If an ability has a type listed (Su, Ex) but it grants abilities of a different type, what does it count as?


Rules Questions

51 to 96 of 96 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Chess Pwn wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:
Abilities type should carry forward to all of the abilities it grants unless stated otherwise. Otherwise you are just guessing.

Do you have any proof or evidence for this stance?

The evidence of my argument is that Fast healing is labeled as an EX ability, and nothing in the rules state that a magical sources causes all effects of that effect to be magical as well.

Because under this ruling the blood of dragons granting wings which grants a fly speed is magical flight since the original source was a SU ability.

So the two views are both just guessing because there's no clarifications.
View one is guessing that things are what they say they are by default unless something specific changes that.
View two is guessing that they can extrapolate the original source to all effects that it grants.

To me the first is following the principle that unless it says you can, you can't. Unless it says that the fast healing is magical it isn't, it's the default.
And to me the second just sounds like wishful thinking that doesn't have any support to back it (hence the request for some if there is that I'm unaware of).

But we can't PROVE either is correct because we don't have enough rules/clarifications to do so.

I'm relying on the principle of specific over general and that an ability is labelled correctly.

Also logic - it requires quite a leap of faith to say that a magically granted ability is not magical.
*shrugs*


dragonhunterq wrote:


I'm relying on the principle of specific over general and that an ability is labelled correctly.

The issue with that is there is NO specific rule that unlabeled abilities granted by an ability gain it's type of ability. And we have instances of abilities that don't do what you say. For instance, the spell recharge Innate Magic lets you regain used of racial SLA's: just because it's a spell granting it doesn't turn those SLA's into spells.

dragonhunterq wrote:
Also logic - it requires quite a leap of faith to say that a magically granted ability is not magical.

The other way take a leap of faith to say that abilities gained by form, like wings, fins, natural attacks, land speed, scent, low light, darkvision, natural armor, stat buffs, ect are magic abilities and not mundane abilities when gained from a spell/Su/SLA. I know which one makes more sense to me... *shrug* I don't see druid's claws bypassing magic DR but that's just me...

Silver Crusade

graystone wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The wings may do mundane things but they are magic and get stopped by things that stop magic.

The transformation is stopped by magic, not the wings. I cast a spell and gain the alertness feat, the feat doesn't become magic: it's still an Ex ability.

Lets ask this way: if I use a spell/SLA to change shape and gain wings, can someone dispel JUST my wings as, by your suggestion, those wings are a spell/SLA and not mundane abilities?

Can you do targeted dispels like that?

Silver Crusade

Chess Pwn wrote:
But we can't PROVE either is correct because we don't have enough rules/clarifications to do so.

Clicky. The. FAQ.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:
Abilities type should carry forward to all of the abilities it grants unless stated otherwise. Otherwise you are just guessing.

Do you have any proof or evidence for this stance?

The evidence of my argument is that Fast healing is labeled as an EX ability, and nothing in the rules state that a magical sources causes all effects of that effect to be magical as well.

So infernal healing grants the [Ex] fast healing and therefore is not magical? As such it cannot be dispelled via dispel magic even though it has a duration?

The baseline for PF (and D&D) has always been specific trumps general. If a specific ability states something other than the general ability then the specific takes precedent.

Silver Crusade

graystone wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:


I'm relying on the principle of specific over general and that an ability is labelled correctly.

The issue with that is there is NO specific rule that unlabeled abilities granted by an ability gain it's type of ability. And we have instances of abilities that don't do what you say. For instance, the spell recharge Innate Magic lets you regain used of racial SLA's: just because it's a spell granting it doesn't turn those SLA's into spells.

dragonhunterq wrote:
Also logic - it requires quite a leap of faith to say that a magically granted ability is not magical.
The other way take a leap of faith to say that abilities gained by form, like wings, fins, natural attacks, land speed, scent, low light, darkvision, natural armor, stat buffs, ect are magic abilities and not mundane abilities when gained from a spell/Su/SLA. I know which one makes more sense to me... *shrug* I don't see druid's claws bypassing magic DR but that's just me...

Being magic and overcoming DR/Magic aren’t necessarily the same thing.

The Abundant Ammunition spell conjures ammo but doesn’t mention anything about overcoming DR/Magic but that it can be enhanced further through spells like Magic Weapon. Likewise summoned creatures’ Natural Attacks don’t automatically bypass DR/Magic either.


