Jowgen
2019-01-01, 03:29 PM
invocations are spell-like abilities; using an invocation is therefore a standard action that provokes attacks of opportunity.
There appear to be two schools of thought regarding the action cost of using an Invocation (and SLAs in general), namely those who believe that the default is a Standard Action unless the descriptive text of the Invocation itself specifies otherwise (e.g. this (http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=15686.0)DFA handbook), and those who believe that the casting time listed in the corresponding Spell's header takes precedence (e.g. see this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?577317-The-Warlockopedia-A-Comprehensive-Warlock-Handbook)Warlock handbook).
I decided to go on a minor book dive to collect all the relevant pieces of text and found that this is not a disagreement limited to handbooks.
Using a spell-like ability is a standard action unless noted otherwise, and doing so while threatened provokes attacks of opportunity.
This is the basic piece of relevant text from the Monster Manual glossary, which matches the online glossary in the wotc archives exactly, and in lieu of the DMG saying anything of interest on the topic, this is our primary source. It does not go into detail as to what constitutes "noted otherwise".
The PHB touches on the subject in two instances the first being in the the Combat chapter.
The casting time of a spell-like ability is 1 standard action, unless the ability description notes otherwise
This reiterates the MM and also specifies "ability description" as the thing that needs to specify "otherwise". As a side note, the table 8-2 in this chapter also lists the use of an SLA as a Standard action.
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.
Here in the chapter on magic, the PHB goes beyond specifying "ability description" by also making reference to the "spell description", albeit without specifying if it's only taking about the descriptive text or the header also (see here (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040907a)for more on the distinction).
Going beyond the core books, the various web materials also touch on the subject. First, we have the Rules of the Game article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040413a)on the topic.
Using a spell-like ability is a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity. Sometimes using a spell-like ability can be a free action or a full-round action, or it can have an even longer activation time. However, it's a standard action unless the ability description specifically says otherwise.
It goes back to "ability description" only. So far it's all been pretty consistent, but now stuff gets weird. First, staying with the web materials, there is Morpheme Savant feat from the Epic Insights series of articles, which has this line
Normal: The warlock's call invocation has a casting time of 10 minutes and does not allow suggestions to be imbued.
As the Warlock's Call invocation only states "You can use this invocation to send a message as the sending spell.", without reference to duration outside the corresponding spell's header, this feat is often cited as an example of an Invocation having the same casting time as the spell upon which it is based. Some argue that this shows that all invocations should have the casting time of their corresponding spells, while others argue that this is an instance of "otherwise specified" only applicable to this invocation, or straight up dismiss it as an error by the author (one "Eytan Bernstein"), due to this reading causing dysfunctions with certain other Invocations.
This would be plenty to dissect, debate and discuss already, but wait...! There's more.
Using a spell-like ability usually takes 1 standard action and provokes attacks of opportunity unless otherwise noted. If the spell-like ability duplicates a spell that has a casting time of less than 1 standard action, the spell-like ability has that casting time.
The Rules Compendium, in its classic style, comes out of left field and adds a rule seemingly out of nowhere: SLA casting time = Spell casting time, PROVIDED Spell casting time < Standard Action.
Some argue that the RC herein purposefully elected to not extend this rule to greater-than-standard-action casting time spells, as to preserve the standard=default rule, while others insist that absence isn't confirmation, or partake in classic RC-dismissal.
Oddly enough though, the RC for once has nothing on the SRD. The online copies of the SRD found here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm) and here (https://www.35srd.com/specialabilities-2/)contradicts the core books by taking the extra step that the RC didn't:
A spell-like ability takes the same amount of time to complete as the spell that it mimics (usually 1 standard action) unless otherwise stated.
This line appears in no hard-copy book I could find. Yet, the SRD copies found here (http://dndsrd.net/specialAbilities.html) and on dndwiki remain faithful to the PHB version of the rule.
A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description
I myself am not sufficiently versed in the chronology of SRD versions and the specifics of which source specifically over-rules which according to RAW. I leave that discussion to those who know.
My personal take-away from all this is that different authors across publications had different ideas on how SLAs should work. To me personally, it seems like whoever designed the invocation using classes worked under the assumption that they'd be Standard actions (with the odd full-round one like the glaive later), but some subsequent designers pushed for SLAs to have spell-equivalent casting times across the board, which partially manifested in the RC and fully made its way into one version of the SRD (which may or may not be the dominant one). That's my theory at least.
