I don't know how unbalancing that would be, but it certainly doesn't make any sense. Many supernatural abilities don't have spell-like behavior.
The Monk's diamond body ability, for instance, or the Paladin's divine grace. How would those work as spell-like abilities?
Diamond Body (Su): At 11th level, a monk gains immunity to poisons of all kinds.
Divine Grace (Su): At 2nd level, a paladin gains a bonus equal to her Charisma bonus (if any) on all saving throws.
Does the DM's change mean abilities like those need to be activated somehow, can be dispelled, and cause AoOs?
It certainly hoses the witch more, and in general isn't necessary.
|
Two questions, has ANY PLAYER in your ex-game, been abusing any SU ability?
Is there a reason for you ex-DM to make such a rule?
I would suspect that this is a follow-up to the thread where someone was looking to see if he needed to find a new group, and it was mentioned that the GM did this in that group because he (the GM) felt that the Alchemist's bombs were overpowered, anmd then extended it to ALL SU.
Well changing it to SP instead of SU means that it provokes each and every time you use them (and using range attacks provokes anyways) and that they can be disrupted, and that spell resistance applies (which means bombs would become useless against golems).
Personally as much as bombs suck I don't see this as needed (realizing that I mean suck in a generalized sense not a 'this is a horrible option no one should use' sense).
The bbeg we were up against had SR and a weakness to fire... alchemist putty..lol...previously witch with sleep hex.
well here is a group of caveats i could think of:
#1 Bombs could no longer be used while silenced. SP has a VSM component
#2 Mutagen could be dispelled just like any other buff
#3 a deafend alchemist would have 50% chance of failure to make a bomb,SP has a VSM component
#4 All of the discoveries like a familiar or extra limbs could be dispelled
#5 An action could be readied against an alchemist and dispel cast upon them making them fail at making the bombs on their turn
#6 witch hexes can only get 1 shot on a guy per day (normally) and if they have to roll for SR then a will save (most BBEG's with SR have formiddable will saves) it is almost guaranteed a flop.
#1 is wrong.
#2 is faulty.#3 is also wrong (same as #1)
#4 isn't correct either -- most of those are extra-ordinary as such wouldn't convert.
#5 Controversial at the minimum, conflicting rules in different areas.
#6 meh, but kind of.
It sounds like the dm just doenst like it when his precious monsters are hurt. Good that it was an EX game.
As Abraham mentioned there are ALL sorts of problems with making all SU abilities SP, not the least of which it negates the rational meaning of spell like abilities (abilities that replicate spells).
It actually makes the rules not work. All current Spell like abilities are some kind of action. You are enacting something that is like a spell.
A paladins divine grace is a Supernatural Ability. So when the paladin makes a save it provokes an attack of oportunity? It just doenst make sense. Or a bards song? Does a singing bard provoke attacks of opportunity every round they sing? The change is literal nonsense and just scrambles the rules because the dm is petty. You are better off without them.
Yeah, that level 20 monk? Disspel that diamond body. "Teehee, oops"
That alchemist? Disspell, Mass. "Teehee, oops"
Also, I don't really see how you can "abuse" a supernatural ability. Can a fighter "abuse" swinging his sword? Can a caster "abuse" casting a spell? The perfectly honest answer to this is no, SO LONG as the rules are properly followed. If a rule isn't being followed then that's when I've seen things become unbalanced.
Sounds like a GM who doesn't understand the PF universe.
All spell like abilities have to be activated.
Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.
A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.
Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.
If a character class grants a spell-like ability that is not based on an actual spell, the ability’s effective spell level is equal to the highest-level class spell the character can cast, and is cast at the class level the ability is gained.
As you can see you are plainly wrong on number 1 and 3.
Number 4:
Mummification, Healing Touch, Wings, Lingering Spirit, Parasitic Twin, preserve organs, spontaneous healing, tentacle, and tumor familiar are all listed explicitedly as extra ordinary abilities. As such they are not supernatural. Specific over general.
Number 5: Again controversial look at the above rule text -- this runs counter to what is printed elsewhere in the CRB. There has been no Errata published on this yet.
Dispelling is not the same as counterspelling.