Rysky wrote:
graystone wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The wings may do mundane things but they are magic and get stopped by things that stop magic.

The transformation is stopped by magic, not the wings. I cast a spell and gain the alertness feat, the feat doesn't become magic: it's still an Ex ability.

Lets ask this way: if I use a spell/SLA to change shape and gain wings, can someone dispel JUST my wings as, by your suggestion, those wings are a spell/SLA and not mundane abilities?

Can you do targeted dispels like that?

It's it's own distinct ability right? Not one JUST from form?

"You can also use a targeted dispel to specifically end one spell affecting the target or one spell affecting an area".

"Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic."

If wings is it's own distinct ability with it's own type [Su/Sla/Ex/spell], they it can be targeted by dispel. If it's part of your form and Ex [not Sla/spell/Su] then no, you can dispel it.

zylphryx: "So infernal healing grants the [Ex] fast healing and therefore is not magical? As such it cannot be dispelled via dispel magic even though it has a duration?": No, you can dispel the spell that grants fast healing. Think of it as magic the moves time forward a day to get your daily hp healing for the day. It's a magic effect that gets you non-magic healing.

"specific trumps general": Please show the rule that abilities that grant other ability, by default, transfer the 1st abilities type to the second. If you can't, there isn't a "specific" to trump anything.


Rysky wrote:
graystone wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:


I'm relying on the principle of specific over general and that an ability is labelled correctly.

The issue with that is there is NO specific rule that unlabeled abilities granted by an ability gain it's type of ability. And we have instances of abilities that don't do what you say. For instance, the spell recharge Innate Magic lets you regain used of racial SLA's: just because it's a spell granting it doesn't turn those SLA's into spells.

dragonhunterq wrote:
Also logic - it requires quite a leap of faith to say that a magically granted ability is not magical.
The other way take a leap of faith to say that abilities gained by form, like wings, fins, natural attacks, land speed, scent, low light, darkvision, natural armor, stat buffs, ect are magic abilities and not mundane abilities when gained from a spell/Su/SLA. I know which one makes more sense to me... *shrug* I don't see druid's claws bypassing magic DR but that's just me...

Being magic and overcoming DR/Magic aren’t necessarily the same thing.

The Abundant Ammunition spell conjures ammo but doesn’t mention anything about overcoming DR/Magic but that it can be enhanced further through spells like Magic Weapon. Likewise summoned creatures’ Natural Attacks don’t automatically bypass DR/Magic either.

SO you're saying that something created/granted by magic DOESN'T make it magic? That's almost like saying that wings granted by a spell aren't magic...

Silver Crusade

graystone wrote:
Rysky wrote:
graystone wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:


I'm relying on the principle of specific over general and that an ability is labelled correctly.

The issue with that is there is NO specific rule that unlabeled abilities granted by an ability gain it's type of ability. And we have instances of abilities that don't do what you say. For instance, the spell recharge Innate Magic lets you regain used of racial SLA's: just because it's a spell granting it doesn't turn those SLA's into spells.

dragonhunterq wrote:
Also logic - it requires quite a leap of faith to say that a magically granted ability is not magical.
The other way take a leap of faith to say that abilities gained by form, like wings, fins, natural attacks, land speed, scent, low light, darkvision, natural armor, stat buffs, ect are magic abilities and not mundane abilities when gained from a spell/Su/SLA. I know which one makes more sense to me... *shrug* I don't see druid's claws bypassing magic DR but that's just me...

Being magic and overcoming DR/Magic aren’t necessarily the same thing.

The Abundant Ammunition spell conjures ammo but doesn’t mention anything about overcoming DR/Magic but that it can be enhanced further through spells like Magic Weapon. Likewise summoned creatures’ Natural Attacks don’t automatically bypass DR/Magic either.

SO you're saying that something created/granted by magic DOESN'T make it magic? That's almost like saying that wings granted by a spell aren't magic...

I literally said the opposite, it was the first line.

Silver Crusade

graystone wrote:
Rysky wrote:
graystone wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The wings may do mundane things but they are magic and get stopped by things that stop magic.

The transformation is stopped by magic, not the wings. I cast a spell and gain the alertness feat, the feat doesn't become magic: it's still an Ex ability.

