Innate Spell - is it useful ?

[nedz]

Innate Spell ( Player's Guide to Faerûn p39)
Prereqs: Silent Spell (PH) , Still Spell (PH)

I noticed that Beguilers get Silent Spell and Still Spell for free. Now Beguilers often acquire new spells by means of Arcane Disciple, but these are limited to one use per day.

Would Innate Spell over-ride this ?

I.e. If Arcane Disciple gives me access to some spell X once a day, and I then took Innate Spell ( X ), would I get the ability to use X 3/day as an SLA ?

Also, does this feat have any other uses outside of this context ?

[Cerefel]

Would it work with Precocious Apprentice before the character gets access to 2nd level spells normally? I don't see why not, considering you're still using the slot for the same spell, especially considering the PGtF version is considered a metamagic effect and uses a slot of the same level. It could probably allow for more reliable use of the spell as well. Maybe some use for prepared casting gishes to get more uses of their buffs without having to worry about how many slots to prepare the spell in.

[Cosi]

The "big cheese", so to speak, for Innate Spell is using it with Supernatural Transformation. You take Innate Spell (wish), then turn it into a Supernatural ability for which you do not pay XP costs. This allows you to things that are both stupid and broken. You can also do smaller cheeses by ignoring other costs, like limited wish's XP cost, various Vile costs, or the "bit of a critter" requirement for ice assassin or simulacrum.

You can also make stuff with long casting times into SLAs you use as a standard action. This ranges from "meh" with awaken to "good" with planar binding to "great" with major creation. That last one is especially nasty because, in addition to all the normal uses of major creation, casting it as a standard action lets you use it as BFC or as the world's most lethal forcecage (because it is full of lava).

Technically, none of this counts for anything because Complete Arcane printed a much worse version of Innate Spell which requires you to give up a spell slot of whatever level you want an SLA of plus eight.

[nedz]

Technically, none of this counts for anything because Complete Arcane printed a much worse version of Innate Spell which requires you to give up a spell slot of whatever level you want an SLA of plus eight.

Right, I hadn't spotted that - Complete Arcane is the more recent source.

This kind of kills the whole idea - never mind.

[Cerefel]

I wasn't aware CArc was more recent than PGtF. It's odd that the 3.0 version is more similar to the CArc version than to the PGtF one.

[nedz]

I wasn't aware CArc was more recent than PGtF. It's odd that the 3.0 version is more similar to the CArc version than to the PGtF one.

From this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16617440&postcount=761) list. They were only about 8 months apart.

[dhasenan]

The "big cheese", so to speak, for Innate Spell is using it with Supernatural Transformation. You take Innate Spell (wish), then turn it into a Supernatural ability for which you do not pay XP costs.

According to Complete Arcane: "One spell slot eight levels higher than the innate spell is permanently used to power it." RAW might allow you to take this feat without that spell slot, but it's obvious that RAI requires you to have an appropriate spell slot.

So you need a level 17 spell slot to use wish as the target ability for this feat. You must still pay XP costs. It's a learned spell-like ability, not an innate one (despite the name), so you can't use it with Supernatural Transformation.

It's possible that the version of the feat in the Faerûn book is appreciably more broken than the one in Complete Arcane, but you implied that Complete Arcane had a more broken version.


This allows you to things that are both stupid and broken. You can also do smaller cheeses by ignoring other costs, like limited wish's XP cost, various Vile costs, or the "bit of a critter" requirement for ice assassin or simulacrum.

You are to assume that spell components that do not have a cost listed are already in your spell component pouch. You are already walking around with a bit of Orcus's fingernail. Failing that, Eschew Materials is more widely useful.

Anyway, unless you're in an epic campaign, you can only use this with cantrips and level 1 spells, and I'm not aware of any with a casting time greater than a standard action.

I might take this along with a level of Cleric if my party were having trouble staying in the field long enough. Give up a ninth level spell slot to cast cure light wounds once per round. It's not fast enough to make much difference in combat, but I could heal up the party in ten or fifteen minutes without consuming limited resources. Handy for a DM that gives you a lengthy adventuring day. I'd try for an item to do this instead, though -- that would be a lot cheaper.

That sort of thing. Things the party sorely needs that can be supplied by one low-level spell applied many many times, where I can't afford to spend as many spell slots as it would take to do it naturally -- when the DM won't let me get a magic item to serve that purpose.

[Cerefel]

I don't get why people assume SLAs are always a standard action.They have the same casting time as the spell they mimic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spellLikeAbilities)

[Kraken]

It's a learned spell-like ability, not an innate one (despite the name), so you can't use it with Supernatural Transformation.


