More controversial Eidolon questions


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

If you cast a buff on an eidolon, and he gets sent back to his plane. Assuming you re-summon him immediately, does he still have that buff?

If the answer is no, what happens if you cast protection from elements(fire) on yourself, and go to the plane of fire?

Now for the fun question. The Eidolon for the most part can be a crappy caster or a decent tank. Through evolutions he can learn to cast the following spells.

Level 1 - acid splash, dancing lights, daze, detect magic, flare, ghost sound, light, mage hand, ray of frost, stabilize, or touch of fatigue.

Level 4 - burning hands, comprehend languages, cure light wounds, detect chaos/evil/good/law, magic missile, obscuring mist, silent image, vanish [APG] (self only), or ventriloquism

Level 7 - acid arrow, cure moderate wounds, darkness, daze monster, glide [APG], invisibility (self only), lesser restoration, levitate, minor image, scorching ray, see invisibility, or spider climb

Level 11 - arcane sight, create food and water, cure serious wounds, daylight, fireball, fly, gaseous form, lightning bolt, major image, stinking cloud, tongues, or water breathing

Can the eidolon use wands and scrolls that are on his spell list without using use magic device?

Shown below are the rules for wands.
Wand Rules

The rules for scrolls state that you don't even have to be able to cast the spell to utilize them, as long as the spells are on your spell list.

That said, can an Eidolon be in combat form and still have the capability of using wands crafted with his particular spell list in mind, even if he doesn't have the specific evolutions to cast the spell like abilities? (Scroll rules state that it simply has to be available to your list not that you have to know how to cast it.)

What does everyone think?


Other relevant stuff:

Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.


For the first question I would allow the buff to remain on the Eidolon when he returns as long as the duration of the spell has not elapsed. If we say an Eidolon takes 5 damage and returns to it home plain and then is summoned immediatly again it still has the damage then we have to allow the positive as well as the negative unless someone is just trying to nerf the Summoner class.

As for the wand, I cannot find any reason why an Eidolon could not use a wand as long as the form it is in allows it to cast spells. I would rule that the Eidolon has to be in an evolution form that gave it access to spells. If the eidolon cannot cast any spells in its form then it would not be able to use the wand. As long as that condition is met, the Eidolon is no more powerful then a 3rd level Paladin who is using a wand.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mogart wrote:

If you cast a buff on an eidolon, and he gets sent back to his plane. Assuming you re-summon him immediately, does he still have that buff?

If the answer is no, what happens if you cast protection from elements(fire) on yourself, and go to the plane of fire?

No, and the 2nd question is irrelevant. When you summon the Eidolon, unless it was sent back to it's home plane by damage, it's essentially reset to the condition it was the last time you summoned it. It is not the same thing as your personal planar travel.

The Eidolon is not a spellcaster and can not make use of wands without UMD rolls, assuming that it has the proper appendages for grasping them properly. (no hands.... no wand usage)


LazarX wrote:


No, and the 2nd question is irrelevant. When you summon the Eidolon, unless it was sent back to it's home plane by damage, it's essentially reset to the condition it was the last time you summoned it. It is not the same thing as your personal planar travel.

If we follow this logic, then when the eidolon takes ability damage, I can dismiss and re-summon him and have all of the ability damage be erased.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mogart wrote:
LazarX wrote:


No, and the 2nd question is irrelevant. When you summon the Eidolon, unless it was sent back to it's home plane by damage, it's essentially reset to the condition it was the last time you summoned it. It is not the same thing as your personal planar travel.
If we follow this logic, then when the eidolon takes ability damage, I can dismiss and re-summon him and have all of the ability damage be erased.

Ability damage may be an effective exception to the rule, but I can't look that up right now.


LazarX wrote:
Mogart wrote:

If you cast a buff on an eidolon, and he gets sent back to his plane. Assuming you re-summon him immediately, does he still have that buff?

If the answer is no, what happens if you cast protection from elements(fire) on yourself, and go to the plane of fire?

No, and the 2nd question is irrelevant. When you summon the Eidolon, unless it was sent back to it's home plane by damage, it's essentially reset to the condition it was the last time you summoned it. It is not the same thing as your personal planar travel.

The Eidolon is not a spellcaster and can not make use of wands without UMD rolls, assuming that it has the proper appendages for grasping them properly. (no hands.... no wand usage)

Did you look at the rules for wands? As long as the Eidolon can hold the wand and cast the spell, under the rules for wand and spell trigger it can use a wand.

