Does Mind Blank works against SLA?
I have read something about it, but there are not clear answers and the discussions didnt' get to a shared conclusion.
The spell speak of "devices and spells" and not of SLA. Btw also other spells, as dispel magic, speak only of spells and not of SLA.
SLA definition states also that apart from component/counter exceptions they function like spells. But in the same definition it's written also that SLA con be dispelled by Dispel spells, so the previous point it's no more so valid.
Any other hint? Any official answer I missed somewhere?
Mind Blank text:
The subject is protected from all devices and spells that gather information about the target through divination magic (such as detect evil, locate creature, scry, and see invisible). This spell also grants a +8 resistance bonus on saving throws against all mind-affecting spells and effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to gain information about the target. In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn’t detected. Scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at the subject do not work at all.
SLA definition:
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 activates it mentally. 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.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well it's going to depend on the SLA but yes in general if the SLA is mimicking a spell which would be effected by Mind Blank then yes it will work against the SLA.
Pretty much sums it up in the first line you quoted above in the SLA definition: "Usually a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name." The specific things that make it different are then listed (and therefore not covered by 'usually') such as lack of V,S,M or Focus components etc..
The part about devices I've always taken to mean devices such as Crystal Balls. The more current term would be 'item' as in magic item.
Consider the potency of Mind Blank (nerfed in many respects compared to the older versions) that it will even stop Limited Wish, Miracle and Wish how would a device or SLA causing the same effect as the spell bypass Mind Blank and work when a Wish wouldn't? Thinking otherwise is probably a case of over thinking it.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The spell speak of "devices and spells" and not of SLA. Btw also other spells, as dispel magic, speak only of spells and not of SLA.SLA definition states also that apart from component/counter exceptions they function like spells. But in the same definition it's written also that SLA con be dispelled by Dispel spells, so the previous point it's no more so valid.
You really think that Dispel magic works only on spells because its description in the CRB doesn't cite Spell-like abilities?
SLA aren't cited in Dispel magic because it is the Core Rulebook and the rules are those for humans and demi-humans, that normally don't have SLA.Then, in the same book, there is a section about SLA where it specifies the rules about SLA, and there it says that they can be dispelled.
It is very simple: how Dispel magic work with SLA is in the specific section about SLA, not in the general rule.
You are trying to infer a rule that goes against what is written by an absence that is there simply to reduce the word count.
"Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name." and the specific exceptions about that is all you need to know. If there isn't a specific exception, it works exactly like a spell.