SLA metamagics

[Anthrowhale]

Complete Arcane says Sudden Metamagic can be applied to SLAs but other metamagics generally can't. The exact wording is:


Sudden Metamagic Feats: These metamagic feats don’t require modified spell slots, and so they work as well with spell-like abilities...Other Metamagic Feats: Except as noted above, metamagic feats can’t generally be used to modify spell-like abilities...

The word "generally" leaves the possibility of a few alternatives working. The obvious choice is "don't require modified spell slots". The definition of a "don't require modified spell slots" is implicitly given in the sudden metamagic feats which all say something like:

...you can apply the effect of the ... feat to any spell you cast without increasing the level of the spell or specially preparing it ahead of time...
where I've emphasized 3 points.

spell refers to SLAs as well given text in Complete Arcane.
level of the spell in context should be interpreted as "level of the spell slot" since none of the Sudden metamagics adjust the actual spell level and all of them adjust the level of the spell slot.
preparing implies that you need methods for applying metamagic which require no preparation.

So,

Metamagic feats which apply to spells, (i.e. not divine metamagic since it's not a metamagic feat)
can be applied without preparation by prepared casters,
and do not adjust the spell slot required (i.e. Nothing other than +0 metamagic need be considered)

can be applied to SLAs.

Looking around, the complete set of possibilities for metamagic on SLAs seems to be:


Sudden {Empower, Extend, Maximize, Quicken, Silent, Still, Widen}. Explicitly in Complete Arcane.
Imbued Healing. Spontaneously adds a domain-dependent rider effect to Conjuration(Healing) spells and fits the criteria above. This seems to be the only unlisted exception to "generally".
{Boost, Consecrate, Corrupt, Empower, Heighten, Maximize, Purify, Quicken Violate} Spell-like ability as per their description.
Mortalbane, Ability Focus, Dragonfoe, Incorporeal Spell Targeting, Lunar Magic, Prophet of the Divine, Steam Magic, Supernatural Transformation, Tenacious Magic [ELH version] as per the description.
Incantatrix 3. Since SLAs produce spell effects just like spells, you can apply any metamagic altering the effect just as for spells.

[Saintheart]

Assuming you can add a material component to an SLA (they don't have any by definition) then Poison Spell would seem to also qualify: it only adds the component, it doesn't raise the spell slot. It's not metamagic but it has an effect on a spell.

Could you also cheese Primitive Caster to raise a SLA's ECL this way? SLAs have no components, but the feat allows you to add components to them accordingly.

Also, maybe less controversially: City Magic. It's metamagic but doesn't raise the spell level. Handy for blowing through immunities or resistances.

[Rebel7284]

I have seen Sanctum Spell be used with a SLA using this reasoning a few months back in that Warlock -> Shadowcraft Mage thread.

Invisible Spell is SO poorly written but can work well with certain SLAs for sure.

[Gruftzwerg]

I recently had a TO build including SLA metamagics and tried to dissect the rules..

Have a look at my Shadowcraft Warlock build (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?652658-(U)-Can-t-Touch-This-(Gnome)-a-Shadowcraft-Warlock&p=25672820#post25672820).

It has a Rule Explanation spoiler containing the rules involved.

The rules regarding it are messy (similar to the PRC rules in Complete Warrior). There is a small discussion regarding it a bit further below the thread.

I'm a bit short on time atm. If questions (or critique ^^) should remain, I'll try to address em later.

[Thurbane]

Yeah, this has been discussed in depth previously, and the usual outcome it can kinda be read either way.

My 2 coppers? Sudden Metamagic working with SLAs is "specific trumps general", and therefore they are the only metamagics that work with SLAs.

I freely admit, though, mine may not be the only interpretation of RAW.

[Darg]

The biggest thing is that the PHB and the MM declares SLAs work like spells. If they didn't, they would ignore things like globe of invulnerability, grappling spell disruption, spell turning would have no limit vs SLAs, mage slayer feat chain wouldn't affect SLAs, and even the weapon-like spell feat rules introduced and implied to work in CArc wouldn't work with SLAs. The only feat that explicitly doesn't work with SLAs is Spell Focus.