As for your comment about the Eidolon when it is resummoned you are correct. It is in the last condition that it was when you last summoned it. Which in this case includes a buff. There is a feat called unstable evolution which allows an Eidolon to change evolution points around each time it is summoned and in combination with this feat it is a good question that needs to be answered.


Mogart wrote:


If we follow this logic,

That's a mistake right there when dealing with the Summoner class and the rules around it.

Many are specifically for them and with a heavy handed balance in mind.

I recall that there were once optional rules for summon spells to summon specific creatures (Bob the formian, vs any old formian) and that might best guide you.

But to ignore my own advice and go with logic:

The issue is not planar travel, but rather summoning. And I do think you meant the summon eidolon spell rather than performing the ritual again, right?

In that case I would have the eidolon appear sans buffs and sans damage. When he disappears (say the spell wears off) and is brought back by the ritual it would be as if he never had been summoned by the spell.

Now if you're instead talking about calling him back via the ritual, I would have all status effects on him still running since when he left. I would likely increment time elapsed mind you. Seeing as his hps are not healed and the other effects do not get cleared it makes sense that none really do.. though again I would let spells with a duration have the time elapsed count against those durations.

-James


Minor Magic Is a Spell Like ability not a spell, Eidolons are not casters just monsters with SLAs


David Thomassen wrote:
Minor Magic Is a Spell Like ability not a spell, Eidolons are not casters just monsters with SLAs

In most cases, spell like abilities are treated exactly like spells, even when used with feats. Such as the Summoner's ability to summon monsters which benefit from Augment Summoning.

So given that the rules for the use of spell triggers state that you simply have to be able to "cast the corresponding spell" you are saying that casting the spell by a spell like ability, is somehow different from casting the spell using an actual prepared spell.

See here for reference:
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.


Mogart wrote:


In most cases, spell like abilities are treated exactly like spells, even when used with feats. Such as the Summoner's ability to summon monsters which benefit from Augment Summoning.

For anything other than the summoner class it would not work, that said given the number of exceptions to rules if you, as the DM, elected to allow the minor magic ability to also give spell completion of one degree or another to the eidolon it would not be surprising.

-James


The thing about SLAs is that you must have the SLAs, in order to use wands and scrolls with that corresponding spell.

The choice of SLAs doesn't mean that is the Eidolon's class spell list. If you spend the points and get every SLA then yes you can use all the wands and scrolls of those spells.

For a more basic example a summoner doesn't have summon monster 9 on his spell list until he can through his SLA use summon monster 9.


Gignere wrote:
The thing about SLAs is that you must have the SLAs, in order to use wands and scrolls with that corresponding spell.

Maybe, maybe not. But the recent publication of "The Summoner's Circle" allows you to create a variety of Eidolon builds using the "Unstable Evolutions" Feat. If you use that feat, you can theoretically re-select spells each and every time you summon your Eidolon.


Arcane Strike for Rogues
"Arcane strike requires the ability to cast arcane spells as a prerequisite. Spell-like abilities are not arcane spells, despite similarities."

Rest of the statement by James Jacobs:
A rogue would have to multiclass into wizard, bard, or sorcerer (or another arcanist class) in order to gain the benefit of Arcane Strike.

It's a better feat for bards than rogues as a result.


The use of Augment Summoning with the Summoners Summon Monster SLA is the exception to the rule for spell feats and SLAs.


David Thomassen wrote:

Arcane Strike for Rogues

"Arcane strike requires the ability to cast arcane spells as a prerequisite. Spell-like abilities are not arcane spells, despite similarities." ** spoiler omitted **
The use of Augment Summoning with the Summoners Summon Monster SLA is the exception to the rule for spell feats and SLAs.

Yes, you are correct about this. A rogue doesn't have any arcane spell crafting to allow him to take/use that feat. The issue here was a spell trigger for the wand. And spell triggers just require the ability to cast the spell. One could actually say a spell like ability to cast the spell charged into the wand.


After more digging into this (I would like to be wrong as giving an Eidolon a wand of Curing sounds good to me as a player):
Spell Like Abilities
"Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components). They go away in an antimagic field and are subject to spell resistance if the spell the ability is based on would be subject to spell resistance. ... 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."


David Thomassen wrote:

After more digging into this (I would like to be wrong as giving an Eidolon a wand of Curing sounds good to me as a player):

Spell Like Abilities
"Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components). They go away in an antimagic field and are subject to spell resistance if the spell the ability is based on would be subject to spell resistance. ... 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."

