Can supernatural and ex abilities fulfill specific spell prerequisites?

[Elves]

(clause 1) A requirement based on a specific spell measures whether the character or creature in question is capable of producing the necessary effect

(clause 2) and as such, invocations and spell-like abilities that generate the relevant effect meet the requirements for specific spell knowledge.

I agree with Anthrowhale's read of this (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24925619&postcount=21).

Clause 1 tells us that specific spell requirements are based on the ability to produce the spell effect. Clause 2 derives from that clause ("as such"), not the other way around. Clause 1 is the principle and clause 2 is the consequence.

A supernatural or extraordinary ability that functions "as the spell" is also "producing the necessary effect"*, so as a consequence of clause 1 they also fulfill specific spell prereqs.

*If they function identically, the only way they differ from the spell is their type tag -- but SLAs also have a different type tag and are allowed, so we know that alone isn't enough to make them a different effect for the purpose of this rule.


I don't really see any ambiguity here. To be clear, the argument isn't that "the rules don't say you can't, therefore you can" (the 'Air Bud rule'). It's that the rules explicitly do say you just need to be able to produce the required effect.

[Thurbane]

RAW? No.

RAI? Maybe.

[Elves]

RAW? No.

RAI? Maybe.

Hm, I would say the opposite if you mean As Intended

[Crake]

In the specific case of Fist of Raziel though, I would still argue no, because it creates a specific magic circle-like effect, rather than the ability to produce any kind of magic circle. For example, a fist of raziel cannot use their magic circle aura to produce an inwardly focused magic circle to trap a creature.

[Elves]

In the specific case of Fist of Raziel though, I would still argue no, because it creates a specific magic circle-like effect, rather than the ability to produce any kind of magic circle. For example, a fist of raziel cannot use their magic circle aura to produce an inwardly focused magic circle to trap a creature.

True, there are various su and ex effects that are "as the spell, but...", and those are arguable to different degrees depending how much they differ. But in the case of the ones that are straight-up copies, it seems pretty straightforward.

[Crake]

True, there are various su and ex effects that are "as the spell, but...", and those are arguable to different degrees depending how much they differ. But in the case of the ones that are straight-up copies, it seems pretty straightforward.

I think, in the event that yes, it's an exact, straight up copy, for example an SLA that's been converted into an Su ability via supernatural transformation, then I can probably agree. But I think you'll find, in practise, very few Su abilities ARE actual straight up copies. Most provide effects similar to a spell, but don't actually allow you to cast a spell. For example, an ability that allows you to move freely as if you were under the effects of freedom of movement, I personally wouldn't count, as it's a personal only effect, and you can't use the effect on others at all, like you normally would if you were casting it properly.

[Anthrowhale]

Interesting---let me try to crystallize the issue.

In the specific case of Fist of Raziel -> Witch Hunter, Witch Hunter says:


Able to cast ... magic circle against evil.

Complete Arcane says:


A requirement based on a specific spell measures whether the character ... is capable of producing the necessary effect...

And Fist of Raziel says:


A ... fist of Raziel is constantly surrounded by a magic circle against evil effect...

The question raised seems to be: Does the Complete Arcane text imply all variations or some variations of the effect must be producible? I don't see any evidence in fluff that you need to be able to center the effect on someone else, but I could see a DM requiring that anyways (or not). I hadn't appreciated this.

[Vaern]

SRD says that spell-like abilities "are spells and magical abilities that are very much like spells."
Supernatural abilities are defined as being "magical, but not spell-like."

SLAs are considered to be either spells or close enough to spells that they might as well be. The ability to produce an effect via SLA is effectively the same as being able to cast it as a spell (unless the description mentions a specific difference, as with common weight restrictions on SLA teleport).

Supernatural abilities are simply not like casting a spell, so I'd probably rule against them counting as a spell requirement even they produce an effect similar to a specific prerequisite spell.
Of course, it may be permissible in some groups or in specific scenarios. Personally, my opinion on the matter may vary on a case-by-case basis depending on circumstances... in particular, how cheesy is it? Is the ability a staple of your character that you want to highlight with a cool feat or prestige class? Or did you go out of your way to pick up that particular ability to fast-track your character into a spellcasting prestige class without having to be a spellcaster?

[Elves]

I don't see any evidence in fluff that you need to be able to center the effect on someone else, but I could see a DM requiring that anyways (or not). I hadn't appreciated this.

That reading requires drawing a distinction between an [x spell] effect and the effect of x spell. To me that seems overcomplicated.

Reading 1:
The requirement is that "the character or creature in question is capable of producing the necessary effect " -- that is, a magic circle against evil effect. A Fist's ability is a "magic circle against evil effect".

Reading 2:
The requirement is that "the character or creature in question is capable of producing the necessary effect" -- that is, the effect of magic circle against evil. A Fist's ability is a magic circle against evil effect, but can't fully produce the effect of that spell. Thus, it's a magic circle effect but doesn't produce the effect of magic circle.

Besides being a rather fine distinction, the other problem I see with reading 2 is that even within its dichotomy, it has no evidence "the necessary effect" in CArc means "effect of spell" instead of "spell effect".