Energy Substitution Feat is a possible selection. If descriptors didn't apply to SLAs then those dancing pixies are well worth the LA.

[Anthrowhale]

It has a Rule Explanation spoiler containing the rules involved.

The observation here is interesting. Under SLAs it says:

...In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell...
So an SLA is functionally a spell without a V, S, M, F, XP, and which can't be used to counterspell or be counterspelled.

That broadens the scope of application, but I don't believe it allows arbitrary +0 metamagics to be used. The problem is that metamagic feats by default have application methodologies for prepared spells and for spontaneous spells. SLAs are neither. Is using metamagic with an SLA supposed to be a full-round action? Or just the normal casting time? There are no rules here. Hence, you need the metamagic to be 'self-executing'. The Sudden X line has this. Imbued Healing seems to have this---it's wording supports universal application. None of the other +0 metamagic has this self-executing flavor. The closest one is Insidious Magic, but that says you "can use" which suggests the normal default preparation mechanisms apply.

Looking at some possibilities:
Metamagic rods don't seem to work because the application methodology varies and is undetermined. Metamagic Song has the same issue.
Divine Metamagic doesn't work because SLAs are not divine spells.
Mastery of X feats from Eberron plausibly do work. They aren't metamagic, but they are self-executing.
Eldritch Corruption plausibly works.
Prophecy's Shaper plausibly works.
... and plausibly there are other class abilities that work.


Assuming you can add a material component to an SLA (they don't have any by definition) then Poison Spell would seem to also qualify: it only adds the component, it doesn't raise the spell slot. It's not metamagic but it has an effect on a spell.

Seems legit.


Could you also cheese Primitive Caster to raise a SLA's ECL this way? SLAs have no components, but the feat allows you to add components to them accordingly.

Plausibly yes.


Also, maybe less controversially: City Magic. It's metamagic but doesn't raise the spell level. Handy for blowing through immunities or resistances.
I don't think this works since City Magic is not self-executing and SLAs come with no methodology for metamagic use.

I have seen Sanctum Spell be used with a SLA using this reasoning a few months back in that Warlock -> Shadowcraft Mage thread.

Invisible Spell is SO poorly written but can work well with certain SLAs for sure.
I think neither of these work since they aren't self-executing and SLAs come with no methodology for metamagic use.


My 2 coppers? Sudden Metamagic working with SLAs is "specific trumps general", and therefore they are the only metamagics that work with SLAs.

What do you think about an Incantatrix doing something after the fact? (Or in the act of casting?)


Energy Substitution Feat is a possible selection. If descriptors didn't apply to SLAs then those dancing pixies are well worth the LA.
Energy Substitution has no application mechanism with SLAs though.

[Gruftzwerg]

The observation here is interesting. Under SLAs it says:

So an SLA is functionally a spell without a V, S, M, F, XP, and which can't be used to counterspell or be counterspelled.

That broadens the scope of application, but I don't believe it allows arbitrary +0 metamagics to be used. The problem is that metamagic feats by default have application methodologies for prepared spells and for spontaneous spells. SLAs are neither. Is using metamagic with an SLA supposed to be a full-round action? Or just the normal casting time? There are no rules here. Hence, you need the metamagic to be 'self-executing'. The Sudden X line has this. Imbued Healing seems to have this---it's wording supports universal application. None of the other +0 metamagic has this self-executing flavor. The closest one is Insidious Magic, but that says you "can use" which suggests the normal default preparation mechanisms apply.


If we go for a pure RAW reading, the general metamagic rules are enough to use em.
The "specific" limitations (!) for spontaneous casting and prepared casting doesn't apply.
Thus Sanctum Spell, Energy Substitution and the like should work normally.

RAI, you have a pretty obvious point. But I wouldn't automatically say that SLA users can't use em. I would rather use the spontaneous metamagic rules, instead of denying SLAs the interaction. But that is just my humble opinion on this.