Lets ask this way: if I use a spell/SLA to change shape and gain wings, can someone dispel JUST my wings as, by your suggestion, those wings are a spell/SLA and not mundane abilities?

Can you do targeted dispels like that?

It's it's own distinct ability right? Not one JUST from form?

"You can also use a targeted dispel to specifically end one spell affecting the target or one spell affecting an area".

"Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic."

If wings is it's own distinct ability with it's own type [Su/Sla/Ex/spell], they it can be targeted by dispel. If it's part of your form and Ex [not Sla/spell/Su] then no, you can dispel it.

zylphryx: "So infernal healing grants the [Ex] fast healing and therefore is not magical? As such it cannot be dispelled via dispel magic even though it has a duration?": No, you can dispel the spell that grants fast healing. Think of it as magic the moves time forward a day to get your daily hp healing for the day. It's a magic effect that gets you non-magic healing.

"specific trumps general": Please show the rule that abilities that grant other ability, by default, transfer the 1st abilities type to the second. If you can't, there isn't a "specific" to trump anything.

Ah, okay, you can target by spell, you can’t target specific parts of a spell (you also can’t dispel Su effects), if someone cast Beast Shape to grow wings, or if say the Draconic Wings Bloodline Ability was a SLA you could dispel it.

In regards to your response to zylphryx, there’s also not a rule that the abitlies don’t transfer type, whereas the existence of abitlies of one type that grants another ability that’s usually another type lends credence to our position.


It’s not intuitive, but if you polymorph into a bird, you don’t actually use your wings to fly. You take the shape of a bird and gain a flight speed, because the magic enables you to fly. It’s just like when you polymorph into a dolphin and you can breath underwater, even though that’s not an ability of an actual dolphin.


I skipped a lot of post so someone may have already stated this.

If your normally EX ability is granted by an SU ability then you do not have the Ex ability.

Wings Example: If you get wings it does not grant you magical flight. It means the thing that gave the wings is magical. If you go into an antimagic field your wings go away since they came from a magical source therefore you don't get flight.

Fast Healing Example: If something magical gave you fast healing and that SU ability is removed then you don't fast healing because the source of the fast healing is taken away.
In other words you only have fast healing for as long as you have __. If ___ is gone then there is no way for you to have fast healing.


Its a bit tricky.

Conjuration spells that have instantaneous duration work in an antimagic. So do some healing effects.

If an effect is kept in place by magic, it is shut down by magic. So for example, if you summon a creature, it is surpressed while in AMF.


Perfect Tommy wrote:

Its a bit tricky.

Conjuration spells that have instantaneous duration work in an antimagic. So do some healing effects.

If an effect is kept in place by magic, it is shut down by magic. So for example, if you summon a creature, it is surpressed while in AMF.

They seem to be talking about things that modify someone. Conjuration tends to teleport things or create things, not modify the subject to give them abilities. Those are more along the lines of the Transmutation(Polymorph) school when using spells.


True. But suppose you polymorphed any object a manticore into a shrew.

Wouldn't you say that if the change were permanent... that this would not be affected by dispel, for example?

Back to the original example.
Suppose there were a spell: detect EX ability.

Would it or would it not detect fast healing conveyed by a wand?


It would be affected by dispel magic. Even permanent spell durations can be dispelled.

As for your hypothetical question I will have to give more than a yes or no answer.

Let say "Super Healer(not a real ability) granted fast healing, and let's say there was a spell called Detect Fast Healing.

Yes the spell(detect fast healing) would work for as long as the fast healing was in play, but if the creature with "Super Healer" walked into an Antimagic Field or if the ability was shutoff by an opponent, then the fast healing would no longer be there so there would be nothing for Detect Fast Healing to detect.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
zylphryx wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:
Abilities type should carry forward to all of the abilities it grants unless stated otherwise. Otherwise you are just guessing.

Do you have any proof or evidence for this stance?

The evidence of my argument is that Fast healing is labeled as an EX ability, and nothing in the rules state that a magical sources causes all effects of that effect to be magical as well.

So infernal healing grants the [Ex] fast healing and therefore is not magical? As such it cannot be dispelled via dispel magic even though it has a duration?

