Rule Clarification (Augment Summoning)

[Clement]

After the session on Sunder I went back and did some digging. Turns out I uncovered a few things on SLAs and confirmation that it should work only in that situation. 

According to the PRD/ Core rulebook (Under Magic/ Chapter 9 - Magic):

Spell-Like Abilities: Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

If a character class grants a spell-like ability that is not based on an actual spell, the ability's effective spell level is equal to the highest-level class spell the character can cast, and is cast at the class level the ability is granted.

We were looking under the wrong entry as this is much clearer that it works just like spells and functions just like a spell. If so shouldn't it benefit from the feat? 

And if I also found confirmation from the lead designer:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2k75q?Round-2-Rules-Questions#9

Quote: 

Andrew Betts wrote:

Can Augment Summoning also affect monsters summoned through this Spell-Like Ability?

Yes

Jason Bulmahn 
Lead Designer 
Paizo Publishing

The answer was a clear yes, no ifs no buts. 

[Creep/DM]

To be clear, a spell-like ability is not a spell. It may work and function like a spell, but there are differences, such as (what you have pointed out yourself):

1. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus.

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

Based on your reasoning, if it works and functions like a spell, why can't it be used to counterspell, or be counterspelled?

Based on the current version of the PRD, the answer is clear that the feat applies to spells, no ifs and no buts. 

As mentioned in my other posts, the PRD is considered the single official source. Any material, even if in the Paizo website/blog/message board/youtube video/faq/email/twitter etc., has to be updated into the PRD before it becomes effective. We have already seen too many contradictions and differences in unofficial online sources as well as rule reversals in the past.

It would be very unfair to other players if a special exception is made just for you.

[Clement]

Since the spell-like ability does not work with augment like the spell should, then it does not work like the spell, hence a contradiction in the rules. And if we go by RAW, the text says it functions just as summon monster # (except...); that means it's going to function as summon monster # (Except...), And summon monster # says it's a spell.

Summon Monster I (Sp): Starting at 1st level, a summoner can cast summon monster I as a spell-like ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + his Charisma modifier. Drawing upon this ability uses up the same power as the summoner uses to call his eidolon. As a result, he can only use this ability when his eidolon is not summoned. He can cast this spell as a standard action and the creatures remain for 1 minute per level (instead of 1 round per level). At 3rd level, and every 2 levels thereafter, the power of this ability increases by one spell level, allowing him to summon more powerful creatures (to a maximum of summon monster IX at 17th level). At 19th level, this ability can be used as gate or summon monster IX. If used as gate, the summoner must pay any required material components. A summoner cannot have more than one summon monster or gate spell active in this way at one time. If this ability is used again, any existing summon monster or gate immediately ends. These summon spells are considered to be part of his spell list for the purposes of spell trigger and spell completion items. In addition, he can expend uses of this ability to fufill the construction requirements of any magic item he creates, so long as he can use this ability to cast the required spell.

If we read here the Summon Monster I Spell-like ability has been referred to as a "Spell" as well as a "spell-like ability" and an "ability".

On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 5:53:11 PM UTC+8, Clement wrote:

After the session on Sunder I went back and did some digging. Turns out I uncovered a few things on SLAs and confirmation that it should work only in that situation. 

According to the PRD/ Core rulebook (Under Magic/ Chapter 9 - Magic):

Spell-Like Abilities: Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

[Creep/DM]

Spells and spell-like abilities are not the same, if we go by RAW, they are separate rule elements and so there is no contradiction. For example, the following rule elements clearly state "spells and spell-like abilities". You can find many others by doing a search on the PRD.

Steel Soul

Benefit: You receive a +4 racial bonus on saving throws against spells and spell-like abilities. This replaces the normal bonus from the dwarf's hardy racial trait.

Spell Resistance (Ex) A creature with spell resistance can avoid the effects of spells and spell-like abilities that directly affect it. To determine whether a spell or spell-like ability works against a creature with spell resistance, the caster must make a caster level check (1d20 + caster level). If the result equals or exceeds the creature's spell resistance, the spell works normally, although the creature is still allowed a saving throw if the spell would normally permit one.