[Darg]

That broadens the scope of application, but I don't believe it allows arbitrary +0 metamagics to be used. The problem is that metamagic feats by default have application methodologies for prepared spells and for spontaneous spells. SLAs are neither. Is using metamagic with an SLA supposed to be a full-round action? Or just the normal casting time? There are no rules here. Hence, you need the metamagic to be 'self-executing'. The Sudden X line has this. Imbued Healing seems to have this---it's wording supports universal application. None of the other +0 metamagic has this self-executing flavor. The closest one is Insidious Magic, but that says you "can use" which suggests the normal default preparation mechanisms apply.

Metamagic spells have two methods of application: spell preparation or spontaneous casting. SLAs are cast spontaneously. As described in the PHB, spontaneous casting is just casting without preparation. There are ways for prepared casters to cast spontaneously without any extra rules explanation, and the opposite is true of spontaneous casters. It's not like there is this mechanical wall to breech. SLAs work like spells. If you aren't preparing SLAs, you're casting them spontaneously. If such a rule required explicit mention in the rules, a favored soul would be unable to cast metamagic as it doesn't prepare, cast as a sorcerer or bard, or spontaneously convert prepared spells.


Energy Substitution has no application mechanism with SLAs though.

What do you mean by that? Sudden metamagic spells don't have an application mechanism either. It's just assumed players will know how to use them. As they are metamagic feats and don't exactly address or counter the general metamagic rules, it's completely reasonable to assume that sorcerers still have to increase their cast times just like how metamagic rods work. At the same time it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume it doesn't have that quirk.

[Chronos]

...Huh. I could have sworn that I saw a rule somewhere that sudden metamagic feats don't change the casting time of a spell, and specifically that sorcerers could use Sudden Quicken for this reason, but it's not in the preface to the Complete Arcane feats section, the individual feat descriptions, nor the Warmage's bonus feats.

[Darg]

...Huh. I could have sworn that I saw a rule somewhere that sudden metamagic feats don't change the casting time of a spell, and specifically that sorcerers could use Sudden Quicken for this reason, but it's not in the preface to the Complete Arcane feats section, the individual feat descriptions, nor the Warmage's bonus feats.

Sudden quicken only applies the benefit of the feat, not the feat itself like DMM/meta rods do. The restriction is part of the special text, not the benefit.

[Anthrowhale]

If we go for a pure RAW reading, the general metamagic rules are enough to use em.
The general rules say:

Preparing and casting a spell in such a way is harder than normal...
How does an SLA user prepare and cast them in a way that his harder than normal?


SLAs are cast spontaneously.
I don't know any direct quote for this. Furthermore, I don't think SLAs with a budget per day at the same caster level have a shared budget like a sorcerer would.


As described in the PHB, spontaneous casting is just casting without preparation.

Sorcerers need to meditate for 15 minutes per day as per the readying rules (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#dailyReadyingofSpells). Do you think SLA users need to do so as well? Are there any rules for that?

If you aren't preparing SLAs, you're casting them spontaneously.

Is it ever stated that spontaneous casting is the default? (I believe no?)


If such a rule required explicit mention in the rules, a favored soul would be unable to cast metamagic as it doesn't prepare, cast as a sorcerer or bard, or spontaneously convert prepared spells.

FS are described as spontaneous casters in several places and there are blanket rules for all spontaneous casters in the Rules Compendium.


What do you mean by that?
Well, let's start with SLAs not being spontaneous casting until that's proven. If so, it's unclear how to apply something like City Magic to an SLA. You can't do it through the preparation mechanism because SLAs aren't prepared. You can't do it via spontaneously adding it to your casting since you aren't a spontaneous caster. What's the methodology? The only application mechanism I'm aware of is Incantatrix 2.


Sudden quicken only applies the benefit of the feat, not the feat itself like DMM/meta rods do. The restriction is part of the special text, not the benefit.
Yeah, labeling Sudden X as metamagic is somewhat misleading since it isn't used like normal metamagic for either prepared or spontaneous casters.

