Glorious Heat and Fire Bolt (fire domain)?

[soulnova]

Can I use Glorious Heat with Fire Bolt as a spell-like ability? If so what would the spell level be for it?

Mainly because of this:

Fire Bolt (Sp): As a standard action, you can unleash a scorching bolt of divine fire from your outstretched hand. You can target any single foe within 30 feet as a ranged touch attack with this bolt of fire. If you hit the foe, the fire bolt deals 1d6 points of fire damage + 1 point for every two cleric levels you possess. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

Spell-Like Abilities (Sp) Spell-like abilities, as the name implies, are magical abilities that are very much like spells.

Glorious Heat
When you cast a divine spell with the [fire] descriptor, choose a single ally within 30 feet that you can see. That ally heals a number of hit points equal to the level of the spell cast and gains a +1 morale bonus on attack rolls until the end of its next turn.

[AwesomenessDog]

Spell-like abilities are not spells, they also don't have things like the fire descriptor when they aren't replicating a spell that has a fire descriptor.

(Also technically spells that classes cast are more akin to recreations of actual spell-like abilities which are the real magic, than the other way around.)

[Azothath]

soulnova wrote:

Can I use Glorious Heat feat with Fire Bolt domain power as a spell-like ability?... {edit}

no

The game draws a distinction between casting spells, spell-like abilities(Sp & SLAs), and supernatural abilities(Su).
Glorious Heat only works with cast spells that have a [fire] descriptor. For divine caster's that's a short list.

Personally I'd take a different feat that would see more use and thus be more effective. Reach, Persistent, or Bouncing Metamagic feats or Extra Channel.

[Derklord]

soulnova wrote:

Glorious Heat

When you cast a divine spell with the [fire] descriptor, choose a single ally within 30 feet that you can see. That ally heals a number of hit points equal to the level of the spell cast and gains a +1 morale bonus on attack rolls until the end of its next turn.

Unless you're playing in PFS or are explicitly using all PFS rules, that is not the text of the feat. The actual Glorious Heat feat heals "a number of hit points equal to half your level". Which means you can simply spam the Spark orison.

And not that it helps here, but:

soulnova wrote:

If so what would the spell level be for it?

"The effective spell level for these spell-like abilities is equal to the highest-level spell that a character of that class could normally cast at the level the ability is gained." As a domain power gained at 1st level, it counts as a 1st level spell.

To what level SLAs count as spells is very vague, but in this case irrelevant as the domain power has no descriptor.

[Azothath]

I agree that Spark:K0 spell will work (some reason it didn't pop up in the lousy search engine on AoN using fire & cleric|divine). Just remember you will light a candle (waste an action) and heal an ally a few HPs. It should statistically surpass Cure Light Wounds:C1 past 20th level (LoL). The actual benefit is a few HPs healing at range which can be life saving (equivalent to Reach Metamagic). Still, it's likely just to get someone killed as it doesn't do enough (aka next round the foe attacks your mortally wounded ally).
I'd also agree that you could sit there and do it again and again out of combat... your GM may tire of this abuse (Game Balance issue) and have an agent of Sarenrae call upon you for this peccadillo. Your best bet is to tithe well and often.
There really isn't any question that (Sp) is not casting a spell. See the link above in my first post. This decision was done to prevent early entry into Prestige Classes and stop some minor abuses. Fans of Mystic Theurge are still howling.

[AwesomenessDog]

I mean you're missing the "out of combat" healing part of this that makes it absurdly broken (and why it was errata'd at least for PFS): it's literally free healing as long as you can find some kindling to sacrifice or at least have a party member on hand to keep snuffing out the sacrificial handkerchief. It's not meant to replace the Heal spell for in combat healing utility, it's meant to replace even having to spend a small amount of gold and attention on wands to heal between fights.

[Derklord]

AwesomenessDog wrote:

I mean you're missing the "out of combat" healing part of this that makes it absurdly broken (and why it was errata'd at least for PFS): it's literally free healing as long as you can find some kindling to sacrifice or at least have a party member on hand to keep snuffing out the sacrificial handkerchief.

It's not free, it costs a feat. That is a resource invested. Item creation feats save way more wealth than what you save in healing wands (or the boots) with Glorious Heat, so you shouldn't even think about banning/nerfing the latter if you allow the former.

But even if you don't allow magic item creation, the cost of outfight healing just isn't that great. Boots of the Earth ara a one-time ivnestment that makes healing free from then on, and very rarely are all daily spell slots (and other daily-use abilities like Channel Energy or Spell Recall) used.

You said it, it's at best "a small amount of gold and attention on wands to heal between fights", removing that doesn't break the game unless your campaign is super thrifty or hardcore gritty survival.
­

Azothath wrote:

There really isn't any question that (Sp) is not casting a spell.

"Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. [...] 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." (CRB pg. 221)

SLAs also defintive count as spells for things that ask for specific spells, like magic item creation requirements, feat requirements, and the effects of Augment Summoning.