As for the paragraph on Summon Monster I (Sp), it is clearly stated that it is a spell-like ability. When the word "spell" is used, it is referring to the spells in the wizard's spell list for the purpose of determining its effects and for inclusion into the summoner's spell list. Whereas when the paragraph is referring to the ability, it says "this ability" multiple times (which you have neglected to highlight).

[Silver Eyed King]

In reply to this. This point is stating the differences that make it a separate thing. In a sense, we can either interpret it as:

It is a spell, except that it cannot do, x, y, z. 

In this case, we can specify what a SLA is to very high precision, including the restrictions.

Or we can interpret it as:

Its not a spell. But it behaves like a spell, except that it cannot do x, y, z.

In this case, we still have not defined what a SLA is. Just what it appears to behave like, and what it cannot do. It does not specify how close it is to a spell, or what are the exact attributes that it shares with a spell.

[Creep/DM]

There are existing rules defining the characteristics of spell-like abilities under Core Rulebook -> Magic -> Special Abilities and Glossary -> Special Abilities, so it would not be accurate to say that it is not defined.

Another piece of evidence can be found under Bestiaries -> Universal Monster Rules:

Spell-Like Abilities (Sp) Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components). They go away in an antimagic field and are subject to spell resistance if the spell the ability is based on would be subject to spell resistance.

[Silver Eyed King]

This still says: Like a spell, but not a spell. doesn't say what exactly makes it a spell. It does not tell us if feats that say "spells" affect it, or abilities. Unless it is interpreted as: it is exactly like a spell minus verbal, somatic, focus and material components.

Clear distinction in the wording(spells and spell like abilities) for features can also be interpreted as being done so to prevent players from arguing that spell like abilities are not spells and thus bypass things that stop "spells". Clear distinction then reinforces the similarity between spells and spell like abilities and make a clear statement that SLA's nature as a spell causes it to not bypass those features.

Also, I quote from an earlier post:

"To be clear, a spell-like ability is not a spell. It may work and function like a spell, but there are differences, such as (what you have pointed out yourself):

1. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus.

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

Based on your reasoning, if it works and functions like a spell, why can't it be used to counterspell, or be counterspelled?"

The answer to the question is that this line STATES where spells and SLA differs. ie, SLA IS a spell except it (1) and (2). That is a statement of the rule. Therefore, the answer to the question : "Based on your reasoning, if it works and functions like a spell, why can't it be used to counterspell, or be counterspelled?" is that it cannot counterspell because it is SLA and not a spell, and the rules for SLA state that SLA cannot counterspell. If we take SLA to be EXACTLY the same as a spell, then there is a contradiction. But because we made sure to define the regions where SLA and spells are different, there is no contradiction.

On a separate note, the class seems strong due to its summoning ability, but this ability is almost only restricted to combat. The summoner's lack of other utility is quite huge. Only 2 skill points plus int being a non emphasized stat means a lack of skills (even with the Knowledge(all) class skill). 

Additionally they have highly restricted spell list (up to level 6 spells only except for the SLA, only very few select spells to chose from) and slow spell progression (every 3 levels instead of every 2), means that the ability to throw out very strong spells that can turn the tide of combat.

This means that their saving grace has to come from summons and eidolon. Considering that higher level creatures can do extra damage to summoned creatures, or outright destroy them, their summoning spells might see restricted use as well. Even the eidolon (which is supposed to be a strong point) will be affected by effects that summoned monsters are affected by(with the exception of spells that prevent contact). A banishment spell (cleric 6, sorcerer/wizard 7) is enough to take out an eidolon from combat, forcing the summoner to use summon spells. Which is weak if it can't be augmented. Can't rely on other spells because of spell list. Can't fight because caster. Thus level 20 character can be locked out by a level 6/7 spell. 

The ability to cast in light armor seems like an edge, but due to the lack of a marking mechanic, it is very easy to snipe a summoner. With no marking mechanic, attackers can easily bypass the frontline to reach the summoner. The inability to cast protective spells(refer above) makes them much less able to defend themselves as compared to a wizard or sorcerer. Therefore, the ability to wear light armor is very important to ensure that the summoner does not simply die. I am pretty sure there are many creatures that can snipe a summoner with one full round of attacks.