I took a look at the FAQ which it turns out does address this question:

Can I apply metamagic feats or effects to spell-like abilities? What if the feat doesn't change the spell's level? No. Although spell-like abilities function mechanically like spells..., they are not spells and don't benefit from feats or other effects that specifically affect spells.
That's a solid dose of cold water.

[Darg]

The general rules say:

How does an SLA user prepare and cast them in a way that his harder than normal?

How does a spellcaster do it? Fluff-wise there isn't a real explanation. Mechanically, metamagic increases the spell level of the spell and increase the cast time of standard action or longer spells. +0 metamagic does not increase the spell level of the spell.


I don't know any direct quote for this. Furthermore, I don't think SLAs with a budget per day at the same caster level have a shared budget like a sorcerer would.


Most spellcasters prepare their spells in advance—whether from a spellbook or through devout prayers and meditation—while some cast spells spontaneously without preparation. Despite these different ways that characters use to learn or prepare their spells, when it comes to casting them, the spells are very much alike.

This is the closest the game ever gets to actually defining spontaneous casting. A shared budget doesn't mean anything. Sorcerers and favored souls have levels where a spell at a particular level doesn't share uses per day.


Sorcerers need to meditate for 15 minutes per day as per the readying rules (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#dailyReadyingofSpells). Do you think SLA users need to do so as well? Are there any rules for that?

Is it ever stated that spontaneous casting is the default? (I believe no?)

The only rule is if the ability isn't at will you get a limited number of castings per day. Even if you ignore the meditation rule, the rest of it helps keep everything neat and together.

There is no default form of casting. You either prepare or you don't.


FS are described as spontaneous casters in several places and there are blanket rules for all spontaneous casters in the Rules Compendium.

It doesn't define what a spontaneous caster is. FS is only ever referred to being spontaneous in opposition to the alternative.


Well, let's start with SLAs not being spontaneous casting until that's proven. If so, it's unclear how to apply something like City Magic to an SLA. You can't do it through the preparation mechanism because SLAs aren't prepared. You can't do it via spontaneously adding it to your casting since you aren't a spontaneous caster. What's the methodology? The only application mechanism I'm aware of is Incantatrix 2.

The PHB and the MM both say that SLAs function/work just like spells. The burden therefore is on saying how they don't. In fact, the only two places that actually says anything different are 2 class' descriptions under invocations and eldritch blast. Do class features have the authority to set general rules for the game? One wouldn't normally think so.


Yeah, labeling Sudden X as metamagic is somewhat misleading since it isn't used like normal metamagic for either prepared or spontaneous casters.

I took a look at the FAQ which it turns out does address this question:

That's a solid dose of cold water.

The FAQ isn't RAW nor does it give itself authority to change the rules. Is it a reasonable extrapolation of the rules? Sure, why not. It's just not what the rules say at all. It doesn't really change anything nor is it always accurate to the intent of the rules. The author of warlock is on record saying that hideous blow was designed to not provoke when used while the FAQ says it does. The invocation follows the structure of a spell like produce flame in that it gives you the ability to take an action with the effect. If we follow the FAQ's reasoning for HB, produce flame would provoke every time you attacked with it.

[Gruftzwerg]

The general rules say:

How does an SLA user prepare and cast them in a way that his harder than normal?


...

I took a look at the FAQ which it turns out does address this question:
Those are just specific subrules for prepared casting and spontaneous casting. Warlocks have neither.
Walocks invoke their invocations.

But as we see with Sudden XXX feats, they still inherit to count as casting a spell (as per the general SLA rule that grant compatibility like a spell being cast):

Once per day, you can apply the effect of the Quicken Spell feat to any spell you cast without increasing the level of the spell or specially preparing it ahead of time. You can still use Quicken Spell normally.

