Timeline for Can a spell-mimicking invocation be used in lieu of an arcane spell for Spellblast and Greatreach eldritch essence invocations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 23, 2018 at 12:53 | comment | added | KRyan | @WannabeWarlock 1. Feat and prestige class prerequisites are not the same as ability descriptions. These rules are the closest you ever get to getting what you want, and they don’t even apply to spellblast or greatreach blast to begin with. 2. Spell-like abilities and invocations count as some particular spell because they have the same effect. Complete Arcane describes requirements for a particular, named spell as requiring that effect—and not necessarily in spell form. But anything that cares more about spells than some specific effect doesn’t work for them. | |
| Mar 23, 2018 at 6:22 | comment | added | Wannabe Warlock | Sorry, but I'm not seeing where "they never count as 'a spell'" -- in fact, on page 72, it seems like they count as anything except for "able to cast [n]-level spells." It has a section that seems to explicitly point out that they can count as "a spell." It seems like, for example, caustic mire (greater, 4th) would be usable in conjunction with anything that could be used with the spell of that same name (such as spellblast). Maybe I'm working too long of hours, but I don't see what is so obvious here. | |
| Mar 23, 2018 at 1:52 | comment | added | KRyan | @WannabeWarlock Added, but in general I think that’s a little unnecessary. You aren’t (don’t seem to be) a newbie here, this is more of an expert-level question—it’s not unreasonable for answers to assume a certain amount of familiarity with the material. I assume you, and really anyone familiar with the details of the warlock class, are aware of the rules on pages 18 and 71-72 that go into this detail, so referencing them doesn’t really need a specific citation. | |
| Mar 23, 2018 at 1:50 | history | edited | KRyan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
adding quotation
|
| Mar 23, 2018 at 0:51 | comment | added | Wannabe Warlock | Lack of citation. You have said things that may or may not be true, but you haven't given any evidence for your claims. I'm happy to mark the answer, but you haven't provided a single specific source to back your claims other than naming a whole book. | |
| Mar 22, 2018 at 23:16 | comment | added | KRyan | @WannabeWarlock I consider the question rather thoroughly answered, conclusively and incontrovertibly. What do you consider to lack support here? | |
| Mar 22, 2018 at 23:10 | comment | added | Wannabe Warlock | Can you point to some rules reference to support what you've said here? I'd like to shore up the question tidily ;) | |
| Mar 17, 2018 at 17:47 | comment | added | KRyan | @WannabeWarlock They are special invocations not on the warlock invocation list; there is no way for a regular warlock to learn them. As for the Sudden line, that is an explicit (poorly-written) exception for those feats, that cannot be generalized outward. Especially considering how poorly-written that exception is—the only conceivable interpretation are that it is an exception, or that it’s a contradiction of the primary rule about invocations meeting requirements, and thus ignored per the errata rules. It cannot be read as overwriting the primary rule in general. | |
| Mar 17, 2018 at 17:35 | comment | added | Wannabe Warlock | Those "class features" are presented as invocations, so it's possible that any warlock can learn them (vs spellweave that is presented as an Su class feature instead of as, say, a metamagic feat). Please also note that according to Complete Arcane p.71, the "sudden" line of metamagic feats can be applied to invocations and spell-like abilities -- they require casting a spell. This would imply that casting an invocation fulfills more requirements than would at first be expected. That's actually what brought up this discussion on the first place | |
| Mar 17, 2018 at 14:30 | history | answered | KRyan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |