A Sanctified Slayer inquisitor gains the Studied Target ability which boosts the DCs of Slayer (Inquisitor) class abilities by 1-5.
Spell-like abilities exist; which are abilities that work like spells. But are spells and spellcasting themselves considered to be a class ability?
Ah, thank you, no I have a build put together. This fellow is an NPC the party will tag along with for a while and wanted to double check my interpretation. A +5 DC to spells seemed really high to me, and I didn’t want this NPC to overshadow the party’s Mesmerist.
Spell Bane is already plenty to help boost DCs.
Studied Target (Ex): At 1st level, a sanctified slayer gains the slayer’s studied target class feature. She uses her inquisitor level as her effective slayer level to determine the effects of studied target. This ability replaces judgment 1/day.
Studied Target (Ex): A slayer can study an opponent he can see as a move action. The slayer then gains a +1 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks attempted against that opponent, and a +1 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against it. The DCs of slayer class abilities against that opponent increase by 1. A slayer can only maintain these bonuses against one opponent at a time; these bonuses remain in effect until either the opponent is dead or the slayer studies a new target.
The wording of the studied Target from the sanctified slayer says they gain the slayers studied target class feature. RAW it only increases the slayer class abilities, not those of the inquisition class features. The slayer specifies slayer class abilities, not simply class abilities. Since spells are not a slayer class ability the DC of spells are not increased. It would however increase the DC of any slayer talents the character gains from the archetype.
At low level it is not much of a problem, but at higher level it becomes incredibly powerful. At 15th level it grants you a +4 to the DC of your saving throws. That is equal to a mythic character with spell focus, greater spell focus and mythic spell focus, but it works on all schools of magic. Since studied target is an untyped bonus it stacks with any other method of raising the DC of the spell. That incredibly powerful and there is no way I would allow it in a campaign I run.
Having an effective slayer level allows the ability to function. If the class feature that has an effective class level modifies an ability that the original class does not have the class feature does not give that class feature. A good example of this is the druid’s animal companion. Animal companion has the ability Share Spells. The Cavalier has a class feature that functions as the Druids Animal Companion with the effective Druid level being equal to the cavalier’s level. The Cavalier does not have the ability to cast spells so they do not gain the benefit of share spell. This is the same thing as the sanctified slayer increasing the DC of class slayer class abilities.
Having an effective slayer level allows the sanctified slayer to use studied strike, it just does not advance the DC of anything except the slayer talent granted by the archetype.
The wording on share spells does not specify it has to be a druid spell, but it does specify it must be from the same class that grants the animal companion. That line is what allows a Ranger or other spell casting class to use share spells.
It’s more of a concern with a full spell caster like the nature fang Druid.
The problem is that the language of the rules never explicitly states a spell is not an ability, but it does consistently refer to them as if they were two different things.
Magical Healing: Various abilities and spells can restore hit points.
…
Charm and Compulsion
Many abilities and spells can cloud the minds of characters and monsters,
…
Some abilities and spells (such as raise dead) bestow permanent level drain on a creature.
…
Etc.
My personal interpretation for this is as follows, without necessarily regard for RAW but instead RAI. This is formed thanks to folks helping point out that spells aren’t abilities but also includes some of the other debate. I’m personally in the camp of “if an archetype steals an ability from another class just replace every instance of the classes name with the archetypes name”.
A Sanctified Slayer’s Studied Target:
#1: Boosts the DCs of any Slayer Talent.
#2: Boosts the DCs of any Inquisitor Abilities (ie: Discern Lies)
#3: Boosts the DCs of any feat with a DC
#4: Does not boost the DCs of any Inquisitor Spells
This is how I’ll be running it at my table. The most controversial one of these points is likely #3; though if they survive long enough to pick up any critical feats I’ll deal with the consequences of my actions.
If any future GM looking for the same information, this was my compromise.
If it helps any, my personal opinion on allowing the Studied Target to boost the Spell DC is: its perfectly fine. It will allow the character to give less of a focus on their actual casting ability score and more on their physical stats, giving way to a more well rounded and versatile character after it is all said and done. I often forgo taking any spells that allow for a saving throw when I play an inquisitor (or any 3/4 BAB, 6th level caster) because the DCs tend to feel too low to be effective. This even goes for a Nature Fang Druid. You'll never need more than 16 WIS for an inquisitor or 19 for a druid to remain a potential threat.
I treat spellcasting as a class ability. There is no need to dance around or justify this stance. If a player wants to hyper-focus on their casting stat in order to milk every last drop of DC from the combination of these features, you have more of a problem with the player than you do with the class/archetype itself.
Just my two cents.
It feels weird that the nature fang druid is the most powerful druid caster though. It may even be the strongest save or die caster in the game, since there’s no reason you couldn’t focus on wisdom and casting.
As I said, if the player wants to hyper-focus on maxing out their wisdom score to achieve those in game mechanical benefits against a single target at a time, you might have a problem with the player rather than the archetype.
I tend to stick close to the RAW as often as I can and err on the side of restrictive rather than open ended readings of the rules. That said, I am somewhat of a permissive GM and what is good for the players is good for their opponents, something I make quite clear going into the game. The players decide how challenging their enemies become.
The players decide how challenging their enemies become.
That may work for your group, but you also have to understand that real groups aren’t uniform in how they build. You may have 3 players who don’t optimize at all and one player who takes every single advantage they can. Do you punish the other 3 because they have a party member who doesn’t have the same playstyle as them.
You may have 3 players who don’t optimize at all and one player who takes every single advantage they can.
I don't have that one kind of player. They do not make it into my games. Session zero is the best time to weed that kind of problem from the table. If that is a problem that you have, and you need to tweak the framework of the game in order to curtail the behavior, then you should do so. Regardless, having boosted DC's against a single target isn't that big of a game changer and if you allow a player to take advantage of this, adapt your enemies accordingly. In my opinion, kineticists are more of a hassle to corral than Nature Fang Druids or Sanctified Slayer Inquisitors. And I deal with them the same way: if you can do it, so can your enemies.