Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="HolyMan" data-source="post: 5301846" data-attributes="member: 84167">AoO aren't my major concern it is being able to use this &quot;spell-like&quot; abilty will paraylzed(or tied up etc.) but you can't cast spells while paraylzed(tied up etc.). So that seems &quot;unspell-like&quot;.&nbsp;So point two:&nbsp;Without components of any kind you give the oppurtinity to cast while impaired. I say that is &quot;inspell-like&quot;, and shouldn't be allowed.&nbsp;And that they can be countered but how does someone know a spell is being cast. You say &quot;I use my SLA to summon a monster to put a dire wolf behind the enemy.&quot; and I say &quot; Your ablity is countered by one of the inquisitors.&quot; We all know the next thing will be &quot;How did he know I was casting anything?&quot; (Although the Bestiary says they can't be countered but the Core book says they can.)&nbsp;That is what I really wish to address and if we simply say, SLA's can't be countered then they become a little more powerful than their intention. I know they book states that the have no components but it also says that they are like spells and spells do have at least a verbal component. &nbsp;If we even add just that (V component) we give reason for counterspelling, and the inability to use it if you are incapacited and can't speak. &nbsp;Sure spell like abilites have been around a while and never &quot;fixed&quot;. They work to the players benefits when used or to the DM's when used agianst players, balanced ok, sure. But they are still sitting their contradicting themselves. &nbsp;So point three:&nbsp;Do we allow counterspelling of SLAs or not? &nbsp;If they can than they will need some component to allow for how the counterer knew a spell was being cast. If they can't be then are they really &quot;spell-like&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HolyMan, post: 5301846, member: 84167"] AoO aren't my major concern it is being able to use this "spell-like" abilty will paraylzed(or tied up etc.) but you can't cast spells while paraylzed(tied up etc.). So that seems "unspell-like". [B]So point two:[/B] Without components of any kind you give the oppurtinity to cast while impaired. I say that is "inspell-like", and shouldn't be allowed. And that they can be countered but how does someone know a spell is being cast. You say "I use my SLA to summon a monster to put a dire wolf behind the enemy." and I say " Your ablity is countered by one of the inquisitors." We all know the next thing will be "How did he know I was casting anything?" (Although the Bestiary says they can't be countered but the Core book says they can.) That is what I really wish to address and if we simply say, SLA's can't be countered then they become a little more powerful than their intention. I know they book states that the have no components but it also says that they are like spells and spells do have at least a verbal component. If we even add just that (V component) we give reason for counterspelling, and the inability to use it if you are incapacited and can't speak. Sure spell like abilites have been around a while and never "fixed". They work to the players benefits when used or to the DM's when used agianst players, balanced ok, sure. But they are still sitting their contradicting themselves. [B]So point three:[/B] Do we allow counterspelling of SLAs or not? If they can than they will need some component to allow for how the counterer knew a spell was being cast. If they can't be then are they really "spell-like". [/QUOTE]

Verification