Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Simulacrum used by PCs.


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

101 to 150 of 161 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tacticslion wrote:

However the simulacrum is a magical effect - specifically an illusion. Much like a magical sword isn't destroyed, but the magic is suppressed, an Antimagic Field, based on the wording, should suppress the illusion for the duration of the field. At which point we're strongly into GM-regulated territory. There is no RAW for what happens when an ice statue focus for which the simulacrum is based is destroyed (not a difficult task within an Antimagic Field - virtually any hard, sharp object repeatedly bashed against it will do, especially by a fighter of sixth level and up!).

One may argue that the illusion isn't annulled based off of the instantaneous duration - but a sword doesn't have a duration for its magic, nor does an incoporeal creature (and creating them would be an instantaneous effect). Yet incoporeal creatures wink out in an Antimagic Field, as do swords' magic. Simulacra aren't constructs, outsiders, or undead. True Seeing reveals their true form. As far as I can tell, they would continue to radiate "illusion magic" to detection spells. All this would indicate that an antimagic field shuts them down (based entirely on the concept of what an antimagic field does, I admit: there's no RAW one way or the other, though I'd say RAI - not RAW - is that it would do so).

Actually a simulacrum is a creature, exactly like a construct.

He will feel uncomfortable in a anti magic field and leave it as soon as possible (this part is a 3.x rule actually) but he will suffer no ill effect. Removing the illusion part so that he appear as a creature of the material used to craft the simulacrum can be a valid houserule but it will be an houserule.

Antimagic Field wrote:
The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures).

A anti magic field don't keep out or damage undead, even those created with a spell, like skeleton and zombies, nor it affect other creatures created with magic. After the creature is "born", with whatever method, he is independent from the means that have spawned him.

Silver Crusade

Diego Rossi wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

However the simulacrum is a magical effect - specifically an illusion. Much like a magical sword isn't destroyed, but the magic is suppressed, an Antimagic Field, based on the wording, should suppress the illusion for the duration of the field. At which point we're strongly into GM-regulated territory. There is no RAW for what happens when an ice statue focus for which the simulacrum is based is destroyed (not a difficult task within an Antimagic Field - virtually any hard, sharp object repeatedly bashed against it will do, especially by a fighter of sixth level and up!).

One may argue that the illusion isn't annulled based off of the instantaneous duration - but a sword doesn't have a duration for its magic, nor does an incoporeal creature (and creating them would be an instantaneous effect). Yet incoporeal creatures wink out in an Antimagic Field, as do swords' magic. Simulacra aren't constructs, outsiders, or undead. True Seeing reveals their true form. As far as I can tell, they would continue to radiate "illusion magic" to detection spells. All this would indicate that an antimagic field shuts them down (based entirely on the concept of what an antimagic field does, I admit: there's no RAW one way or the other, though I'd say RAI - not RAW - is that it would do so).

Actually a simulacrum is a creature, exactly like a construct.

He will feel uncomfortable in a anti magic field and leave it as soon as possible (this part is a 3.x rule actually) but he will suffer no ill effect. Removing the illusion part so that he appear as a creature of the material used to craft the simulacrum can be a valid houserule but it will be an houserule.

Antimagic Field wrote:
The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures).
A anti magic field don't keep out or damage undead, even those...

I'm not sure that is correct. A Simulacrum is Illusion(Shadow) which means it is only partially real. You have to make a disguise check at the time of creation. Now if someone that knows the person recognizes that it's a fake but it doesn't say what happens then. The designers really need to sit down with this spell and the Illusion (Shadow) school and write it out into more detail. Both seem very very incomplete.

The spell calls it an Illusory duplicate and nothing more so if it did walk into an anti-magic field it would cease to exist until the field was taken away, it would just be a statue.


shallowsoul wrote:

I'm not sure that is correct. A Simulacrum is Illusion(Shadow) which means it is only partially real. You have to make a disguise check at the time of creation. Now if someone that knows the person recognizes that it's a fake but it doesn't say what happens then. The designers really need to sit down with this spell and the Illusion (Shadow) school and write it out into more detail. Both seem very very incomplete.

The spell calls it an Illusory duplicate and nothing more so if it did walk into an anti-magic field it would cease to exist until the field was taken away, it would just be a statue.