The baseline for PF (and D&D) has always been specific trumps general. If a specific ability states something other than the general ability then the specific takes precedent.

Infernal healing is granting fasting healing, the spell is there the entire time granting fast healing, if it goes away your fast healing goes away because you have nothing giving you fast healing.

It's like using bulls strength to lift something to heavy for you. You can't dispel the lifting to make them drop it, that's just EX stuff at work, but you can dispel the spell that is giving them the strength to lift.


We have 31 FAQ tags. Those are rookie numbers. Let's get the numbers up so we can get an official FaQ so we can all put this to rest.

As much as I am in the Camp it is an SU ability after years of Debate I'm fine with either way they would bring down an official ruling. I just want to see them actually FAQ this.

So point all your friends here, Recruit people to FAQ tag this thread. Whatever it takes at this point.


wraithstrike wrote:

It would be affected by dispel magic. Even permanent spell durations can be dispelled.

As for your hypothetical question I will have to give more than a yes or no answer.

Let say "Super Healer(not a real ability) granted fast healing, and let's say there was a spell called Detect Fast Healing.

Yes the spell(detect fast healing) would work for as long as the fast healing was in play, but if the creature with "Super Healer" walked into an Antimagic Field or if the ability was shutoff by an opponent, then the fast healing would no longer be there so there would be nothing for Detect Fast Healing to detect.

My question wasn't if there were a spell "detect fast healing". It was if there was an spell or ability detect EX.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Perfect Tommy wrote:
My question wasn't if there were a spell "detect fast healing". It was if there was an spell or ability detect EX.

Your question is moot, since your spell "Detect EX" is a spell and therefore won't work when you look into the AMF.

Anyway, their answer will be yes, it will detect any form of fast healing conveyed by any spell or ability because there are two camps in this argument.

One group views the rules very logically and they are technically correct, the best kind of correct. Fast Healing is an Ex ability and it is being granted by an Su ability, and so it doesn't trigger the Fast Healer feat.

The second group are a bit more laissez-faire with how they apply the rules, and technically they are wrong. However, if Regeneration and Infernal Healing stopping bleed damage is wrong, hey, I don't wanna be right!


Perfect Tommy wrote:


Back to the original example.
Suppose there were a spell: detect EX ability.

Would it or would it not detect fast healing conveyed by a wand?

That I don't know.

I really think it would depend on the specific situation. Just because something is normally an EX that doesn't mean the PDT would not say that since it is granted by an magic that it now counts as magic.

In any event it would only be detected for as long as the magic was active because once the magic is shutdown so is the EX thing that comes with it.

However the magical spell or SU that granted the EX would definitely be picked up by detect magic.

With that being said the original ability counts as whatever it is listed as, even if the benefit is an EX ability.

An SU is magical, otherwise it is not an SU, and there is no reason to label it as an SU.


As the ability Blood of Life sparked this debate I'd like to add something to think about. I'm sure both camps will use this to their advantage but it may sway some. The real question here is what is the trigger for each part of what's going on. Some people say the magic is still there when the healing occurs so F.Healer must be triggered. Others say the magic causes a non magical effect to happen so there is no explicit magical healing trigger. When do you think the effect of Fast Healer (or any other case like this) is triggered?

As the camp I'm in. It's plain to see Fast Healer is trying to cast a wide net for the instances that trigger it. It basically should be read any magical or non magical healing triggers it. It's base description contradicts its 'Benefit' which lead to much confusion.

Fast Healer is a feat requiring 2 other feats. So its 3 feat slots and minimum 5th level to attain. To be nested that far down, it's logical to make it an impressive feat. Considering that most characters will only have a boost of 2 or 3 points of healing by burning 3 feats and additional nerfs would not be very balanced at all to not effect BoF. It doesn't improve with levels so without a specific build the feat will see diminishing returns and by 20th level probably be very under powered. Fast Healer should reward people willing to take Endurance and Diehard in order to get it and especially reward those building a theme around it, like a bloodraging warrior who heals mid combat instead of just shrugging off damage.

Here are the abilities in question for quick reference:
Fast Healer
You benefit greatly from your healing, be it from spells or natural healing.
Prerequisites: Con 13, Diehard, Endurance.
Benefit: When you regain hit points by resting or through magical healing, you recover additional hit points equal to half your Constitution modifier (minimum +1).