I know the FAQ and also the quote from Complete Arcane about Spell Focus where they "conclude" that is doesn't work.
The problem with these kind of statements is that they have no RAW base.
The general SLA rules include the line:

In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell
So unless you find something in the general SLA rules that denies this interaction, the SLA still inherits compatibility.

You would need an explicit call out to trump this in any way. Neither Complete Arcane, nor the FAQ does this. They just pretend that the (geneal) rules are this way with zero evidence.

Unless you can find rules that back this up, I will stick to the general SLA rules to prevent dysfunction.
Because so far, I don't see any other option that wouldn't cause dysfunctions at one end or another.



Yeah, labeling Sudden X as metamagic is somewhat misleading since it isn't used like normal metamagic for either prepared or spontaneous casters.

I share your feelings. But we just have to live with it. While it's simply Specific Trumps General, it still fells odd.
But just because many things have been altered doesn't mean that it would lose the relation/tag.

Same can be said about SLA. They are altered to a degree that we have a hard time to still classify em as spells (being cast). But that is what they are by default: Spell Like Abilities

So unless the effect in question (metamagic) is triggered by something that SLA explicitly can't replicate (e.g. change in spell slot lvl), it should work as intended.

[Chronos]

Is "spontaneous casting" even a thing, in the rules? So far as I can tell, all of the rules are for either "If you prepare your spells" or "If you cast your spells without preparation". And yes, everything that isn't "with preparation" is "without preparation".

[Gruftzwerg]

Is "spontaneous casting" even a thing, in the rules? So far as I can tell, all of the rules are for either "If you prepare your spells" or "If you cast your spells without preparation". And yes, everything that isn't "with preparation" is "without preparation".

the sole thing that is "defined" as a keyword here is: spontaneous casting


The special ability of a cleric to drop a prepared spell (but not a domain spell) to gain a cure or inflict spell of the same level or lower, or of a druid to drop a prepared spell to gain a summon nature's ally spell of the same level or lower. Since the substitution of spells occurs on the spur of the moment, clerics need not prepare their cure or inflict spells in advance, nor do druids need to prepare their summon nature's ally spells in advance.

Oddly enough it is not what we are looking for here...

[Anthrowhale]

Mechanically, metamagic increases the spell level of the spell and increase the cast time of standard action or longer spells.
This is dependent on the classification of SLAs.


This is the closest the game ever gets to actually defining spontaneous casting.

The Rules Compendium has an entire section on "Spontaneous Casting" page 139. It says:

...can cast any spell they know using a daily allotment of spell slots. These characters are called spontaneous spellcasters.
This is more explicit than your quote and it definitely doesn't fit the general SLA pattern.


...In fact, the only two places that actually says anything different are 2 class' descriptions under invocations and eldritch blast...The FAQ isn't RAW ...
And, I'd add the spell focus discussion in complete arcane which is separate from the above. That's about 4 different places suggesting that SLAs are not spells indicating this is at least a substantial point of confusion amongst authors. It is possible that you know better than multiple authors of course, but it seems there is substantial controversy here.


Those are just specific subrules for prepared casting and spontaneous casting.
No, actually that's a quote from the nonspecific header paragraph for metamagic feats (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#metamagicFeats). Hence, it applies to all applications of metamagic.



Warlocks have neither.
Walocks invoke their invocations.

Right, and so they can't apply the general rules for metamagic quoted.


Is "spontaneous casting" even a thing, in the rules?
It is a full page in the Rules Compendium.

[Darg]

This is dependent on the classification of SLAs.

The Rules Compendium has an entire section on "Spontaneous Casting" page 139. It says:

This is more explicit than your quote and it definitely doesn't fit the general SLA pattern.

Why doesn't it fit the general SLA pattern? Battle sorcerer 1/fighter 5/suel arcanamach 1 has a daily limit of spell uses per day applicable only to 1 spell each. In this regard they would functionally be the same. SLAs just act like their own individual pools of uses per day.

