Jokem, I was not talking down to you, I had assumed you had read the thread.
Since it appears you did not I will repost the relevant quote:
Using a spell-like ability works like casting a spell in that it requires concentration and provokes attacks of opportunity.A Spell-Like Ability being a standard or move action is not relevant. A Move Action Spell-Like Ability provokes just like a Standard Action Spell-Like Ability unless there is a rule that states otherwise.
For reference, even swift action spells and spell-like abilities would provoke EXCEPT that they put this line in:
Casting a spell as a swift action doesn’t incur an attack of opportunity.You need a similar line to make move action Spells and SLAs not provoke OR wording in the ability that states that.
In short, since the action type is not relevant to whether or not SLAs provoke we have the following:
Detect Evil, used as a move action, provokes because nothing is in the rules to contradict the rule that SLAs provoke.
Dimensional Hop also provokes because nothing is in the rules to contradict the rule that SLAs provoke. It's comment about not provoking is only applicable to the movement.
You keep thinking that whether SLAs provoke has something to do with the action type. It doesn't and there is no rule stating it does (other than free/swift/immediate action spells/SLAs).
I read the CRB Page 186. Why did you leave this sentence out?
The casting time of a spell-like ability is 1 standard action unless the ability description notes otherwise.
And you did not answer my question. I assumed you read my entire post. Since it appears you did not I will repeat here.
Detect Evil (Sp): At will, a paladin can use detect evil, as the spell. A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for...
I did not 'leave it out'. I simply did not quote the non-relevant portion. I quoted the portion that is relevant to whether SLAs provoke an AoO which is the discussion here.
As for your question, I have answered it several times.
Dimensional Hop is a move action.
Paladin's Detect Evil is either a Standard Action (for the area version) or a Move Action (for the single target version).
How does this not answer your question?
|
Spell like abilities provoke, true or false?
Leaves are green, true or false?
This kind of question is inherently erroneous. While many leaves are green / many spell like abilities provoke, that is NOT always the case. Some leaves are red. Some spell like abilities do not provoke.
The wording "This teleportation must be used in 5-foot increments and such movement does not provoke attacks of opportunity." refers to the movement not the use of the ability, true or false?
Again, your question is itself erroneous.
Using the ability causes you to move. Ergo, "use of the ability" and "movement" are the same thing.
Rather, that belief is being constructed based on assumptions about how/whether text in other sections of the rules should or should not apply;
There aren't any assumptions made when an ability with (SP) is read to apply the rules about Spell-Like Abilities. Spell-Like Abilities, as with spells, provoke regardless of action, unless that action is a swift action, or the ability specifically excuses the casting from provoking. The key point is that an SLA requires actually casting it like a spell.
So the trouble here with the 'does not provoke' clause comes out of the fact that people read the ability as:
"You may move as a move action. The movement does not provoke".
However this is incorrect, since it ignores the fact that an SLA operates as a spell does, which means that it must be cast as a spell is. If we apply the fact that it must be cast, then the result is:
"You may cast this SLA as a move action, and the movement granted by casting the SLA doesn't provoke".
It's really that simple; it provokes because SLAs, by default, provoke, and nothing excuses the casting of the ability from provoking, only the movement provided by it. This is not some semantic game; this is simply applying the relevant rules regarding SLAs, and making the grammatical distinction between the action that activates it and clauses that affect the movement granted by it.
The text of the ability seems to suggest that it would operate more like a supernatural movement ability, but this simply isn't the case if it has (SP).
|
|
The text of the ability seems to suggest that it would operate more like a supernatural movement ability, but this simply isn't the case if it has (SP).
Well, at least we agree on what the text seems to suggest.
The disagreement is thus over whether the text of the specific ability takes precedence over the rules for SLAs in general. I believe it does. You apparently believe it does for the action type, but not for provoking.
The text of the ability seems to suggest that it would operate more like a supernatural movement ability, but this simply isn't the case if it has (SP).Well, at least we agree on what the text seems to suggest.
The disagreement is thus over whether the text of the specific ability takes precedence over the rules for SLAs in general. I believe it does. You apparently believe it does for the action type, but not for provoking.
The thing is, it's perfectly functional to read "you can teleport up to 10 feet per cleric level per day as a move action" in the context of it being an SLA that you must cast as a move action, after which you gain the non-provoking teleportation movement.
Generally, the most important thing when trying to understand the functioning of an ability is first to process what kind of ability it is; and if you begin by acknowledging that this is an SLA that essentially requires casting a spell, then it's difficult to end up viewing it as a pure movement thing.
Anyhow, when there's a functional way to read it that satisfies all of the rules involved, then that's how the ability functions per the rules.
Edit: And just to say, as far as action type goes, SLAs are said to be whatever action they list; it simply says that they default to a standard action if no action is listed. So a move-action SLA doesn't contradict SLA rules at all.
Whew, that is not how the rules are written.
Spell-Like Abilities (Sp): Using a spell-like ability works like casting a spell in that it requires concentration and provokes attacks of opportunity. Spell-like abilities can be disrupted. If your concentration is broken, the attempt to use the ability fails, but the attempt counts as if you had used the ability. The casting time of a spell-like ability is 1 standard action, unless the ability description notes otherwise.
No statement that it provoking is in any way linked to it's action type.
SLAs provoke AoOs...full stop. Action is IRRELEVANT unless rules state otherwise. The only rule that states otherwise is on CRB p188 regarding swift action spells.
The wording of the power does not change this since the wording is specifically addressing movement and not activation.
Standard-action SLAs provoke. Swift-Action SLAs do not. Move-action SLAs are not really addressed in the CRB. Therefore, the wording of the power takes precedence, and there is no AoO.
That's incorrect; SLAs operate as spells, and spells provoke unless they are swift actions. There is no question that a spell or SLA cast as a move action provokes. This has already been addressed here:
"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."
"Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies."
|
I don't agree with your interpretation of the rules because it contradicts the wording of the SLA description. Teleport as a move action, then it goes on to say the Teleportation does not provoke.
The movement IS the teleportation, which does not provoke according to the description of the ability.
I give up. If we cannot agree on the meaning of the words, then there is no point in continuing. I have asked Paizo to clarify this and I am done discussing it until they do.
I hand this over to Paizo.
You could try asking Mark Seifter in his thread.
His answers aren't official, but he is a member of the PDT and he often doesn't mind giving his interpretations. (Plus he's an excellent teacher and one of the most knowledgable people out there about both the rules and the philosophies behind them).
I'd predict this is unlikely to receive an FAQ in a hurry*. It doesn't really need one, in my opinion.