The general rule for SLAs and Metamagic feats is that if the feat doesn't raise the spell level of the spell the Feat will work on the SLA.
Augment Summoning is not a metamagic feat.
edit:I am still waiting for that developer quote that says metamagic feats can be used with SLA's. Nothing Owen named was an SLA, and he is not a developer.
Does an eidolon keep it’s gear between summonings?
I haven't seen anything in the rules which dictates one way or another. I suppose this is something you would have to work out with your DM. However, if it does not retain its gear between summonings, then I can see that you could easily lose magic items if the eidolon dies and you are forced to run for it.
If it doesn't retain its gear, it also makes the spell Summon Eidolon far more awkward since (assuming it uses manufactured weapons) you would have to re-equip it upon summoning.
The general rule for SLAs and Metamagic feats is that if the feat doesn't raise the spell level of the spell the Feat will work on the SLA.
Augment Summoning is not a metamagic feat.edit:I am still waiting for that developer quote that says metamagic feats can be used with SLA's. Nothing Owen named was an SLA, and he is not a developer.
Fine. Give me a list of "Approved Developers" that I can quote as opposed to Owen who is a "Developer" but not a Developer who is good enough for your standards. I will happily look up the same rule yet again.
The general rule for SLAs and Metamagic feats is that if the feat doesn't raise the spell level of the spell the Feat will work on the SLA.
Augment Summoning is not a metamagic feat.edit:I am still waiting for that developer quote that says metamagic feats can be used with SLA's. Nothing Owen named was an SLA, and he is not a developer.
Fine. Give me a list of "Approved Developers" that I can quote as opposed to Owen who is a "Developer" but not a Developer who is good enough for your standards. I will happily look up the same rule yet again.
First of all being a developer does not make you correct. Even Sean and Jason have been wrong before. It would take one of those two since they often explain things pretty well.
I would also need an example of metamagic feat that fits. Honestly a metamagic feat that works on SLA's would probably remove the need for designer/dev input, but the issue is that metamagic feats by design use spell slots.
I just chose this one from that post you made because it was the easiest to knock down.
I will have to go back and read the post to see if it takes your argument down though.
Metamagic Feats
As a spellcaster's knowledge of magic grows, he can learn to cast spells in ways slightly different from the norm. Preparing and casting a spell in such a way is harder than normal but, thanks to metamagic feats, is at least possible. Spells modified by a metamagic feat use a spell slot higher than normal. This does not change the level of the spell, so the DC for saving throws against it does not go up.
While Owen was a designer on the APG (And I assume the Bestiary) and he has stated that MetaMagic Feats and Rods work with SLAs, it still does not answer the base question:
Can a SLA be used to activate (and be used in the creation of) Spell Triger / Completion items, such as wands.
I think we are at an impass here.
While Owen was a designer on the APG (And I assume the Bestiary) and he has stated that MetaMagic Feats and Rods work with SLAs, it still does not answer the base question:
Can a SLA be used to activate (and be used in the creation of) Spell Triger / Completion items, such as wands.I think we are at an impass here.
He was incorrect though. You can't use rod with SLA's. I just had this debate a few days ago.
Metamagic rods do require spell slots -- just not spell slots of higher level. You aren't casting a spell if it doesn't come from a slot.
Metamagic Rods
Metamagic rods hold the essence of a metamagic feat, allowing the user to apply metamagic effects to spells as they are cast. This does not change the spell slot of the altered spell. All the rods described here are use-activated (but casting spells in a threatened area still draws an attack of opportunity). A caster may only use one metamagic rod on any given spell, but it is permissible to combine a rod with metamagic feats possessed by the rod's wielder. In this case, only the feats possessed by the wielder adjust the spell slot of the spell being cast.
The rods don't remove the need for a slot to be used. They just make it so the spell can be cast using the original slot instead.
|
The use of Augment Summoning with the Summoners Summon Monster SLA is the exception to the rule for spell feats and SLAs.