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


And, I'd add the spell focus discussion in complete arcane which is separate from the above. That's about 4 different places suggesting that SLAs are not spells indicating this is at least a substantial point of confusion amongst authors. It is possible that you know better than multiple authors of course, but it seems there is substantial controversy here.

Where's the 4th one? I only know of three: the invocation feature of warlock and dragonfire adept and eldritch blast. All three are class features and one of them is a copy from another.


No, actually that's a quote from the nonspecific header paragraph for metamagic feats (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#metamagicFeats). Hence, it applies to all applications of metamagic.

Right, and so they can't apply the general rules for metamagic quoted.

It is a full page in the Rules Compendium.

Specific trumps general. We all know this rule. Hence the feature descriptions have precedence over what we might think. That said, invocations may be SLAs, but not all SLAs are invocations. You can't apply the rules for invocations to the broader spectrum of SLAs. Is there a rule outside of class features or even a general reference to said rule that SLAs can't benefit or be penalized from things that specifies "spell"? If there isn't, it's a textbook case of RAW says they should. As I mentioned earlier, SLAs wouldn't be able to benefit from the new spell interactions with feats in CArc if they can't even though it's implied that they can.

[Saintheart]

Leaving aside the ongoing argument, one titbit I noticed: Greenbound Summoning applies to a (Sp) version of Summon Nature's Ally by RAW.

I don't know how many or if there are a lot of SLAs that are Summon Nature's Ally specifically, but per Complete Arcane p. 71, that counts as an ability to cast the relevant spell for feat prerequisites. Greenbound Summoning can therefore be qualified for and its benefit applies to the creatures summoned, and doesn't say it only applies to a cast spell. No need to get involved in the discussion about whether feats apply to SLAs, by RAW at least this one seems to.

[Anthrowhale]

Why doesn't it fit the general SLA pattern? Battle sorcerer 1/fighter 5/suel arcanamach 1 has a daily limit of spell uses per day applicable only to 1 spell each.
You are creating a degenerate case which is almost identical. But, even in this contrived case there are differences.

If you take an additional level of battle sorcerer or suel arcanamach the spell casting pattern can differ. Additionally, the battle sorcerer (at least) still needs to 'ready' spells. And, additionally, the SLA user does not get bonus spells/day with increased charisma and plausibly can still use the SLA regardless of charisma penalty/damage.


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

You can see upthread that I get the wording. The difference is that I also see several authors specifying that although it functions like a spell it is not a spell. For example what is the minimum stat for casting it? Nothing is listed. Is a unique SLA arcane or divine? What school is it in? These questions aren't answered.



Where's the 4th one? I only know of three: the invocation feature of warlock and dragonfire adept and eldritch blast. All three are class features and one of them is a copy from another.

Ok, then 5. The other 2 are the opening of the feats section complete arcane and the FAQ.


Is there a rule outside of class features or even a general reference to said rule that SLAs can't benefit or be penalized from things that specifies "spell"?
Well, there's the "ruling" in the FAQ. Regardless of whether or not you agree with it, you should understand that this is an area of controversy where people may not want to override the ruling.


Leaving aside the ongoing argument, one titbit I noticed: Greenbound Summoning applies to a (Sp) version of Summon Nature's Ally by RAW.
Looks legit.

[Darg]

You can see upthread that I get the wording. The difference is that I also see several authors specifying that although it functions like a spell it is not a spell. For example what is the minimum stat for casting it? Nothing is listed. Is a unique SLA arcane or divine? What school is it in? These questions aren't answered.

Spells don't have an innate minimum stat for casting: see imbue with spell ability. It's the class feature itself which sets the minimum ability score.

What determines the source of a unique spell scroll? What's the source of a warlock's crafted scrolls? You aren't going to get an answer; although faerun declares SLAs are arcane as they draw from the weave.

As for spell school, why do they have to have a school if they aren't declared to be in a school? The PHB even says that not every spell has to be in one of the 8 schools.


Almost every spell belongs to one of eight schools of magic. A school of magic is a group of related spells that work in similar ways. A small number of spells (arcane mark, limited wish, permanency, prestidigitation, and wish) are universal, belonging to no school.