[Anthrowhale]

That reading requires drawing a distinction between an [x spell] effect and the effect of x spell. To me that seems overcomplicated.

Reading 1 does seem significantly simpler to me.

I think there's something counterintuitive going on, because you really need the Complete Arcane text to get to yes. Starting with


Prerequisite: Able to cast ... magic circle against evil.

complete arcane changes it to effectively


Prerequisite: Able to produce ... a magic circle against evil effect.

The former is not satisfied by Fist of Raziel 1. The latter is.

A DM could argue though that the right rewrite is something like:


Prerequisite: Able to produce ... any magic circle against evil effect.

and claim 'no' since you can't touch someone and have it apply to them.

Is there a way to rule out v2 other than simplicity?

[Elves]

Is there a way to rule out v2 other than simplicity?
I mean, many warlock invocations are modified spell effects yet qualify per CArc. Which should have been my first reply to you Crake, come to think of it.

[Anthrowhale]

I mean, many warlock invocations are modified spell effects yet qualify per CArc. Which should have been my first reply to you Crake, come to think of it.

Is there any evidence beyond the example given on complete arcane page 72? That just says the darkness invocation matches a darkness spell prereq, and it looks like the darkness invocation is an exact match to the spell.

[Elves]

There are a couple like that, but most are modified in some way.

To be fair, many are only changed in their range, duration and targeting. Earlier, I suggested those entries might not be part of a spell's effect. But as I admitted, that's an interpretive leap. Reading 2 has to make that leap, or else conclude that most invocations that call out spells by name don't in fact count (implausible). Reading 1 doesn't, since the modifications don't matter as long as it's an [x spell] effect.

So I can't rule Reading 2 out for you, but it does require 3 claims -- that the rule distinguishes between spell effect and effect of spell, that "the necessary effect" means the latter instead of the former, and that a spell's range, area, etc. aren't part of its effect.
(The 2nd claim in particular is arbitrary, which means the reading isn't conclusive even within its own logic.)

--

An analogue to fist of Raziel's magic circle is devour magic, which lets you use "a targeted greater dispel magic" but not the area version. Does that "generate the effect" of greater dispel magic?

[Anthrowhale]

There are a couple like that, but most are modified in some way.

To be fair, many are only changed in their range, duration and targeting. Earlier, I suggested those entries might not be part of a spell's effect. But as I admitted, that's an interpretive leap. Reading 2 has to make that leap, or else conclude that most invocations that call out spells by name don't in fact count (implausible). Reading 1 doesn't, since the modifications don't matter as long as it's an [x spell] effect.

So I can't rule Reading 2 out for you, but it does require 3 claims -- that the rule distinguishes between spell effect and effect of spell, that "the necessary effect" means the latter instead of the former, and that a spell's range, area, etc. aren't part of its effect.
(The 2nd claim in particular is arbitrary, which means the reading isn't conclusive even within its own logic.)

--

An analogue to fist of Raziel's magic circle is devour magic, which lets you use "a targeted greater dispel magic" but not the area version. Does that "generate the effect" of greater dispel magic?

I think we've pushed RAW as far as it goes. My inclination is definitely towards reading 1, but I can't rule out reading 2. In a game, I'd be inclined to look at the fluff to decide. When a spell can have multiple different effects, the natural RAI question is: is the right effect available? For example, in Witch Hunter, there is no fluff about either calling creatures or protecting others, hence for the Fist of Raziel's Magic Circle effect seems like it should definitely satisfy. If Witch Hunter instead had bodyguard or malconvoker fluff, I might decide otherwise.

[loky1109]

Master of the Unseen Hand and Mindspy has special exceptions about Su. So all without exception doesn't fulfill.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Master of the Unseen Hand and Mindspy has special exceptions about Su. So all without exception doesn't fulfill.

This is also my take on it. The quoted section from Complete Arcane only ever references SLAs and Invocations. The only time you can get Ex or Su to qualify is if they have their own listed exceptions, like with MotUH, Mindspy, or Shadowcasters with their Mysteries.

[Darg]

My reading is based on the PHB:


In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Ex and Su abilities do not function like a spell. Therefore my groups rule that they do not qualify.

That said, perfect copies of spells are not actually required for the rule to work. The invocation Charm works differently from charm person/monster and yet it qualifies for Mindbender (even though it specifically says that charm qualifies under spells).

[Elves]

Master of the Unseen Hand and Mindspy has special exceptions about Su. So all without exception doesn't fulfill.
Those are both from CWar, which predates CArc by a year. So whatever CArc says would supersede them.

Shadowcaster was printed later though, and says this:

Levels in shadowcaster do not qualify a character for prestige classes with the following entry requirements: ...Ability to cast a specific spell, even if a mystery exists with a similar effect.
The problem is that this doesn't work as a general claim about Su abilities, because mysteries eventually become spell-like -- so this rule isn't about su abilities only, and is already an exception to the CArc rule.

This page reads as specific to mysteries.



so I'd probably rule against them counting as a spell requirement even if they produce an effect similar to a specific prerequisite spell.
CArc explicitly says that what's being measured is the ability to produce the effect.