The activation of a wand requires the use of a spell trigger.

[url=http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems.html#spell-trigger[/url] The text applicable to using a spell trigger is shown below.

Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Please note that the text does not specify spell casting through a spell like ability or though normal spell casting. It simply says whoever can cast the spell can activate a spell trigger. Furthermore it states that you don't even have to actually be able to cast the spell, as per the Paladin example. I would say that as long as your class can cast the correct spell, then you can use the same wand of that spell.


Mogart wrote:
If you cast a buff on an eidolon, and he gets sent back to his plane. Assuming you re-summon him immediately, does he still have that buff?

Yes, if the duration has not expired. There's no rule stating that all buffs on him immediately end.

Quote:

Now for the fun question. The Eidolon for the most part can be a crappy caster or a decent tank. Through evolutions he can learn to cast the following spells.

Blah blah blah

Can the eidolon use wands and scrolls that are on his spell list without using use magic device?

No. The Eidolon does not have a spell list and is not a spellcaster. He has evolutions which grant him spell-like abilities, but he does not even have the ability to cast spells. He doesn't even have the ability to cast spell-like abilities unless he specifically takes those evolutions.

He might be able to use the wands if you actually give him the ability to use the corresponding SLA, but in that case you'd probably be better served by getting Skilled [UMD] if you're just trying to use some wands.

Same for scrolls. Eidolons in general being capable of getting evolutions which give them access to SLA versions of particular spells does not constitute a spell list.


Omelite wrote:


He might be able to use the wands if you actually give him the ability to use the corresponding SLA, but in that case you'd probably be better served by getting Skilled [UMD].

Same for scrolls. Eidolons in general being capable of getting evolutions which give them access to SLA versions of particular spells does not constitute a spell list.

I am good with this type of compromise answer.

Let me see
Skilled = +8 1 evo. point
Make UMD a class skill with 1 rank = 1 + 3

UMD +12 before the roll at level 1. DC to use a wand 20.

It is still probably worth the risk.


+12 to umd at lvl 1 is likely better than anyone else can get.


thepuregamer wrote:
+12 to umd at lvl 1 is likely better than anyone else can get.

It is indeed. But the Summoner class itself sacrifices level 7-9 spells to be able to do some fun stuff. There might as well be some benefits.


Mogart wrote:
thepuregamer wrote:
+12 to umd at lvl 1 is likely better than anyone else can get.
It is indeed. But the Summoner class itself sacrifices level 7-9 spells to be able to do some fun stuff. There might as well be some benefits.

well summoner's are pretty top tier for the first 10 lvls or so. Thats not bad. Later on when your badass minion starts to fall behind and other full progression casters can summon up long term minions and have their keep their high lvl spells, you are slightly worse off. But those first 10 lvls are good times.

If you plan to use your eidolon for using wands, would it be better for you to just go master summoner?


thepuregamer wrote:


well summoner's are pretty top tier for the first 10 lvls or so. Thats not bad. Later on when your badass minion starts to fall behind and other full progression casters can summon up long term minions and have their keep their high lvl spells, you are slightly worse off. But those first 10 lvls are good times.

If you plan to use your eidolon for using wands, would it be better for you to just go master summoner?

Point for point and level for level I would play a druid over a Summoner. Just take an animal companion, it is essentially the same as an eidolon, in some cases better in other cases worse. During the times where the animal companion is worse than the Eidolon the druid can rely on better spell selection. As a druid you also get to Shape change.

I just find it funny that there is so much summoner hate and virtually no druid hate.


I don't hate summoners, I like them, though the summoner I end up playing is not exactly the one you see in the apg. I prefer to remove the strange exceptions that crop up with the eidolon. No armor, shared items slots, base forms(I personally just removed them and credit the people their 5 evo points), and the permanent feat selection(if druids can change animal companions to reselect feats, eidolons should be able to as well). I also pushed the eidolon to a 20 hd progression with medium bab so that their saves would progress at a fair rate. That may be a ton of buffs but I dropped their na progression down 5 to account for the allowed armor bonus. So it ended up only a slight buff.

I personally think that there is not much druid hate because druids are a not a new class. And from 3.5 to pathfinder, they got slapped a bit in the wildshaping area. Summoner's get so much hate though because they are somewhat complicated and people react harshly to new things that they do not understand.