So yeah, that is everything I could find on the topic. Hope this is useful to someone out there.
There appear to be two schools of thought regarding the action cost of using an Invocation (and SLAs in general), namely those who believe that the default is a Standard Action unless the descriptive text of the Invocation itself specifies otherwise (e.g. this (http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=15686.0)DFA handbook), and those who believe that the casting time listed in the corresponding Spell's header takes precedence (e.g. see this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?577317-The-Warlockopedia-A-Comprehensive-Warlock-Handbook)Warlock handbook).
I decided to go on a minor book dive to collect all the relevant pieces of text and found that this is not a disagreement limited to handbooks.
Using a spell-like ability is a standard action unless noted otherwise, and doing so while threatened provokes attacks of opportunity.
This is the basic piece of relevant text from the Monster Manual glossary, which matches the online glossary in the wotc archives exactly, and in lieu of the DMG saying anything of interest on the topic, this is our primary source. It does not go into detail as to what constitutes "noted otherwise".
The PHB touches on the subject in two instances the first being in the the Combat chapter.
The casting time of a spell-like ability is 1 standard action, unless the ability description notes otherwise
This reiterates the MM and also specifies "ability description" as the thing that needs to specify "otherwise". As a side note, the table 8-2 in this chapter also lists the use of an SLA as a Standard action.
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.
Here in the chapter on magic, the PHB goes beyond specifying "ability description" by also making reference to the "spell description", albeit without specifying if it's only taking about the descriptive text or the header also (see here (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040907a)for more on the distinction).
Going beyond the core books, the various web materials also touch on the subject. First, we have the Rules of the Game article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040413a)on the topic.
Using a spell-like ability is a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity. Sometimes using a spell-like ability can be a free action or a full-round action, or it can have an even longer activation time. However, it's a standard action unless the ability description specifically says otherwise.
It goes back to "ability description" only. So far it's all been pretty consistent, but now stuff gets weird. First, staying with the web materials, there is Morpheme Savant feat from the Epic Insights series of articles, which has this line
Normal: The warlock's call invocation has a casting time of 10 minutes and does not allow suggestions to be imbued.
As the Warlock's Call invocation only states "You can use this invocation to send a message as the sending spell.", without reference to duration outside the corresponding spell's header, this feat is often cited as an example of an Invocation having the same casting time as the spell upon which it is based. Some argue that this shows that all invocations should have the casting time of their corresponding spells, while others argue that this is an instance of "otherwise specified" only applicable to this invocation, or straight up dismiss it as an error by the author (one "Eytan Bernstein"), due to this reading causing dysfunctions with certain other Invocations.
This would be plenty to dissect, debate and discuss already, but wait...! There's more.
Using a spell-like ability usually takes 1 standard action and provokes attacks of opportunity unless otherwise noted. If the spell-like ability duplicates a spell that has a casting time of less than 1 standard action, the spell-like ability has that casting time.
The Rules Compendium, in its classic style, comes out of left field and adds a rule seemingly out of nowhere: SLA casting time = Spell casting time, PROVIDED Spell casting time < Standard Action.
Some argue that the RC herein purposefully elected to not extend this rule to greater-than-standard-action casting time spells, as to preserve the standard=default rule, while others insist that absence isn't confirmation, or partake in classic RC-dismissal.
Oddly enough though, the RC for once has nothing on the SRD. The online copies of the SRD found here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm) and here (https://www.35srd.com/specialabilities-2/)contradicts the core books by taking the extra step that the RC didn't:
A spell-like ability takes the same amount of time to complete as the spell that it mimics (usually 1 standard action) unless otherwise stated.
This line appears in no hard-copy book I could find. Yet, the SRD copies found here (http://dndsrd.net/specialAbilities.html) and on dndwiki remain faithful to the PHB version of the rule.
A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description
I myself am not sufficiently versed in the chronology of SRD versions and the specifics of which source specifically over-rules which according to RAW. I leave that discussion to those who know.
My personal take-away from all this is that different authors across publications had different ideas on how SLAs should work. To me personally, it seems like whoever designed the invocation using classes worked under the assumption that they'd be Standard actions (with the odd full-round one like the glaive later), but some subsequent designers pushed for SLAs to have spell-equivalent casting times across the board, which partially manifested in the RC and fully made its way into one version of the SRD (which may or may not be the dominant one). That's my theory at least.
So yeah, that is everything I could find on the topic. Hope this is useful to someone out there.