Can you provide some sort of citation that backs this up as RAW, definitively? Not that it's an unreasonable ruling, but I don't see it as being conclusive based on the text of the feats in question, and if it came down to a strictly linguistic argument, I'd err on the side of it being eligible for supernatural transformation. The distinction between racial SLAs and learned SLAs is easily observable, however if the rules don't make that distinction, then the distinction doesn't matter. In the absence of specific language defining one or the other as "innate," we're left to interpret it with the aid of a dictionary, and I think it's reasonable to classify something that's now a permanent ability as "innate." In the sense that nothing in D&D is truly permanent, thanks to dragonborn, psychic reformation, and other ways to remove both types of SLAs.

[ryu]

The "big cheese", so to speak, for Innate Spell is using it with Supernatural Transformation. You take Innate Spell (wish), then turn it into a Supernatural ability for which you do not pay XP costs. This allows you to things that are both stupid and broken. You can also do smaller cheeses by ignoring other costs, like limited wish's XP cost, various Vile costs, or the "bit of a critter" requirement for ice assassin or simulacrum.

You can also make stuff with long casting times into SLAs you use as a standard action. This ranges from "meh" with awaken to "good" with planar binding to "great" with major creation. That last one is especially nasty because, in addition to all the normal uses of major creation, casting it as a standard action lets you use it as BFC or as the world's most lethal forcecage (because it is full of lava).

Technically, none of this counts for anything because Complete Arcane printed a much worse version of Innate Spell which requires you to give up a spell slot of whatever level you want an SLA of plus eight.

What are you talking about? Lava is harmless. If you have any fire resistance at all it explicitly doesn't harm you. Yes, resistance is specifically called out as rendering you immune in the lava entry. Did they intend to say fire immunity? Probably. Doesn't change the fact that the dampen use of prestidigitation renders lava harmless.

[Kraken]

Speaking of prestidigitation, I can see an argument for giving up an 8th level slot and feat to be able to cast it at will. Even magic missile in a lower op setting isn't too bad for a feat and 9th level slot. Unlimited, unerring, seldom resisted damage is pretty good to be able to plink with if you've taken suitable defensive precautions.

[ryu]

Speaking of prestidigitation, I can see an argument for giving up an 8th level slot and feat to be able to cast it at will. Even magic missile in a lower op setting isn't too bad for a feat and 9th level slot. Unlimited, unerring, seldom resisted damage is pretty good to be able to plink with if you've taken suitable defensive precautions.

If we were going that far with it, it would very important to ask the question of if metamagiced spells could be used, and if metamagic reducers could be applied. To focus on one spell? Arcane thesis combined with as much metamagic as you can shove onto the magic missile could actually be decently annoying.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Speaking of prestidigitation, I can see an argument for giving up an 8th level slot and feat to be able to cast it at will. Even magic missile in a lower op setting isn't too bad for a feat and 9th level slot. Unlimited, unerring, seldom resisted damage is pretty good to be able to plink with if you've taken suitable defensive precautions.

Magic Missile is already a suboptimal spell when you cast it from a 1st level slot. It doesn't matter if it's "unlimited, enerring, seldom resisted damage" when there's so little of it that you'd need several rounds to kill a CR-appropriate enemy. If you really want to use it even with marginal efficiency you'll need metamagic, and you won't get any of the damage-enhancing ones and still fit it into a 9th level slot.
By the time you get 9th level slots you get plenty of 1st level slots and you can very cheaply get more with a Ring of Wizardry. Giving up a 9th level slot and three feats for non-enhanced Magic Missile is idiotic.

You already get plenty of cantrips. Do you really need more than 4 hours of Prestidigitation? If your answer is yes get an item. An eternal wand of extended Prestidigitation costs 820gp. Buy 3-4 of them if you absolutely have to.

Seriously, feats are a very limited and precious resource. Don't throw away a bunch of them to cast crap spells at-will when you almost certainly don't need them at will and have better things to do with your actions. You already have plenty of high level slots. Use them instead of spamming Magic Missile.

[Cosi]

According to Complete Arcane: "One spell slot eight levels higher than the innate spell is permanently used to power it." RAW might allow you to take this feat without that spell slot, but it's obvious that RAI requires you to have an appropriate spell slot.

Technically, none of this counts for anything because Complete Arcane printed a much worse version of Innate Spell which requires you to give up a spell slot of whatever level you want an SLA of plus eight.


What are you talking about? Lava is harmless. If you have any fire resistance at all it explicitly doesn't harm you. Yes, resistance is specifically called out as rendering you immune in the lava entry. Did they intend to say fire immunity? Probably. Doesn't change the fact that the dampen use of prestidigitation renders lava harmless.

To anyone how knows in advance you plan on hitting them with it. And has prestidigitation. Even then, you can still use contact poison or acid or whatever.

[ryu]

To anyone how knows in advance you plan on hitting them with it. And has prestidigitation. Even then, you can still use contact poison or acid or whatever.

Or literally any form of fire resistance, which I'll be quick to remind you is the most common energy resistance in the game. Poisons and acid are more likely to work though yes.

[dhasenan]

Can you provide some sort of citation that backs this up as RAW, definitively?