Do you have a link to an official stance on that?
(Edit: I've seen the links above, and while I respect Owen as a major force in SGG, it's not clear if that 'developer' tag refers to his Paizo work, or his day job at SGG, so I'm wary that some GMs may not accept his stance as anything but a houserule.)I have to level up this PC, and, given the lack of consensus on how many of the Summoner abilities work, I would like to have something I can show to an unfamiliar GM to back this up.
Feats are very costly things to leave to the adjudication of a GM, especially ones that rely on an otherwise poor gateway feat to qualify for.
|
|
Does an eidolon keep it’s gear between summonings?
I've just looked, and can find nothing either way, yet I'm certain there used to be wording to the effect (in the 'shared bodyslots' paragraph?) that the eidolon dropped all its possessions when it disappeared, since I made allowances for that when I created this PC under the Beta rules.
Maybe it got changed in the Final APG writeup, or maybe d20PFSRD hasn't quoted the full text?
If it has been relaxed, that does make things much easier; I no longer have to cart his stuff about.
The use of Augment Summoning with the Summoners Summon Monster SLA is the exception to the rule for spell feats and SLAs.Do you have a link to an official stance on that?
I have to level up this PC, and, given the lack of consensus on how many of the Summoner abilities work, I would like to have something I can show to an unfamiliar GM to back this up.
Feats are very costly things to leave to the adjudication of a GM, especially ones that rely on an otherwise poor gateway feat to qualify for.
Augment Summon does work on the summoner's SLA's. One of the devs clarified that during beta testing, but Augment Summoning is not a metamagic feat.
Andrew Betts wrote:
Can Augment Summoning also affect monsters summoned through this Spell-Like Ability?
Yes
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
edit: fixed a typo.
Everything you posted is correct except that Augment Summoning is in fact a feat. Did you mean to write not a metamagic feat?The use of Augment Summoning with the Summoners Summon Monster SLA is the exception to the rule for spell feats and SLAs.Do you have a link to an official stance on that?
I have to level up this PC, and, given the lack of consensus on how many of the Summoner abilities work, I would like to have something I can show to an unfamiliar GM to back this up.
Feats are very costly things to leave to the adjudication of a GM, especially ones that rely on an otherwise poor gateway feat to qualify for.Augment Summon does work on the summoner's SLA's. One of the devs clarified that during beta testing, but Augment Summoning is not a feat.
link to be clickedAndrew Betts wrote:
Can Augment Summoning also affect monsters summoned through this Spell-Like Ability?
Yes
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Yeah. I will edit it. Thanks.
|
|
Augment Summon does work on the summoner's SLA's. One of the devs clarified that during beta testing, but Augment Summoning is not a feat.
I'm assuming you mean it's not a metamagic feat?
I'm OK with that, it's just the feat wording isn't clear if it works with SLAs, or just spells.It's the specific ability to affect SLAs that I'm after, since there's little reason for a Summoner to ever learn the spell, given the free SLAs.
Andrew Betts wrote:
Can Augment Summoning also affect monsters summoned through this Spell-Like Ability?
Yes
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
That's exactly what I'm after, thanks.
Later in the thread, he clarifies it doesn't work on the Eidolon brought forth via the daily ritual.Now to find if it works using the Summon Eidolon spell!
FAQ and
FAQ and
For the record, Owen is a developer for Super Genius Games and a freelancer for Paizo, but that doesn't mean he is a developer for or at Paizo. Feel free to consider his opinions about the Pathfinder rules, but you should not interpret his statements as official rulings for the Pathfinder RPG--those only come from Paizo employees, mainly Jason, myself, and Stephen.
Those 3 FAQ's say:
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.
—Sean K Reynolds, today
------------------------------
Can I use a metamagic rod to alter a spell-like ability?
No. Metamagic rods allow you to apply a metamagic feat to a spell, and metamagic feats do not work on spell-like abilities.
