Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="HolyMan" data-source="post: 5301720" data-attributes="member: 84167">Ok are we ready for the Special Abilities debate? Think they need to go over this stuff a little better. Here are my sources if anyone has others please let me know:&nbsp;Core pg. 221 &amp; 554Beatiary pg.304Srd (which reads verbatim like pg. 554 of the Core PF book)3.5 PHB pg. 142 &amp; 180 (pg. 180 reads like pg. 221 of the Core PF book)3.5 DMG pg. 289 (which is almost a copy of pg. 554 of the Core PF book with a chart thrown in to help confuse you.)&nbsp;Point open for debate:&nbsp;&nbsp;I think that Spell-Like Abilities(SLA), Supernatural Abilities(Su), and Extraordinary Abilities(Ex) should be on a scale of best down. For me that would be - Ex (1st), Su (2nd), and SLA (3rd).&nbsp;So your Ex ability would allow for no components, no possibliy for dispel or countering, can not be negated, target gets no SR, and no AoO. Action: varies (swiift or reactionary)&nbsp;Su abilities would have to have at least a verbal component, can be dispelled or negated, but cannot be countered. Target is not allowed SR and AoO not allowed. Action: varies (swift or standard)&nbsp;SLA's being on the bottom of the 'totem pole&quot; would be just like spells in almost everyway. Components needed, can be dispelled or countered, subject to negation, target gets SR and they provoke AoO. Action: standard or full round.&nbsp;With the above the only change to the RAW would be SLA's needing components. But it seems strange to me that a &quot;power&quot; that you can use standing stark still would provoke an AoO, so that's one of the reasons I believe you should add them. Also if your SLA is a &quot;Ray&quot; spell you don't need to point?? (somatic).&nbsp;Let me know what you think guys and if you find out anything else.&nbsp;HM</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HolyMan, post: 5301720, member: 84167"] Ok are we ready for the Special Abilities debate? Think they need to go over this stuff a little better. Here are my sources if anyone has others please let me know: Core pg. 221 & 554 Beatiary pg.304 Srd (which reads verbatim like pg. 554 of the Core PF book) 3.5 PHB pg. 142 & 180 (pg. 180 reads like pg. 221 of the Core PF book) 3.5 DMG pg. 289 (which is almost a copy of pg. 554 of the Core PF book with a chart thrown in to help confuse you.) [B][U]Point open for debate:[/U][/B] I think that Spell-Like Abilities(SLA), Supernatural Abilities(Su), and Extraordinary Abilities(Ex) should be on a scale of best down. For me that would be - Ex (1st), Su (2nd), and SLA (3rd). So your Ex ability would allow for no components, no possibliy for dispel or countering, can not be negated, target gets no SR, and no AoO. Action: varies (swiift or reactionary) Su abilities would have to have at least a verbal component, can be dispelled or negated, but cannot be countered. Target is not allowed SR and AoO not allowed. Action: varies (swift or standard) SLA's being on the bottom of the 'totem pole" would be just like spells in almost everyway. Components needed, can be dispelled or countered, subject to negation, target gets SR and they provoke AoO. Action: standard or full round. With the above the only change to the RAW would be SLA's needing components. But it seems strange to me that a "power" that you can use standing stark still would provoke an AoO, so that's one of the reasons I believe you should add them. Also if your SLA is a "Ray" spell you don't need to point?? (somatic). Let me know what you think guys and if you find out anything else. HM [/QUOTE]

Verification