Mogart wrote:


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


thepuregamer wrote:
That may be a ton of buffs but I dropped their na progression down 5 to account for the allowed armor bonus. So it ended up only a slight buff.

Umm, let's see. First, they're getting about 4/3 as many feats, since they're getting 4/3 as many HD. They're getting about 4/3 as many saving throw increases for the same reason, and skills too. Oh, and all those evolutions which depend on the eidolon's HD, those are better now. HP too. Endgame their armor is the same, since celestial armor counteracts the loss of mage armor and the 5 natural armor you removed (while still allowing for builds with DEX up to 26). They're getting more flexibility in their build - for instance, you can have an eidolon who just uses a bunch of tentacles, and they count as primary because he only has one type of attack. There's no way to classify all of that as a "slight buff." You made the class way more powerful.


well they gotta spend a feat on armor to atleast use celestial armor, so in your example they are only getting 1 extra feat. But then they are also spending more money on celestial armor. So that is a pretty neutral change.

And currently their saving throws are terrible. To the point that, only a biped is useable after later lvls since a quadruped maxes out at a base +5 to will save.

Also, those hd based evolutions are currently terrible as well. All I do by boosting their hd is make those evolutions usable. Look at frightful presence for example. RAW, when you get access to it, an eidolon can only make creatures who have 9 hd or less shaken. So currently it is a dc 14 save that only affects 9 hd or less creatures. Unuseable. If it can atleast make 11 hd enemies of a lvl 11 summoner shaken, it has some value(not a ton but atleast some). All this does is turn those abilities into options. Which they currently are not. In a guide

To count it all... so its really,
1. skill point boost
2. a save boost(sorely needed)
3. (5.5+con mod)*5 so ~ 50 extra hp in the end.
4. net armor change of 0.
5. 2 extra feat( 10 feats vs 8)
6. hd related abilities already discussed above.

1 is nice but not breaking much. 2 is necessary. 3 is a small change. 4 is no change except now you have to spend atleast 1 feat on armor proficiency and cash on armor(so actually a nerf). 5 is a buff that is atleast partially compensated for by needing to pick up armor proficiency.

I am personally of the mind that if a summoner is going to lose 3 lvls of spells, then his eidolon should be clearly better than an animal companion. So annoying rules that were dropped on the eidolon but not the ac I felt had to go out the window. Just how I dealt with it. A druid is much better anyway since he is like a regular summoner(gets a pet) and a synthesist(wild shape is his own power armor) and he still ahs 9th lvl spells. Further more, the ac doesn't pop inside an antimagic field and it can't be banished. The changes I made do not push the summoner over that so I felt it was not a big deal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Running on RAW, as you noted:

"Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell."

Eidolon is not a class. It is (at best) a race. Even if the Eidolon has an SLA, the spell is not on his Class Spell List...so no Spell Trigger items.

No reason that UMD wouldn't work though...


Ramarren wrote:

Running on RAW, as you noted:

"Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell."

Eidolon is not a class. It is (at best) a race. Even if the Eidolon has an SLA, the spell is not on his Class Spell List...so no Spell Trigger items.

No reason that UMD wouldn't work though...

Actually the technical race would be Outsider. The class that that particular outsider took was Eidolon to bond with and benefit the summoner.

To put it another way. A druid selects a Bear as an animal companion. Is the companion's race Animal Companion? or bear/animal?


Mogart wrote:
Ramarren wrote:

Running on RAW, as you noted:

"Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell."

Eidolon is not a class. It is (at best) a race. Even if the Eidolon has an SLA, the spell is not on his Class Spell List...so no Spell Trigger items.

No reason that UMD wouldn't work though...

Actually the technical race would be Outsider. The class that that particular outsider took was Eidolon to bond with and benefit the summoner.

To put it another way. A druid selects a Bear as an animal companion. Is the companion's race Animal Companion? or bear/animal?

Its race would be bear, its type would be animal.

An eidolon is probably the eidolon race, the outsider type.
A Balor's race is Balor, his type is outsider.


thepuregamer wrote:

well they gotta spend a feat on armor to atleast use celestial armor, so in your example they are only getting 1 extra feat. But then they are also spending more money on celestial armor. So that is a pretty neutral change.

And currently their saving throws are terrible. To the point that, only a biped is useable after later lvls since a quadruped maxes out at a base +5 to will save.