—Sean K Reynolds, today
---------------------------------------
Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as having that spell on its spell list for the purpose of activating spell completion or spell trigger items?
No. A spell-like ability is not a spell, having a spell-like ability is not part of a class's spell list, and therefore doesn't give the creature the ability to activate spell completion or spell trigger items.
—Sean K Reynolds, today
Augment Summon does work on the summoner's SLA's. One of the devs clarified that during beta testing, but Augment Summoning is not a feat.I'm assuming you mean it's not a metamagic feat?
I'm OK with that, it's just the feat wording isn't clear if it works with SLAs, or just spells.
It's the specific ability to affect SLAs that I'm after, since there's little reason for a Summoner to ever learn the spell, given the free SLAs.Andrew Betts wrote:
Can Augment Summoning also affect monsters summoned through this Spell-Like Ability?
Yes
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo PublishingThat's exactly what I'm after, thanks.
Later in the thread, he clarifies it doesn't work on the Eidolon brought forth via the daily ritual.
Now to find if it works using the Summon Eidolon spell!
It does work with the spell since it is a summon spell. There would need to be errata to state it as an exception to the rule for it not to work.
Creative Director
|
I just find it funny that there is so much summoner hate and virtually no druid hate.It's evidently been consolidated...
Try out PFS. ;)
-James
From my own personal opinion, the difference is that a druid's animal companion has context in the world. When you see a druid with an animal, you recognize the animal (be it a wolf or a tiger or a bear or a velociraptor or whatever), and it feels "right."
With a summoner, the fact that the eidolon can be ANYTHING (and usually is), there's no real context for it in any world, really. Unless the player specifically uses the eidolon build rules to make an eidolon that looks like an existing type of creature (like a hound archon or a lillend or a babau or a horned devil or whatever), it looks nonsensical and has no obvious place in the world or a place to come from. It feels "tacked on" to the world's continuity, as an example, and in the same way a chipped tooth feels out of place and constantly attracts the tongue's attention to worry it, an eidolon can feel obviously out of place and thus attracts more attention. The fact that animal companions are much more tightly controlled as far as statistics and have much fewer opportunities for complete customization (and thus, much fewer opportunities for player error or confusion) makes eidolons not only more obvious for folks to look into, but makes it more likely they'll either have errors or simply can do things that GMs aren't prepared for.
Personally... my own problem with summoners in the game stems not from any perceived balance issues, but because their eidolons just don't fit aesthetically into the games I want to run.
What is the issue with Eidolons wearing armor? Is it a go or no-go?
Eidonlons Cannot wear armour Armour Bonus
Armor Bonus: The number noted here is the eidolon's base total armor bonus. This bonus may be split between an armor bonus and a natural armor bonus, as decided by the summoner. This number is modified by the eidolon's base form and some options available through its evolution pool. An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.
Put all of their armour allocation into Natural Armour and give them Mage Armour & Shield Spell.
Personally... my own problem with summoners in the game stems not from any perceived balance issues, but because their eidolons just don't fit aesthetically into the games I want to run.
Wow, sorry to hear the hate...
Wow, sorry to hear the hate...
Personally... my own problem with summoners in the game stems not from any perceived balance issues, but because their eidolons just don't fit aesthetically into the games I want to run.
Funny, I don't see any hate in James's statement, any more than "I don't see a place for monks in the campaigns I want to run" equals "hate." I think you're overgeneralizing "this doesn't fit my campaign" as "hate," and that's wrong. Especially as there is a summoner PC in James's Sandpoint campaign.
Thank you to everyone for helping answer these questions, and thank you to the developers for clearing this up.
My only question now is, is there any benefit to playing a Summoner over a Druid? I am posting something under General discussion, because I really can't find a reason. It almost seems like the Druid is to the Summoner as the Fighter is to the Warrior.