Ok, then 5. The other 2 are the opening of the feats section complete arcane and the FAQ.

Well, there's the "ruling" in the FAQ. Regardless of whether or not you agree with it, you should understand that this is an area of controversy where people may not want to override the ruling.

We know they aren't spells. The goal is finding evidence outside of class features within the rules to support the claim that they don't function like spells or interact with things that only mention spells like delivering touch spells or feats like weapon focus.

The class features only say that warlock/dragonfire adept can't benefit from spell focus and eldritch blast cannot benefit from metamagic specifically. If we allow reasons for interactions to dictate why something cannot benefit from something else as a rule, CArc then gives explicit permission for metamagic to work with SLAs as it gives a perfectly logical reason for these feats to work with SLAs.

The FAQ is a "ruling" yes. That said, it doesn't give itself the authority to overwrite rules. It functions through the authority vested in the DM to adjudicate and modify rules. The FAQ is a DM resource, not rules.

I'll say it again, the rules simply don't function if SLAs do not interact with spell rules where applicable and not differentiated by SLA specific exceptions; of which not benefiting from spell focus and metamagic is not.

[Anthrowhale]

What determines the source of a unique spell scroll?

What do you mean by this? (Other answers are reasonable.)



I'll say it again, the rules simply don't function if SLAs do not interact with spell rules where applicable and not differentiated by SLA specific exceptions; of which not benefiting from spell focus and metamagic is not.
What is an example that you have in mind here?

[Darg]

What do you mean by this? (Other answers are reasonable.)


What is an example that you have in mind here?

You asked if a unique SLA is arcane or divine. They're basically like custom spells. What determines the source of a custom spell? And why does this matter?

All kinds of rules refer to spells specifically but have to apply to SLAs for them to function properly. The rules for touch spells, the weapon-like spell rules and interactions in CArc, the mage slayer feat line, benefits from prestige classes in CArc and other sources, spell turning, etc.

[Gruftzwerg]

What do you mean by this? (Other answers are reasonable.)


What is an example that you have in mind here?

To add on what Darg already said:

My favorite example here are illusions.

What happens with the illusion rules if you have an SLA referring to an illusion?

SLA need to function like spells to inherit the illusion tag and the rules associated with it.

If you should insist otherwise, I will invade your local game with a "SLA illusions are not illusions"-build to mess around xD
(I hope you get the point here ;) )



_____________________________________________




Imho it's easy to get irritated by the various similar "rule tools" that 3.5 makes use of.


Lets try to dissect the limits of: "In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell"

So what does it mean to "function like a spell" while it is "actually not a spell"?

The question already gives the answer: "It works like a spell, but actually is not a spell."
We just need to translate that back into 3.5 rules.

1) "To work like a spell" it needs to interact with "effects" like a spell.

Remind you that spells, feats, special abilities .... all produce "effects", and for those a SLA functions just like a spell.

To prevent an interaction "just like a spell", you need to call out an explicit denial. Take the "share spell" ability for familiars and animal companions. It explicitly calls out to not work with SLA.


2) Since it is "actually not as spell", it's insufficient for "Requirements:"

If a "Requirement:"-line expects a spell, it sole works with spells and nothing else.

Meta feats don't have spells as "Requirement:", but sole target/affect em with their (added rider) effect.
Thus an SLA works as long the effect doesn't expect a spellslot lvl change.


The sole exception (I'm aware of atm) is that you can qualify for a prestige class with SLA, if the requirement requires specific spells that you can replicate with SLA. This is a "specific exception" to the general SLA rules to actually count as spells for "Requirements:".

__

Unless you can point to a specific exception, a SLA will work like a spell.


I hope this is somewhat comprehensible.. This is one of those things that took me longer to gasp what the rules actually want us to do here..^^

[Anthrowhale]

You asked if a unique SLA is arcane or divine. They're basically like custom spells. What determines the source of a custom spell? And why does this matter?
There are effects which vary based on the type of a spell. For example, if a Balor is using Blasphemy, can Divine Denial generate a save?