A similar question was brought up here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?358166-Warlock-Supernatural-Transformation-on-Eldritch-Blast), discussing Eldritch Blast and warlock invocations. The D&D FAQ implies that Supernatural Transformation should apply to racial abilities, not "innate" ones.

If we're going with dictionary definitions, Innate Spell is a spell that you've learned and practiced well enough that you don't need a spell slot for it. You could cast the spell normally from study, and more study got you to the point of making it an Innate Spell. That's kind of the opposite of an innate ability, which you get naturally, from birth or as a natural part of living and aging. The feat is poorly named.

[nedz]

Can you provide some sort of citation that backs this up as RAW, definitively?
The rules do contain a few holes.

The distinction between racial SLAs and learned SLAs is easily observable, however if the rules don't make that distinction, then the distinction doesn't matter.
It's not always so clear.

Consider Half-Fey:
This is available as a Template (+2 LA) which gives you a number of SLAs - clearly racial.

Also however, you can acquire this as 2 levels from Savage Progressions - clearly racial, but also learned.

This is true of several other such progressions.

[dhasenan]

I don't get why people assume SLAs are always a standard action.They have the same casting time as the spell they mimic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spellLikeAbilities)

Innate Spell says you can use the SLA once per round. I think that's where part of the confusion lies.

However, in order to complete a spell taking multiple rounds, you must dedicate several consecutive full-round actions to it. A spell-like ability should presumably work the same.

So, while I could in theory use Innate Spell: Sending 14,400 times per day, that only lets me start invoking the ability that many times. It still would take ten minutes to complete each time, and I can't parallelize them.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

The rules do contain a few holes.

It's not always so clear.

Consider Half-Fey:
This is available as a Template (+2 LA) which gives you a number of SLAs - clearly racial.

Also however, you can acquire this as 2 levels from Savage Progressions - clearly racial, but also learned.

This is true of several other such progressions.Just because something is gained via class doesn't mean it's not also racial or innate.

Psionics, for instance, is explicitly innate, no matter where it comes from.

[nedz]

This is available as a Template (+2 LA) which gives you a number of SLAs - clearly racial.

Also however, you can acquire this as 2 levels from Savage Progressions - clearly racial, but also learned.
Just because something is gained via class doesn't mean it's not also racial or innate.

Psionics, for instance, is explicitly innate, no matter where it comes from.

That's what I said.

[Cosi]

A similar question was brought up here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?358166-Warlock-Supernatural-Transformation-on-Eldritch-Blast), discussing Eldritch Blast and warlock invocations. The D&D FAQ implies that Supernatural Transformation should apply to racial abilities, not "innate" ones.

If we're going with dictionary definitions, Innate Spell is a spell that you've learned and practiced well enough that you don't need a spell slot for it. You could cast the spell normally from study, and more study got you to the point of making it an Innate Spell. That's kind of the opposite of an innate ability, which you get naturally, from birth or as a natural part of living and aging. The feat is poorly named.

I find the idea that Innate Spell is not, in fact, innate to be stupid to the point of causing physical pain. If the people writing the game don't want Innate Spell + Supernatural Transformation to not work, they should errata Supernatural Transformation to say "racial". Or errata Innate Spell to not say "innate". Using the FAQ to clarify something as meaning something that is the opposite of the apparent meaning is rather pathetic.

Also, accepting the FAQ (and similar, i.e. Rules of the Game) stuff in your game breaks more things than it fixes. For example, polymorph stacking becomes totally nuts if you accept Skip's thoughts on the topic.

[Psyren]

Innate Spell turns a spell into a spell-like ability. Nothing in the feat however turns that spell into an innate spell-like ability, so the Supernatural Transformation combo is not the only valid interpretation. And that's putting aside the fact that ST is from Savage Species, a 3.0 source which never got updated.

In other words, taken literally the feat says that "innate spell = spell-like ability." It does not however say "innate spell = innate spell-like ability."

[AtlasSniperman]

If only it was a [Metamagic] feat. Then there'd be a reason to go epic with Ultimate Magus.

[Zaq]

Part of the problem is that by definition, any spell you can make innate with Innate Spell (without massive shenanigans that may or may not even be legal) is going to be very low level (0th or 1st unless you can get access to a slot of 10th level or higher). And if you want lots of 0th or 1st level spells, it's absolutely trivial to get them in item form by the time you've got 8th or 9th level slots to sacrifice. You have to be at least 17th level to get access to a 9th level slot (without feedback loops or fast progression classes); a wand of a 1st level spell is 0.22 PERCENT of level 17 WBL. Not 22 percent. ZERO POINT 22 percent. You can use FIVE of them before making up even ONE PERCENT of your wealth. "Oh, but wands use minimum CL!" Okay, so you buy a damn staff. Might be more than one percent of your WBL, but not THAT much more. Still way cheaper than burning a feat and a high-level spell slot.

The PGtF version is situational, but it's at least not as offensively useless as the CArc version.