Also, those hd based evolutions are currently terrible as well. All I do by boosting their hd is make those evolutions usable. Look at frightful presence for example. RAW, when you get access to it, an eidolon can only make creatures who have 9 hd or less shaken. So currently it is a dc 14 save that only affects 9 hd or less creatures. Unuseable. If it can atleast make 11 hd enemies of a lvl 11 summoner shaken, it has some value(not a ton but atleast some). All this does is turn those abilities into options. Which they currently are not. In a guide

To count it all... so its really,
1. skill point boost
2. a save boost(sorely needed)
3. (5.5+con mod)*5 so ~ 50 extra hp in the end.
4. net armor change of 0.
5. 2 extra feat( 10 feats vs 8)
6. hd related abilities already discussed above.

1 is nice but not breaking much. 2 is necessary. 3 is a small change. 4 is no change except now you have to spend atleast 1 feat on armor proficiency and cash on armor(so actually a nerf). 5 is a buff that is atleast partially compensated for by needing to pick up armor proficiency.

I am personally of the mind that if a summoner is going to lose 3 lvls of spells, then his eidolon should be clearly better than an animal companion. So annoying rules that were dropped on the eidolon but not the ac I felt had to go out the window. Just how I dealt with it. A druid is much better anyway since he is like a regular summoner(gets a pet) and a synthesist(wild shape is his own power armor) and he still ahs 9th lvl spells. Further more, the ac doesn't pop inside an antimagic field and it can't be banished. The changes I made do not push...

Devotion. +4 on will saves vs. enchantment effects. That's the most common type of will save to have to make, and eidolons get a flat +4 on it from level 6 onward.

This means at level 20 they essentially have a +9 on will saves whereas a fighter has a +6, without your modifications. Even without devotion, it's +5 for the quadruped eidolon vs. +6 for the fighter. Why does the eidolon need to be a better frontliner than the frontline classes?

Oh, and I forgot that now they'd get 5 ability score increases instead of 3.

The summoner isn't "losing 3 levels of spells" quite. A lot of spells are lower level on the summoner list than on the sorc/wiz list. He doesn't keep up on spells per day, admittedly. He also has Summon Monster, one of the most versatile spells in the game, as a spell-like ability that's way better than the actual spell (it's a standard action and lasts minutes instead of rounds) that he can cast a lot of times per day.

The eidolon is clearly better than the animal companion. At a few of the early levels, and at level 7, you can probably get better animal companions, but after that the eidolon is going to consistently be way better and way more flexible than the animal companion.


banishment and his friend, holy word type spells, magic jar, repulsion, prismatic spray, all sorts of illusions, scintillating pattern. There are quite non enchantment will saves that the eidolon is going to have to make over the lvls and he does not have tons of ways to raise his saving throw.

A dwarven, elven, half elf, or halfling fighter would have racial abilities boosting saves that an eidolon couldn't get. They would automatically have traits that could boost will saves, they normally have more feats and thus can easily afford both iron will and imp iron will. A fighter is just 1 character and only needs defensive gear for protecting 1 person. Also, players have access to another way of strongly boosting a specific save(multi classing).

An eidolon has devotion and ability increase wisdom... devotion doesn't cover all your will saves and increasing wisdom costs 2 evo points per 1 increase in your will save. Meaning it is a heavy offensive sacrifice and also not terribly effective.

A summoner doesn't auto know his entire list. So his spells known are generally lower and fewer. He can get summon monster 8 as a 6th lvl spell but that is about as good as it gets for offensive magic. He definitely loses alot. His summon monster ability is only usable a) when his eidolon isn't out and b) once at a time. This is not something to brag about.

Well one really good sweet spot for the animal companion is 9th lvl when the druid can drop animal growth on him. Also, the animal companion is cheaper to equip since he isn't using up all the druids slots. There are definitely some parts of an animal companion that are distinctly better than a eidolon. Perhaps the eidolon as an entire package can be better most of the time but the eidolon has a bunch of hangups. Also, armor doesn't just boost armor class. Around 7 or 8th lvl you can put rhino hide on your animal companion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Spell Trigger: ... Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell.

Eidolons have no class, they are a class feature. Eidolons have no spell list, they have evolutions that allow them to use a spell like ability and nothing more.

If Eidolons had either a class or a spell list, it would be listed somewhere in the APG. But it has neither.

No, Eidolons cannot use spell trigger items without using the UMD skill.

Evolutions are not a spell list.


Gilfalas wrote:
Quote:
Spell Trigger: ... Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell.

Eidolons have no class, they are a class feature. Eidolons have no spell list, they have evolutions that allow them to use a spell like ability and nothing more.

