SR vs. Slaying Arrow

[Infiniti2000]

I2K: Doesn't a spell produce a spell-like effect?
No. A spell produces a spell effect.

Really? The spell effect a spell produces is not spell-like? What is it, then, waterbuffalo-like? If anything is spell-like, it's a spell.

No. While they [Su abilities] may produce spell-like (in the English language sense) effects (c.f. vampire's Domination ability), they actually produce supernatural effects (in the game-rules language sense).

So, you agree that Su abilities can produce spell-like effects. I assumed from your lack of distinguishing the words "ability" and "effect" you threw game-rules language out the window. Please note that "spell-like effect" is not a glossary defined term. "Spell-like ability" is. You seem to be claiming that something that produces a spell-like effect is subject to SR. But, we've now agreed that Su produces spell-like effects, so ergo they must be subject to SR.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Really? The spell effect a spell produces is not spell-like? What is it, then, waterbuffalo-like? If anything is spell-like, it's a spell.

No. A spell effect is a spell effect. It is not "spell-like" in game terms. A spell can be counterspelled. A spell-like ability cannot.

So, you agree that Su abilities can produce spell-like effects.

No, I said they can do so according to the English language, but not according to game rules.

For instance, take a Vampire's Dominate ability:

Dominate (Su): A vampire can crush an opponent’s will just by looking onto his or her eyes. This is similar to a gaze attack, except that the vampire must use a standard action, and those merely looking at it are not affected. Anyone the vampire targets must succeed on a Will save or fall instantly under the vampire’s influence as though by a dominate person spell (caster level 12th). The ability has a range of 30 feet.

The Dominate ability works an awful lot like the Dominate Person spell. Accordingly, in English, we can say that it's like a spell - or spell-like.

However, in game-rules-language, we cannot. Dominate is not spell-like. It is Supernatural. The Domination effect is a supernatural effect.

Therefore, while you could use Dispel Magic against someone targeted by a Dominate Person spell, or a Dominate Person spell-like effect, you cannot use Dispel Magic against someone targeted by a Vampire's Dominate ability.

Table 8–1
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 290

Problem: The table indicates that supernatural abilities canbe dispelled. This is not true in v.3.5.

Solution: In the Dispel row, Supernatural column, change Yes to No.

I assumed from your lack of distinguishing the words "ability" and "effect" you threw game-rules language out the window.

No. The two are synonymous, as far as anything is concerned.

But, we've now agreed that Su produces spell-like effects, so ergo they must be subject to SR.

You have; I haven't.

"Two dogs barking."

 

[Hypersmurf]

Don't know. Is there anything that only takes damage from magical fire?

Well, for example:
Incorporeal creatures can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures, by magic weapons, or by spells, spell-like effects, or supernatural effects. They are immune to all nonmagical attack forms. They are not burned by normal fires, affected by natural cold, or harmed by mundane acids.

They're not burned by 'normal fires', and you claim that the flame produced by a Flaming weapon deals 'normal fire damage'...

-Hyp.

 

[Wonko the Sane]

So, you agree that Su abilities can produce spell-like effects. I assumed from your lack of distinguishing the words "ability" and "effect" you threw game-rules language out the window. Please note that "spell-like effect" is not a glossary defined term. "Spell-like ability" is. You seem to be claiming that something that produces a spell-like effect is subject to SR. But, we've now agreed that Su produces spell-like effects, so ergo they must be subject to SR.

Huh?

Supernatural ability: a magical power that produces a particular effect, as opposed to a natural, extraordinary, or spell-like ability. Using a supernatual ability generally does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Supernatural abilities are not subject to dispelling, disruption, or spell resistance.
/snip

But that's not the topic here.

Granted, the RAW doesn't cover this, but I think the fact that the "slaying" bit is obviously magical rather than a poison or "the arrow automatically hits the target's head/heart, etc." thing, death ward can save you, and it's requisite spell (finger of death) allows a saving throw. Plus, it's a death effect. If you don't allow all of the ways to negate it (attack roll, saving throw, and SR) to work, it will likely never see use by any of the PCs enemies, unless you really are evil to your players.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Now, you're just making stuff up. There's no game-rule definition (i.e. defined in the RAW glossary) of a "spell-like effect." Thus, anything that is spell-like is a spell-like effect, whether it's supernatural, a spell-like ability, a spell, or a magic item. They all produce spell-like effects. For you to argue this point is madness because you have 0 rules to back you up.

No. The two ["ability" and "effect"]are synonymous, as far as anything is concerned.

Not even close. One is a glossary term, one isn't. Creatures, for example, have spell-like abilities, not spell-like effects. The difference is so great that it boggles my mind that you cannot discern it. I suggest you read the section on spell-like abilities (it's apparent you haven't done so yet) to see that, e.g., magic items are not spell-like abilities.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Huh?

I was arguing a strawman with Patryn, but he failed to follow the point when he agreed Su abilities produce spell-like effects (and now says he didn't agree, but you can scroll up and see for yourself).

And, RAW does cover this, quite well and quite clearly. SR works only against two things, both clearly defined in the glossary and elsewhere: spells and spell-like abilities. It does not work against Su abilities (magical effects), Ex abilities (non-magical), magical items (magical effects), or anything else. Saying that "spell-like effects" implies "spell-like abilities" is inane.

 

[Wonko the Sane]

And, RAW does cover this, quite well and quite clearly. SR works only against two things, both clearly defined in the glossary and elsewhere: spells and spell-like abilities. It does not work against Su abilities (magical effects), Ex abilities (non-magical), magical items (magical effects), or anything else. Saying that "spell-like effects" implies "spell-like abilities" is inane.

Right..."spell-like effect" isn't defined anywhere. Mostly because it isn't required.

Spells are spells, spell-like abilities are spell-like abilities. Saying that "spell-like effects" means anything besides what the speaker wants it to mean is equally inane.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

They're not burned by 'normal fires', and you claim that the flame produced by a Flaming weapon deals 'normal fire damage'...

Oh! I see what you're arguing.

It's not (normal fire) damage.

It's normal (fire damage).

In this case, it's from magical fire. The fire, however, isn't subject to spell resistance in the same way that, say, Fire Seeds produce normal (fire damage).

EDIT: Or an Orb of Fire produces normal (fire damage).

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I was arguing a strawman with Patryn, but he failed to follow the point when he agreed Su abilities produce spell-like effects (and now says he didn't agree, but you can scroll up and see for yourself).

Stop making crap up.

Seriously.

Read what I wrote.

No. While they [Su abilities] may produce spell-like (in the English language sense) effects (c.f. vampire's Domination ability), they actually produce supernatural effects (in the game-rules language sense).

Note the important phrase "English language sense."

As in, I can say, in English, and be perfectly correct, "Wolves are dog-like animals. They share many similarities."

Similarly, I can say "Some supernatural abilities produce spell-like effects. They share many similarities."

However, as soon as we recognize that we are speaking in GAME TERMS, then I cannot say that and be correct. Supernatural abilities produce supernatural effects - and supernatural effects, only.

Which is what I posted earlier. :BIG FREAKIN' ROLLEYES:

 

[dcollins]

Saying that "spell-like effects" implies "spell-like abilities" is inane.

Look again at the "Spell Resistance" quote from the DMG I posted above, where precisely that occurs. They are synonymous.