Funny, I don't see any hate in James's statement, any more than "I don't see a place for monks in the campaigns I want to run" equals "hate." I think you're overgeneralizing "this doesn't fit my campaign" as "hate," and that's wrong. Especially as there is a summoner PC in James's Sandpoint campaign.Wow, sorry to hear the hate...
Personally... my own problem with summoners in the game stems not from any perceived balance issues, but because their eidolons just don't fit aesthetically into the games I want to run.
Okay, I will agree to my miss-conception. Apologies.
its more like the Druid is the warrior and the summoner is the fighter. Summoner is so broken its not right. take a look at natural attacks and the feats,evolutions,magic items for natural attacks and the fact is that you can make your animal in any image you can think up it could be a eight legged dragon like think with 4 sets of claws with improved natural attack,rending claws-feat rend-evolution add a bite and pounce and say by to the druids four legged bite 2 claw animal and the druid toThank you to everyone for helping answer these questions, and thank you to the developers for clearing this up.
My only question now is, is there any benefit to playing a Summoner over a Druid? I am posting something under General discussion, because I really can't find a reason. It almost seems like the Druid is to the Summoner as the Fighter is to the Warrior.
The summoner is not broken. Broken is subjective. What is good for one DM is beyond control for another DM.
It is only broken if no GM can deal with it.
|
I think you're overgeneralizing "this doesn't fit my campaign" as "hate," and that's wrong. Especially as there is a summoner PC in James's Sandpoint campaign.
Out of curiosity, in what form has that player designed his eidolon?
Have they played nice, and taken their GM's preferences into account?
Or have they turned up at the table with something that would be turned down as too silly even for a Pokemon concept?
An Eidolon with 8 legs cannot have 4 sets of claws, because you can only get claws evolution once and only once for legs.
You can take claws multiple time, but only once on the legs.
Thus I could have 6 arms and 2 legs on my quadruped with claws, improved damage and rend.
Actually no. You could have 4 arms and 4 legs on your quadruped (4 feet), with claws on 6 of the limbs. By evolution point counting
It is 2 points per set of arms and 1 point per set of claws, 2 points for rend. You are looking at a minimum of Arms 1 (2), Arms 2(2), 3 sets of claws (3), rend (2). A total of 9 evolution points, and rend can't be taken until level 6. However you only get a total of 4 attacks at level 6 even if you have 6 limbs that can deal claw damage.
Now if you meant that you have a total of 8 limbs with claws, it still wouldn't matter because you are only allowed a total of 7 natural attacks at level 20, you also forgot that as a quadruped you get bite for free.
Max Attacks: This indicates the maximum number of natural attacks that the eidolon is allowed to possess at the given level. If the eidolon is at its maximum, it cannot take evolutions that grant additional natural attacks. This does not include attacks made with weapons.
So you may get 1 claw above the max but not any more due to "If the eidolon is at its maximum, it cannot take evolutions that grant additional natural attacks."
This is why I asked a couple of months ago, if I could drop free evoultions from the base form of the Eidolon (Eg bite from the Quadruped, so I could take an even number of claw attacks.)
Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 30 ft.; AC +2 natural armor; Saves Fort (good), Ref (bad), Will (good); Attack 2 claws (1d4); Ability Scores Str 16, Dex 12, Con 13, Int 7, Wis 10, Cha 11; Free Evolutions claws, limbs (arms), limbs (legs). Let me bring out that it only states "Attack" instead of "Attacks." Each form only gets one primary ATTACK! and being that they get this are first lvl if it was 2 attacks the base form has already spent 2 of your 3 attacks for lvl 1
LOL
I've seen this cheese before. My response was..
Sure, that's fine. You have one Attack called 2 claws. It does 1d4. Not 1d4 twice, just 1d4. It's singular, so those '2 claws' is one attack, and the 1d4 is how much the one attack does.
If you want the 2 claws to do 1d4 each, then it's two attacks, and it counts toward your max.