If Eidolons had either a class or a spell list, it would be listed somewhere in the APG. But it has neither.

No, Eidolons cannot use spell trigger items without using the UMD skill.

Evolutions are not a spell list.

Really? The part of that whole sentence that you are putting all of your emphasis on is class? That seems incredibly narrow minded.

So you are saying, that an eidolon has no trouble whatsoever using a magic missile spell like ability as a spell like ability, but when it comes to activating a magic missile wand whose spell is almost entirely cast, he is dumbfounded?

Can a dragon also not figure out how to use magic items with spell triggers because he doesn't have a class he is simply a dragon?


That is not what we are saying. We are saying that the Gold Dragon has spell-like abilities which cannot be used to activate a wand and spells that can. See the Ancient Gold dragon

Spell-Like Abilities (CL 26th):At will—bless, daylight, detect evil, geas/quest, sunburst (DC 25)

Spells Known (CL 15th)

7th (5/day)—greater teleport, resurrection
6th (7/day)—antimagic field, greater dispel magic, heal
5th (7/day)—dispel evil, plane shift, teleport, true seeing
4th (7/day)—divination, restoration, spell immunity, stoneskin
3rd (7/day)—dispel magic, haste, invisibility purge, prayer
2nd (8/day)—aid, cure moderate wounds, lesser restoration, resist energy, silence
1st (8/day)—alarm, divine favor, mage armor, shield, shield of faith
0 (at will)—detect magic, light, mending, stabilize, 6 more


David Thomassen wrote:

That is not what we are saying. We are saying that the Gold Dragon has spell-like abilities which cannot be used to activate a wand and spells that can. See the Ancient Gold dragon

Spell-Like Abilities (CL 26th):At will—bless, daylight, detect evil, geas/quest, sunburst (DC 25)

Spells Known (CL 15th)

7th (5/day)—greater teleport, resurrection
6th (7/day)—antimagic field, greater dispel magic, heal
5th (7/day)—dispel evil, plane shift, teleport, true seeing
4th (7/day)—divination, restoration, spell immunity, stoneskin
3rd (7/day)—dispel magic, haste, invisibility purge, prayer
2nd (8/day)—aid, cure moderate wounds, lesser restoration, resist energy, silence
1st (8/day)—alarm, divine favor, mage armor, shield, shield of faith
0 (at will)—detect magic, light, mending, stabilize, 6 more

And a Gold Dragon which can cast those spell like abilities is more than capable of utilizing a spell trigger for those spell like abilities.


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?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The posession of spell-like abilities does not make a creature a spellcaster. since the Eidolon is not a spellcaster it has no spells in a class list. SLA's do not count.

To be a spellcaster you must either possess levels in a spellcasting class or have an effective spellcasting class built into your creature buildup e.g. bardic levels in an illend, sorcerer levels in a dragon. The Eidolon is not an exception to this rule.


Mogart, I'm not even getting how you could possibly think your argument is valid, when the RAW contradicts you in a 100% definitive fashion. There isn't even a little bit of gray-area. This is one thing the RAW is completely literal on, there is no other way to interpret it.

RAW wrote:
Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells)
RAW wrote:
Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell

If a SLA is NOT a spell, then your usage of a SLA is NOT the usage of a spell. You are NOT casting a spell, you are casting a SLA.

It's extremely simple, and there is nothing closed-minded about it. If it is NOT a spell, then you cannot force it to count as one.

Now, if you want to houserule that it works in your games, feel free. But to answer the question you asked us, the answer is no. It does NOT work by the RAW nor the RAI.

"Mogart wrote:
And a Gold Dragon which can cast those spell like abilities is more than capable of utilizing a spell trigger for those spell like abilities.

What are you basing that nonsense on? Let me quote the RAW yet again.

RAW wrote:
Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components).

Normal spells DO have verbal, somatic, focus, and/or material components. Every spell has at least one of them. However, SLA's do not. This means that the effort used to cast a spell is entirely different than the effort used to cast a SLA. Spells require much more intricate precision, effort and knowledge than SLA's do. They are performed in wildly different ways. They function differently, and have different effects magically. Different magical effects leads to different applications of game-rules (the reason why SLA's can neither counter nor be countered, but normal spells can). This is also the reason why SLA's do not, and can not, count as a spell for spell-triggers.

