PDA

View Full Version : help to interpret some rules



Colin
01-30-2010, 08:31 AM
I have encountered a small problem where i would like some help from other's to evaluate the right way to do things.

On page 143 in complete arcane, under magebane it says ", or against creatures with the ability to use arcane spell-like abilities..."

Compare that with PHB page 180 under spell-like abilities ", even if the ability resembles an arcane spell..."

My question is then will magebane work against creatures with spell-like abilities, like a demon with greater teleport...?

My opinion is as follows:

No, it will not work, because most spell-like abilities only resemble arcane spells, the are infact not so. but is this a wrongfull interpretation...?

d-_-b
01-30-2010, 02:20 PM
My opinion: No it will not. If magebane worked against any and all creatures able to use spell-like abilities even a gnome would not be safe.

wizarddog
01-30-2010, 05:41 PM
Mage bane only works against creatures that use Arcane Spell like abilities. If the spell like ability is arcane, then it would be effective.

A gnome's ghost sound ability is a arcane spell so it would suffer from the bane. A devil with teleport would also be effected since teleport is an arcane spell.
If the spell like ability was divine, like a bless, then it would not effect the creature as they are not arcane abilities.

Karrius
01-30-2010, 08:31 PM
There is no such thing as an arcane spell-like ability. A spell is not inherently arcane or divine, that's a function of the class. It is, after all, completely possible to cast Bless as an arcane spell.

As such, "arcane spell-like ability' is just poor editing and writing. It should either apply to all creatures with spell-like abilities, or none of them. Personally, I would err on the side of having it apply to all SLA-having creatures.

wizarddog
01-31-2010, 03:09 AM
From the d20 SRD
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spellLikeAbilities


Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monsterís 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.

It is also explained in the MM p315 under special abilities. It's assumed an arcane spell unless it is a divine spell.

The Magebane property states:

Against any creature with arcane spells currently prepared or spell slots available to cast arcane spells without preparation, or against creatures with the ability to use arcane spell-like abilities...

Would apply only to those who use a Spell-like ability that is arcane.


Now, you can argue that it only applies to the function of the spell as for the class (that a spell functions differently when cast by a Druid than a wizard, for example--the DC of Fire Trap), but the item is call Magebane for a reason, and it has made the distinction on what it can effect.
--- Merged from Double Post ---
However, despite my interpretation, Magebane was rewritten in the Magic Item Compendium as effecting only arcane spell casters and those using Invocations--removing the spell-like ability feature. And rightly so... for only a +1 you could pretty much bane anything with that property. Now it falls more into balance.

Colin
01-31-2010, 03:54 AM
It is also explained in the MM p315 under special abilities. It's assumed an arcane spell unless it is a divine spell.

It dosn't say anywhere "It's assumed an arcane spell unless it is a divine spell", the only things i can read from the text is:

"A spell-like ability takes the same amount of time to complete as the spell that it mimics"
"Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monsterís spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions"
"even if the ability resembles an arcane spell"

"Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled."

Words lilke mimic, duplicate and resembles does not support the fact that they are arcane. And because they use those words, i find it hard to believe that they are the same sort.

And if they cannot be used to counterspell or vice versa, then i again find i hard to believe that they are arcane.

Besides that, magebane is a +1 ability, and it would make a better fit to not work against every spell-like ability, but only those where it is specified that it infact are an arcane spell-like ability, such as a drows spell-like abilities where it is said "these abilities are as the spells cast by a sorcerer of the drows character level" :)

Karrius
01-31-2010, 04:47 AM
It is also explained in the MM p315 under special abilities. It's assumed an arcane spell unless it is a divine spell.

Your analysis is incorrect, but your quote is something I didn't know about, and I stand corrected. It is not "an arcane spell unless it is a divine spell" - Cure Light Wounds is divine, but Protection from Evil is arcane, if you assume that that's what the quote is referred to. Which I'm not entirely sure of.

wizarddog
02-01-2010, 02:19 AM
No matter the interpretation, the magebane quality was poorly worded (as you stated) and was fixed in Magic Item Compendium. It was originally worded as a spell-like so it would work against warlocks.

The MIC clearly states when things work on invocations and that seems to be the way to describe warlock powers in the future.