Blood of Life (Su)
A spelleater’s blood empowers him to slowly recover from his wounds. At 2nd level, while bloodraging a spelleater gains fast healing 1. At 7th level and every 3 levels thereafter, this increases by 1 (to a maximum of fast healing 6 at 19th level). If the spelleater gains an increase to damage reduction from a bloodline, feat, or other ability, he is considered to have an effective damage reduction of 0, and the increase is added to this effective damage reduction.
This ability replaces uncanny dodge and damage reduction.

Fast Healing (Ex)
A creature with the fast healing special quality regains hit points at an exceptional rate, usually 1 or more hit points per round, as given in the creature’s entry. Except where noted here, fast healing is just like natural healing. Fast healing does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation, nor does it allow a creature to regrow lost body parts. Unless otherwise stated, it does not allow lost body parts to be reattached. Fast healing continues to function (even at negative hit points) until a creature dies, at which point the effects of fast healing end immediately.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Roots Akrasia wrote:
I'm sure both camps

When I said there were two camps, I kind of lied, I suspect there's two camps, each filled with two separate groups who are actually having two separate arguments, and you need to decide which argument you're addressing.

In camp "it doesn't work", we have team "rules consistency", who are arguing that it doesn't work because the rules should be logically consistent, and there should be no ambiguity and interpretation that can cause table variation, and all that bad juju. I have some sympathy for that position.

They are arguing with team "verisimilitude" over in camp "it does too work", who are offended by the idea that stuff that, ignoring the minutiae of the rules, comes from a magic spell, looks like magical healing and quacks like magical healing, and yet is somehow not magical healing via a technicality that was probably never considered by the writers of the feats in question in the first place. I'm in this camp, because I prefer my regeneration to stop bleeding, and for healing caused by casting spells on people to be considered magical.

In camp "it doesn't work" I suspect we also have team "This is OP cheese" who think that having fast healing 6 by spending all your feats and concentrating solely on boosting your constitution at the expense of most of your offensive and other defensive capabilities is somehow going to stop you dying rather than prolonging combat for 1 additional round at best. They are opposed by team "I want to do cool stuff" or something.

I have no patience for team "OP cheese" because it's clearly worse in combat healing than just being a Paladin with Fey Foundling, for way more investment, and you can't stop it by denying it from working with fast healing anyway. My level 13 Figment Chicken familiar is going to sit in my familiar satchel and peck me with the Sacrifice evolution for 1 point of SU based healing every round which it definitely works with, and I'll get my Blood of Life healing on top of that too.

People may well be in two teams simultaneously, and arguing one argument motivated by their feelings about the other. Just be aware that when you start talking about how many feats it costs, and how much you can reasonably expect to heal per round, you're having this second argument and not the first, and the first argument is the only one that really counts, because its outcome will invalidate the second one anyway (without errata at least).


I think the total cover provided by your chicken sack would prevent your imaginary pecker from effecting you, or anyone else.


toastedamphibian wrote:
I think the total cover provided by your chicken sack would prevent your imaginary pecker from effecting you, or anyone else.

Step One - cut a hole in the sack.

"It's my chick in a sack!"


vagabond_666 wrote:
Roots Akrasia wrote:
I'm sure both camps

When I said there were two camps, I kind of lied, I suspect there's two camps, each filled with two separate groups who are actually having two separate arguments, and you need to decide which argument you're addressing.

In camp "it doesn't work", we have team "rules consistency", who are arguing that it doesn't work because the rules should be logically consistent, and there should be no ambiguity and interpretation that can cause table variation, and all that bad juju. I have some sympathy for that position.

They are arguing with team "verisimilitude" over in camp "it does too work", who are offended by the idea that stuff that, ignoring the minutiae of the rules, comes from a magic spell, looks like magical healing and quacks like magical healing, and yet is somehow not magical healing via a technicality that was probably never considered by the writers of the feats in question in the first place. I'm in this camp, because I prefer my regeneration to stop bleeding, and for healing caused by casting spells on people to be considered magical.

In camp "it doesn't work" I suspect we also have team "This is OP cheese" who think that having fast healing 6 by spending all your feats and concentrating solely on boosting your constitution at the expense of most of your offensive and other defensive capabilities is somehow going to stop you dying rather than prolonging combat for 1 additional round at best. They are opposed by team "I want to do cool stuff" or something.