Honestly, if you're going to be so stubborn in accepting the answer everyone gave you, why on earth did you bother asking us? If you want it to work so bad, you can houserule that it works. Nothing wrong with houserules. Just understand that you are, in fact, houseruling. The RAW does not accept it, and even the RAI is pretty basic on this. Not a spell = not a spell. Period.

Edit: Now, if you want to argue that Eidolons are an exception to the very obvious rule, point me to a dev statement, or an errata, or an FAQ entry somewhere. Because while there are a few exceptions to the rule, last time I checked, eidolons weren't one of them.

All that being said, the UMD skill might work, since I recall seeing nothing explicitly forbidding an eidolon from using that skill.


Kazejin wrote:

Mogart, I'm not even getting how you could possibly think your argument is valid, when the RAW contradicts you in a 100% definitive fashion. There isn't even a little bit of gray-area. This is one thing the RAW is completely literal on, there is no other way to interpret it.

Whether I hit someone with a magic missile spell or a magic missile spell like ability, they were still hit with magic missile as per the spell, that is how the argument is valid.

The reason I am being so stubborn about it is the same reason that I was being stubborn about the fact that you can't treat a monk as a weapon that can be enchanted. It is also the same reason that when one of my players wanted to have a hammer with one or more bear traps attached to it I said no.

Namely the idea seems inherently wrong to me, if you can cast a spell then you know how to utilize the spell trigger for that spell.


If you are going post text to refute an arguement post the entire quote not just the part that you think makes your case.

Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components).

The above was the quote directly from the rules. As you can see, the quote does not end where it says they are not spell. This rule was to show that a SLA does not require any components. The rules say nothing about if a wand would work with a SLA. Saying the rules are cut and dry against it are completely incorrect. There is no reason to insult someone when you disagree with them, especially when you main point of logic with disagreeing with them is a shortened quote of the rules taken out of context.


Don't respond to my post if you're not gonna read it. Let me quote myself, because I pointed out the fallacy of your logic; and you chose to completely ignore it.

Kazejin wrote:
"Mogart wrote:
And a Gold Dragon which can cast those spell like abilities is more than capable of utilizing a spell trigger for those spell like abilities.

What are you basing that nonsense on? Let me quote the RAW yet again.

RAW wrote:
Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components).
Normal spells DO have verbal, somatic, focus, and/or material components. Every spell has at least one of them. However, SLA's do not. This means that the effort used to cast a spell is entirely different than the effort used to cast a SLA. Spells require much more intricate precision, effort and knowledge than SLA's do. They are performed in wildly different ways. They function differently, and have different effects magically. Different magical effects leads to different applications of game-rules (the reason why SLA's can neither counter nor be countered, but normal spells can). This is also the reason why SLA's do not, and can not, count as a spell for...


I'm sorry, you posted the short version first, then the rest. My point that you took it out of context is still valid. SLA can be effected by any metamagic feats as long as it doesn't raise the spell level slot for the spell to be cast. If we are allowing feats that are made to effect spells to effect SLA's why would SLA's not count to effect wands?

Also I want to ask you about this: "Spells require much more intricate precision, effort and knowledge than SLA's do. They are performed in wildly different ways. They function differently, and have different effects magically."

How do SLA have different magical effects? The rules say, "A monster's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions."

Based on this rule how can you say SLA's have different magical effects then the spell itself?


How about the rules for creation of a magic item. Specifically this text.

Magic Item Creation Rules

Requirements: Certain requirements must be met in order for a character to create a magic item. These include feats, spells, and miscellaneous requirements such as level, alignment, and race or kind. The prerequisites for creation of an item are given immediately following the item's caster level.

A spell prerequisite may be provided by a character who has prepared the spell (or who knows the spell, in the case of a sorcerer or bard), or through the use of a spell completion or spell trigger magic item or a spell-like ability that produces the desired spell effect. For each day that passes in the creation process, the creator must expend one spell completion item or one charge from a spell trigger item if either of those objects is used to supply a prerequisite.

It is possible for more than one character to cooperate in the creation of an item, with each participant providing one or more of the prerequisites. In some cases, cooperation may even be necessary.

If two or more characters cooperate to create an item, they must agree among themselves who will be considered the creator for the purpose of determinations where the creator's level must be known.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

So by the current arguments presented, a SLA can be used to create a wand but knowledge of how to cast that spell can't be used to trigger it.


dragonsword111 wrote:

I'm sorry, you posted the short version first, then the rest. My point that you took it out of context is still valid. SLA can be effected by any metamagic feats as long as it doesn't raise the spell level slot for the spell to be cast. If we are allowing feats that are made to effect spells to effect SLA's why would SLA's not count to effect wands?