Yeah he's probably just scared. He doesn't understand how everything works together. He needs to understand this isn't D&D. This isn't 3.5. This is Pathfinder. Even though it's underpinnings are largely garnered from Dungeons and Dragons, there are enough changes so that it is entirely it's own beast. There are conversion materials out there but I'd almost say ditch your old character, create the same level and "similar as possible" class using only Pathfinder materials. He should do the same with the monsters and reading the rules to ensure that nothing needs removed or changed. Most of the clash I've seen here and elsewhere is from people who are used to D&D but are trying to do the same stuff with Pathfinder. They want to rely on their D&D knowledge but they really shouldn't because of the vast number of changes. It's not even that there's HUGE changes. Most of them are subtle tweaks, except where obviously otherwise, but when you have someone fresh come in to play Pathfinder they get a bunch of roadblocks by GMs who haven't changed their mindset over. They really do need to forget what they did before and do "just Pathfinder" otherwise things just feel off. Pathfinder isn't in Beta anymore. It's a big boy now.
In the game I was just in (I am no longer with that group) the GM decided to change all PC powers that were SU to SP because he felt SU was overpowered for PC's. I think that creates alot of unbalance issues. Anyone agree with that, and why?
I don't anything was wrong with the SU's. Each power should be looked at individually. I hardly ever ban anything myself.
He now has to come up with spell levels for all these abilities now also.
I think it sucks though. Having to pull a concentration check to use a ki point or smite someone would not be good as an example.
Spell-Like Abilities (Sp): Spell-like abilities, as the name implies, are magical abilities that are very much like spells. Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). Spell-like abilities can be dispelled but the cannot be counterspelled or used to counterspell.
Supernatural Abilities (Su): Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). A supernatural ability's effect cannot be dispelled and is not subject to counterspells. See Table: Special Ability Types for a summary of the types of special abilities.
Like I said controversial on the counter spelling -- it's not been cleared up yet.
However again I point out that being able to disrupt a spell like ability isn't the same as countering it, and dispelling a spell like ability isn't counterspelling it either: A counter spell is a very specific maneuver that prevents the effect from happening through cancellation with spell energy from another person.
Disrupting a spell means making the spell caster (or spell like ability user) screw up what they are doing. Dispelling is getting rid of the effect after it has come into existence.
examples:
1. I cast haste and you with a readied action use haste to counter my spell. End result we both lose a spell and mine never goes off.
2. I cast haste and you with a readied action use slow to counter my spell. Normally you can't use a different spell to counter a spell but slow specifically states you can use it to counter haste. End result we both lose a spell and mine never goes off.
3. I cast haste -- next round you cast slow on the same group of people. Either one of two things happen: Those people still get all the effects of haste (faster movement, bonuses and an extra attack on a full attack) but can't take a full attack due to the slow spell (which leaves them staggered) or you dispel the haste effect. Interestingly enough there are no rules currently printing for how this works! The closest we get to the meaning of this is from the magic section:
Spells with Opposite Effects
Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply. Some spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell's description.
Even that doesn't really spell out what they mean by 'dispel' in the haste and slow spell lines.
fortunately we have a slightly clearer example with the light and darkness spells.
You can:
1. Counter each with the other.
2. Bring a spell of one type into the other to negate both (with daylight) or:
3. Cast daylight to dispel darkness or similar spell.
Even here you should check each spell in the effect stack specifically because some of them interact slightly differently with each other.
Your forgetting the things that help compensate for the use of SU abilities though.
Witches have a very narrow spell list and fewer spells per day than any other full caster plus the huge weakness of a living spell book.
Alchemist have medium BAB like the druid, but they don't have the companion and have fewer abilities per day, the mutagen doesn't last as long and gives penalties too, in addition to a lower level spell list and less powerful spell list.
Witches have a very narrow spell list and fewer spells per day than any other full caster plus the huge weakness of a living spell book.
Wrong. The Witch and Wizard spells-per-day progression from level to level are the exact same.
Witches have a very narrow spell list and fewer spells per day than any other full caster plus the huge weakness of a living spell book.Wrong. The Witch and Wizard spells-per-day progression from level to level are the exact same.
Specialization, doubly so for an archetype in inner sea magic. Clerics have domain slots (which druids can have too), this leaves only sorcerers who at even levels have more slots than the wizard.