I have no patience for team "OP cheese" because it's clearly worse in combat healing than just being a Paladin with Fey Foundling, for way more investment, and you can't stop it by denying it from working with fast healing anyway. My level 13 Figment Chicken familiar is going to sit in my familiar satchel and peck me with the Sacrifice evolution for 1 point of SU based healing every round which it definitely works with, and I'll get my Blood of Life healing on top of that too....

The Figment Chicken solves all problems :)

As for the body of the post, there are a couple of things that need some rule clarity here. The reason I said 2 camps are that most of the arguments are for a ability/feat combo that's not OP at as you pointed out. There a few boards dedicated to the "Does Fast Healer trigger BoF". The main problem is Fast Healer has ambiguous wording and really needs to be clarified. On one such thread a bigger problem of ability type and stacking/converting came up. Thus there are 2 potential fixes needed here. Clarify what Fast Healer does and exactly when it triggers (as it was the root of all this debate) and figure out why it does what it does when clarified.

I see 2 approaches to FH. #1 Make it work for all types of healing. #2 Clearly specify all the types of healing that triggers it. As for the main issue it's either yes or no.
So for all the people who want the combo I see 2 ways this happens. FH works for all healing so any way the other issue goes the combo works. # The specify only certain types of effects work (eg. SU and Rest) and the EX to SU is approved.


Roots Akrasia wrote:

As the ability Blood of Life sparked this debate I'd like to add something to think about. I'm sure both camps will use this to their advantage but it may sway some. The real question here is what is the trigger for each part of what's going on. Some people say the magic is still there when the healing occurs so F.Healer must be triggered. Others say the magic causes a non magical effect to happen so there is no explicit magical healing trigger. When do you think the effect of Fast Healer (or any other case like this) is triggered?

As the camp I'm in. It's plain to see Fast Healer is trying to cast a wide net for the instances that trigger it. It basically should be read any magical or non magical healing triggers it. It's base description contradicts its 'Benefit' which lead to much confusion.

Fast Healer is a feat requiring 2 other feats. So its 3 feat slots and minimum 5th level to attain. To be nested that far down, it's logical to make it an impressive feat. Considering that most characters will only have a boost of 2 or 3 points of healing by burning 3 feats and additional nerfs would not be very balanced at all to not effect BoF. It doesn't improve with levels so without a specific build the feat will see diminishing returns and by 20th level probably be very under powered. Fast Healer should reward people willing to take Endurance and Diehard in order to get it and especially reward those building a theme around it, like a bloodraging warrior who heals mid combat instead of just shrugging off damage.

If the fast healing came from a spell I could call it magical healing so I would say that Blood of Life qualifies to activate the feat. I don't see this as an issue of balance so it seems like a non-issue to me.

I understand that for someone in PFS it is more serious.


I think people are reading too much into this. The Bloodline (SU) grants abilities includes an EX ability, fast healing. If the source of the EX is magic and that magic is snuffed out, the abilities it grants are snuffed out. That's the anti-magic field effect. But the reason for the distinction is more for really odd occurrences to give a guideline for adjudication.

Say you were in a repressed magic area, where any SP/SU ability running has to make a level check to remain running while in the suppression area. If the Bloodline (SU) fails this check, everything it provides would stop functioning, but if the Bloodline check succeeds you do not have to check the EX abilities attached to see if the are suppressed individually, but likely would for added effects of a SP/SU nature.

It's a nearly trivial distinction, but for super-weird circumstances, it allows the GM to understand the magic is giving an EX effect.

In another example, a shapeshifted flyer enters an area where all forms of SP/SU flying is negated. Well, that area does not negate shapechanging, so the EX flight granted by being a bird works, while the mage under a Fly spell crashes.


By the way, theres been a lot of comment that this isn't OP.

That's not necessarily so. Seems to me that this thing could take all manner of DR - from sources that do not stack - and translate it into stacking Fast healing.

It would take very careful building - but I think with care it could be quite strong.

Silver Crusade

Perfect Tommy wrote:

By the way, theres been a lot of comment that this isn't OP.

That's not necessarily so. Seems to me that this thing could take all manner of DR - from sources that do not stack - and translate it into stacking Fast healing.