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, and ranger, in that order.
gives a way to resolve this with known spells. For unique effects it's less clear.


The rules for touch spells, the weapon-like spell rules and interactions in CArc, the mage slayer feat line, benefits from prestige classes in CArc and other sources, spell turning, etc.
The mechanics of use (i.e. touch spells, weapon-like rules, etc...) seems to be covered under 'a spell-like ability functions like a spell'. The mage slayer feat line specifically calls out SLAs in one feat at least. Spell Turning is an interesting case. Can Spell Turning work on SLAs? A similar case against is that you can't counterspell an SLA. While counterspelling is different, it's an example of spell deflection strategy. On the other hand SLAs can be dispelled.


...

I follow the reasoning but nothing ends the fact that there is controversy here. For myself, SLAs function like spells in the mechanics of application, addressing some of Darg's points. W.r.t. the effect of an SLA, I'm leaning towards this being indistinguishable from a spell implying that Incantatrix 3 (for example) can apply metamagic. When a unique effect is encountered, I'm entirely sure how to handle interactions dependent on spell type like Divine Denial.

[Darg]

There are effects which vary based on the type of a spell. For example, if a Balor is using Blasphemy, can Divine Denial generate a save?

gives a way to resolve this with known spells. For unique effects it's less clear.

Why not take the simple route and say that if it isn't stated, there isn't one? Yes, source has interactions just like spell school. That said, nothing says that the only sources for magic are arcane and divine. Shadowcasters cast magic drawn from the plane of shadow for example. As I mentioned earlier, Faerun in particular has a setting specific mention that SLAs are drawn from the weave making them arcane unless explicitly provided by a deity.


The mechanics of use (i.e. touch spells, weapon-like rules, etc...) seems to be covered under 'a spell-like ability functions like a spell'. The mage slayer feat line specifically calls out SLAs in one feat at least. Spell Turning is an interesting case. Can Spell Turning work on SLAs? A similar case against is that you can't counterspell an SLA. While counterspelling is different, it's an example of spell deflection strategy. On the other hand SLAs can be dispelled.

The base assumption the rules make is that SLAs function just like spells unless explicitly given exemption. Spell Turning does work on SLAs because they duplicate spells with spell levels/have spell level equivalents.

I've skimmed over several books so I might have missed something, but I can't find an offensive oriented SLA that doesn't duplicate a spell or interact with the target indirectly. Arcane Archer is a good example. The SLAs affect the arrow granting it an effect. Globe of invulnerability/spell Turning doesn't matter because it isn't the SLA trying to penetrate, just like how magic weapon isn't stopped by these spells when the sword strikes the target. In my experience, mechanically unique SLAs aren't directly offensive in nature so they don't need a spell level or spell school. That honor was given to extraordinary and supernatural abilities. Invocations were given an equivalent spell level because of this exception to the status quo.

[Thurbane]

Question for anyone who follows the "In all other ways an SLA is like a spell" reading: can you use an SLA to fill a Ring of Spell Storing, or a Spell Storing weapon?

Not a leading question, just genuinely curious.

[Darg]

Question for anyone who follows the "In all other ways an SLA is like a spell" reading: can you use an SLA to fill a Ring of Spell Storing, or a Spell Storing weapon?

Not a leading question, just genuinely curious.

I personally don't see anything wrong with it, but for the ring it would require that the SLA duplicates a spell with a spell level or has a spell level equivalent as it "contains up to three levels of spells." Spell storing stores a spell of up to 3rd. So ring stores levels, and the ability stores the spell directly.

[sreservoir]

Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes—for example, true seeing. 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, and ranger, in that order.

From a certain point of view, interaction with other abilities is a way that a spell "works", right?

[Chronos]

The way I see it, anything you can do with a spell, you can do with an SLA, unless the thing specifically says that SLAs don't work. That's what "In all other ways, SLAs function like spells" means.