Perhaps they may be strong in the early levels, but so are fighters and paladins or any class with a full BAB. But these classes even out later as spells get stronger. And because a summoner isn't able to catch up in terms of spells, the relative power of a summoner will drop as levels go higher.

[Creep/DM]

On Thursday, March 21, 2013 12:48:45 AM UTC+8, Silver Eyed King wrote:

This still says: Like a spell, but not a spell. doesn't say what exactly makes it a spell. It does not tell us if feats that say "spells" affect it, or abilities. Unless it is interpreted as: it is exactly like a spell minus verbal, somatic, focus and material components.

There is no reason to force-fit the interpretation suggested above, especially when a more consistent interpretation exists. 

As stated under Core Rulebook -> Magic -> Special Abilities:

The rules state spell-like abilities are under the category of special abilities, many of them are based on spells but not all, they function like spells and the characteristics of spell-like abilities are xyz.

There is no reason to interpret it as spell-like abilities are spells, except for xyz.

So far I have presented a number of evidence and examples from PRD, whereas evidence supporting the counter argument has yet to be seen. 

To summarise the evidence from PRD:

1. A spell-like ability is not a spell. (This is to establish that a "IS A" relationship does not exist between the two.)

Evidence:

1a. The PRD states that "Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components)."

1b. The rules for spell-like abilities highlighted the similarities and differences between spells and spell-like abilities. The rules only says it works and functions like a spell, and there is no evidence that contradicts 1a (they are not spells).

1c. There are rules for spell-like abilities, supernatural abilities and extraordinary abilities under the category "Special Abilities". So it would be more consistent to say that they are separate rule elements from spells. Also note that not all spell-like abilities are based on spells, an example is the Paladin's class feature Divine Bond (Sp), which is also a spell-like ability.

2. Augment summoning does not apply to spell-like abilities.

Evidence:

2a. Augment summoning only stated spells. It does not state spell-like abilities, supernatural abilities or extraordinary abilities.

2b. There are many examples of rule elements that clearly state whether they apply to spells, spell-like abilities and/or supernatural abilities. There is no reason to believe that Augment Summoning is a special case that is treated differently.

Analysis and discussion would not be fruitful if the counter argument lacks concrete evidence. The challenge here is to find evidence that states a spell-like ability IS A spell or that feats that apply to spells also always apply to spell-like abilities.

Different players will have different opinions on the strengths and weaknesses of the character classes. Different players also envision their characters and their roles in the party differently, and so the utility value of class features are also perceived differently. Hence it is neither helpful nor relevant to discuss it in this rules clarification thread. Feel free to discuss with the other players if you wish on another thread.

[Creep/DM]

To illustrate with an example, consider the following rule elements extracted from PRD:

Barbarian

Superstition (Ex): The barbarian gains a +2 morale bonus on saving throws made to resist spells, supernatural abilities, and spell-like abilities. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 levels the barbarian has attained. While raging, the barbarian cannot be a willing target of any spell and must make saving throws to resist all spells, even those cast by allies.

Combat Casting

Benefit: You get a +4 bonus on concentration checks made to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability when casting on the defensive or while grappled.

Steel Soul

Benefit: You receive a +4 racial bonus on saving throws against spells and spell-like abilities. This replaces the normal bonus from the dwarf's hardy racial trait.

Augment Summoning

Benefit: Each creature you conjure with any summon spell gains a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength and Constitution for the duration of the spell that summoned it.

A consistent set of interpretations would be:

1. Superstition applies to spells, supernatural abilities, and spell-like abilities, but not extraordinary abilities.

2. Combat Casting and Steel Soul applies to spells and spell-like abilities, but not supernatural abilities or extraordinary abilities.

3. Augment Summoning applies to spells, but not supernatural abilities, extraordinary abilities or spell-like abilities.

Challenge: Find a more appropriate and consistent set of interpretations.