There is no one-size-fits-all answer to whether an SLA counts as a spell.

[AwesomenessDog]

Derklord wrote:

AwesomenessDog wrote:

I mean you're missing the "out of combat" healing part of this that makes it absurdly broken (and why it was errata'd at least for PFS): it's literally free healing as long as you can find some kindling to sacrifice or at least have a party member on hand to keep snuffing out the sacrificial handkerchief.

It's not free, it costs a feat. That is a resource invested. Item creation feats save way more wealth than what you save in healing wands (or the boots) with Glorious Heat, so you shouldn't even think about banning/nerfing the latter if you allow the former.

But even if you don't allow magic item creation, the cost of outfight healing just isn't that great. Boots of the Earth ara a one-time ivnestment that makes healing free from then on, and very rarely are all daily spell slots (and other daily-use abilities like Channel Energy or Spell Recall) used.

You said it, it's at best "a small amount of gold and attention on wands to heal between fights", removing that doesn't break the game unless your campaign is super thrifty or hardcore gritty survival.­

Very many people don't allow Item Creation (short of the ones baked into the class like alchemist or wizard, or even just the weapons/armor/wonderous/rings/etc.). The boots were also errata'd for PFS so that the healing is *very* limited and many people also outright ban it as well in their home games for the same reasons. This isn't an attempt to reopen the "being able to even cheaply heal messes heavily with game design" argument that has gone on in each of these threads, but the argument's existence and prevalence should be enough to indicate that many people don't want to promote a free or even cheap healing is everywhere game.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

You realise that infinite out-of-combat healing in PF1 is a matter of being able to afford enough wands of cure light wounds, right? It's effectively free/cheap healing from mid-levels on.

[AwesomenessDog]

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

You realise that infinite out-of-combat healing in PF1 is a matter of being able to afford enough wands of cure light wounds, right? It's effectively free/cheap healing from mid-levels on.

You realize not every settlement your players stumble across are going to have a stockpile of 5 fully charged CLW wands, let alone be willing to sell them from the church-bound cleric who made it in case of an emergency's stock? You realize not every adventure even sees a party by a major settlement more than maybe once when they start and *leave* said settlement? You realize even if the math was technically always there, it most likely wasn't the game's (designer's) intent that its always more cost effective to just sell a Cure Moderate/Serious/Critical wand you would find in loot for ~3/5/7 times more effective healing per gp, likely for the above reason.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

AwesomenessDog wrote:

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

You realise that infinite out-of-combat healing in PF1 is a matter of being able to afford enough wands of cure light wounds, right? It's effectively free/cheap healing from mid-levels on.

You realize not every settlement your players stumble across are going to have a stockpile of 5 fully charged CLW wands, let alone be willing to sell them from the church-bound cleric who made it in case of an emergency's stock? You realize not every adventure even sees a party by a major settlement more than maybe once when they start and *leave* said settlement? You realize even if the math was technically always there, it most likely wasn't the game's (designer's) intent that its always more cost effective to just sell a Cure Moderate/Serious/Critical wand you would find in loot for ~3/5/7 times more effective healing per gp, likely for the above reason.

I realise that, it's called "games with GMs who either don't understand how PF1 works or understand it but think that downtime due to lack of healing midway through the dungeon is a fun thing". In either case, I don't join games with such people, a waste of time.

[Azothath]

Derklord wrote:

Azothath wrote:

There really isn't any question that (Sp) is not casting a spell.

"Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. [...] 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." (CRB pg. 221)

SLAs also defintive count as spells for things that ask for specific spells, like magic item creation requirements, feat requirements, and the effects of Augment Summoning.

There is no one-size-fits-all answer to whether an SLA counts as a spell.

I'll expand my link to Spell-like Abilities

Spell-Like Abilities (Sp), AoN, Src Bestiary 6 pg. 298, et al:

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 usually has a limit on how often it can be used. A constant spell-like ability or one that can be used at will has no use limit. Reactivating a constant spell-like ability is a swift action. Using all other spell-like abilities is a standard action unless noted otherwise, and doing so provokes attacks of opportunity. It is possible to attempt a concentration check to use a spell-like ability defensively and avoid provoking attacks of opportunity, just as when casting a spell. 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.

For creatures with spell-like abilities, the designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature’s caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature’s Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is 10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature’s Charisma modifier.

Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monster’s spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/ wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/ wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, or ranger, in that order.

Format: At will—burning hands (DC 13)
Location: Spell-Like Abilities.

thus in RAW, first line, "they are not spells"

You blur the distinction of the terms "cast a spell" and "counts as a spell". They are not the same thing nor equivalent under PF1. The second term creates a logical fallacy when attempting to reverse the logical hierarchy of rules. There's leeway in wording but you seem to commit the logical fallacy with your additional statements and summary.
It is more accurate to say that there are specific exceptions to the general rule (An SLA is not a cast spell) where an SLA may be used in place of a cast spell.
The Original Poster's case is not one of those exceptions.