Also I want to ask you about this: "Spells require much more intricate precision, effort and knowledge than SLA's do. They are performed in wildly different ways. They function differently, and have different effects magically."

How do SLA have different magical effects? The rules say, "A monster's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions."

Based on this rule how can you say SLA's have different magical effects then the spell itself?

Very simple; Because they DO function differently.

Can a spell be used as a counterspell? Yes.

Can a SLA be used as a counterspell, or even a counter to another SLA? No.

Can a spell be the target of a counterspell? Yes.

Can a SLA be the target of a counterspell? No.

Does a spell (by rule) always contain some sort of component that raises the complexity of the spellcasting procedure? Yes.

Does a SLA suffer from the above-mentioned handicap? No; except with a few specific SLA's that still require expensive material component costs only because the component is so expensive that it would be game-breaking, and unbalancing, to ignore it.

The list goes on. SLA's have a different functionality magically which results in a different set of strengths and weaknesses, even though the tangible effect is the same. The two clearly function differently if meta-effects are so different. You can't ignore the in-between just because the end result is the same. They have their own respective sets of strengths and weaknesses, one of which being spell-triggers. SLA's are not spells.

And I was typing another reply when I caught wind of your follow up question, so lemme paste that in while I'm at it...

The context still very clearly says its not a spell. Therefore the only logical way to interpret the phrase is that its not a spell. If it still counted as a spell, why include that piece of text at all? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to just say, "Although they function like spells, they do not use verbal, somatic, focus, or material components." Why did the RAW make a specific issue out of pointing out (in a blunt literal fashion) that the SLA is not a spell? Because it's not a spell.


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?


Mogart wrote:


So by the current arguments presented, a SLA can be used to create a wand but knowledge of how to cast that spell can't be used to trigger it.

Incorrect.

A creature with a SLA that casts haste could use it to make boots of speed, but could not use it to make a scroll of haste, wand of haste or the like.

You'll want to go further in the magic item creation section to each individual creation feats (arms/armor, potions, etc).

-James


james maissen wrote:
Mogart wrote:


So by the current arguments presented, a SLA can be used to create a wand but knowledge of how to cast that spell can't be used to trigger it.

Incorrect.

A creature with a SLA that casts haste could use it to make boots of speed, but could not use it to make a scroll of haste, wand of haste or the like.

You'll want to go further in the magic item creation section to each individual creation feats (arms/armor, potions, etc).

-James

I have looked through the methods of making magic items, and I don't see what you are referring to. The only vague inference of it is that the creation feats seem to mention Sorcerers and Bards. I am fairly sure that anyone of magical talent with the appropriate feats can create magic items not just Sorcerers and Bards. I will grant you that using SLAs to create magic items isn't done often, but there is at least one mention that yes it can be done under the requirements section in item creation feats. The feats in general say that you can use SLAs to make them but there is no one entry in which SLAs are specifically mentioned for armor/wondrous/potions/scrolls/rings/wands/rods/staves.

However under the requirements section of item creation it specifically states that SLAs can be used.

So essentially if we continue the current flow of the logic presented herein, either SLAs can't be used to make any magic items at all or they can be used to make magic items even if not specifically mentioned in each individual item creation text. Unless there are magic items that aren't under the sub headings armor, weapons, potions, rings, rods, staves, wondrous item,and wands.


...Do I really need to state every single difference between spells and SLA's for my point to be understood? I thought it would be sufficient to list the basic differences, but I guess not.

At this point though, the only thing I'm going to recommend is that if you believe in your perspective this strongly, try questioning the PF devs for their opinions. You've gotten our interpretations, and they only seem to be inciting further debate; so try the devs. I'd say the topic is worthy of clarification, at the very least. In the meantime, make an appeal to your DM, and see where he stands on it. (If you're the player, that is. If you're the DM, then you easily have the power to allow it yourself.)


So instead of addressing the magic item creation point you decide to just rant saying that we are not listening and that you are right and we are wrong. Does that sum up your last post? How about addressing the issue? SLA's have been said by PF devs to be subject to meta-magic feats as long as the feat does not cause the spell to raise a spell slot. The magic item creation, taken from the rules on this website, say that a SLA can be used to create a magic item such as a wand. Do you have a respose to this instead of being rude?

1 to 50 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / More controversial Eidolon questions All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.