It would take very careful building - but I think with care it could be quite strong.

?

No. Blood of Life doesn’t convert any additional DR into Fast Healing.


Oh? Why do you say that?

Quote:


Blood of Life (Su)
A spelleater’s blood empowers him to slowly recover from his wounds. At 2nd level, while bloodraging a spelleater gains fast healing 1. At 7th level and every 3 levels thereafter, this increases by 1 (to a maximum of fast healing 6 at 19th level). If the spelleater gains an increase to damage reduction from a bloodline, feat, or other ability, he is considered to have an effective damage reduction of 0, and the increase is added to this effective damage reduction.
This ability replaces uncanny dodge and damage reduction.

Silver Crusade

It says exactly what it says. If you gain DR from somewhere else you now have DR, it doesn’t get converted into Fast Healing.


2bz2p wrote:
but for super-weird circumstances

Stopping bleed damage isn’t super weird and is one of the sorts of thing that is impacted by this whole “is it magical or not, is it an effect of the spell or a side effect of the effect of the spell?” debate that is going on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
It says exactly what it says. If you gain DR from somewhere else you now have DR, it doesn’t get converted into Fast Healing.

Yeah, I have to say that the Blood of Life's comment on DR is just about how to define what the bloodrager's DR effectively is and how it interacts with things that would normally increase it since Blood of Life replaces DR as a class feature. Instead of gimping the spell/feat/what-have-you by implying they have no effect since the spelleater bloodrager really doesn't have DR, it gives them their full measure of power by defining the spelleater's DR as 0.


Rysky wrote:
It says exactly what it says. If you gain DR from somewhere else you now have DR, it doesn’t get converted into Fast Healing.

It’s an easy mistake to make. But yeah. It basically just means you count as having DR 0 for effects that increase your DR.

Silver Crusade

*nods*


Man. What a brainfart. Apologies. No idea how I read that wrong, twice.

Silver Crusade

Ish okay, no worries :3


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bumpadie

LIke serious, this is worth an FAQ. Not just for Blood of Life. I have seen people trying to do Multiclassing with Skald's Vigor as well which would fall under the exact same ruling and interpretation.

Paizo...Can we get a FAQ...like serious this would take you guys all of a few days to conclude and make it official.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

Considering they only allocate 1 hr a week, and not every week. That is 8 to 20 weeks to get this out as an official FAQ. So we could answer 1 to 2 FAQ a year at that rate.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's a floor wax and a dessert topping!


Sorry to zombie this thread but after reading through all this I was wondering:

1) What are the stakes? That is to say, why does it matter if it is Su or Ex?

2) Did this ever get resolved?

Liberty's Edge

Chrion wrote:

Sorry to zombie this thread but after reading through all this I was wondering:

1) What are the stakes? That is to say, why does it matter if it is Su or Ex?

Antimagic field primarily, I think. A SU ability doesn't work in it.

Chrion wrote:


2) Did this ever get resolved?

No FAQ was issued, AFAIK, but I don't see the need for one. If the starting ability is SU and it doesn't work, you can't use the EX ability that depends on it.


Diego Rossi wrote:


Antimagic field primarily, I think. A SU ability doesn't work in it.

Could that really be it? The original thread was active for like a year and a half. How often do people run into antimagic fields? I could probably count the times on one hand in my playing/DMing experience.

Liberty's Edge

Chrion wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:


Antimagic field primarily, I think. A SU ability doesn't work in it.
Could that really be it? The original thread was active for like a year and a half. How often do people run into antimagic fields? I could probably count the times on one hand in my playing/DMing experience.

As one of those that are still following the Pathfinder 1 forum, I can say that we are well capable to discuss stuff for months when we all agree that the intended mechanics is something, but the rule text can read another way. So this kind of discussion isn't strange.

Another reason for the discussion can be that some races and classes have a bonus to save against SU abilities. So, if someone in the group plays any of those it matters.

Silver Crusade

Oh wow one of mine got necroed.

Looking at the original post if I were to guess I think it had to do with interactions regarding abilities enhancing other Su or Ex abilities, “X boosts Y, but Y is W now, does it still get boosted?”. Can’t remember what it was though.

51 to 96 of 96 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / If an ability has a type listed (Su, Ex) but it grants abilities of a different type, what does it count as? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.