Eh considering that the spell has already been and gone at the time that the antimagic field is applied I see no reason to believe that a simulacrum would be suppressed any more than that the damage from a fireball would be suppressed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Diego Rossi wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

lots-o-stuff claiming simulacrum is a magical effect:
However the simulacrum is a magical effect - specifically an illusion. Much like a magical sword isn't destroyed, but the magic is suppressed, an Antimagic Field, based on the wording, should suppress the illusion for the duration of the field. At which point we're strongly into GM-regulated territory. There is no RAW for what happens when an ice statue focus for which the simulacrum is based is destroyed (not a difficult task within an Antimagic Field - virtually any hard, sharp object repeatedly bashed against it will do, especially by a fighter of sixth level and up!).

One may argue that the illusion isn't annulled based off of the instantaneous duration - but a sword doesn't have a duration for its magic, nor does an incoporeal creature (and creating them would be an instantaneous effect). Yet incoporeal creatures wink out in an Antimagic Field, as do swords' magic. Simulacra aren't constructs, outsiders, or undead. True Seeing reveals their true form. As far as I can tell, they would continue to radiate "illusion magic" to detection spells. All this would indicate that an antimagic field shuts them down (based entirely on the concept of what an antimagic field does, I admit: there's no RAW one way or the other, though I'd say RAI - not RAW - is that it would do so).

Actually a simulacrum is a creature, exactly like a construct.

He will feel uncomfortable in a anti magic field and leave it as soon as possible (this part is a 3.x rule actually) but he will suffer no ill effect. Removing the illusion part so that he appear as a creature of the material used to craft the simulacrum can be a valid houserule but it will be an houserule.

Antimagic Field wrote:
The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures).
A anti magic field don't keep out or damage undead, even those created with a spell, like skeleton and zombies, nor it affect other creatures created with magic. After the creature is "born", with whatever method, he is independent from the means that have spawned him.

Actually, Diego, check my post again. Specifically the title of the spoiler you're responding to: "Actually I retract most of this as it actually specifies that you create a duplicate creature, not a magical effect. Which means you literally create new creatures (that are duplicates of old ones). That's powerful."

So, yeah, I already admitted it's a creature, not a magical effect. I apparently got the idea that it was a magical effect from reading James Jacobs' posts on the subject (he treats it as an ongoing magical effect and suggests we do as well), but by RAW it's actually a new creature. Also, I'm not sure about previous versions, but there's no particular reason anyone could see through the spell, except maybe with true seeing... and that's slightly debatable (though I'd still say it works).

Part the first: Simulacrum claims only that someone can "detect the ruse" but not "see through the spell" (or any similar wording) by a successful sense motive check. Effectively they can tell that it's not <person X> (or at least they become convinced of that fact), but they don't necessarily know who or what it is.

Part the second: True Seeing specifies that it can "see all things as they actually are" and "see through illusions" (among other things) - as a result I'd say it's pretty straightforward (as the simulacrum is actually made out of ice and snow and is, in fact, the result of an illusion spell), but that's potentially debatable due to the fact that the simulacrum is an actual new creature and otherwise responds to magic exactly like the original creature. Again, I'm not making the argument it works that way, but I could see it being argued that way.

In any event, this all makes simulacrum that much more powerful.

Also, WWWW, the real question is whether or not the Antimagic Field has any effect. Because a simulacrum walk into it isn't so much similar to having a Fireball go off and then cast the spell, as it is having a partially-real illusion walk into said field that specifically shuts off ongoing magical effects.

Now, Diego is perfectly correct: there is no reason, RAW, for anything to happen at all (and an old 3.X rule indicates some things do, but the simulacrum is like a construct). But, as I've previously mentioned, this is one of those spells perfect for house ruling.

Silver Crusade

I think Simulacrum was made to be house ruled and needs to stay way from RAW discussions as much as possible.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
shallowsoul wrote:
I think Simulacrum was made to be house ruled and needs to stay way from RAW discussions as much as possible.

I disagree that it needs to stay away from RAW discussions, but then again, I'm totes cool houseruling it!


Tacticslion wrote:
Also, WWWW, the real question is whether or not the Antimagic Field has any effect. Because a simulacrum walk into it isn't so much similar to having a Fireball go off and then cast the spell, as it is having a partially-real illusion walk into said field that specifically shuts off ongoing magical effects.

Eh the question is whether the results of a spell continue to be magical after the duration of the spell has finished. That is not to say that your example is necessarily wrong but that if the spell is currently active the situation is different.

Osirion

Tacticslion wrote:
Also, WWWW, the real question is whether or not the Antimagic Field has any effect. Because a simulacrum walk into it isn't so much similar to having a Fireball go off and then cast the spell, as it is having a partially-real illusion walk into said field that specifically shuts off ongoing magical effects.

Simulacrum has an Instantaneous duration.

The magic came and went in the moment of spellcasting and can't be dispelled after the fact.

What remains may be a magical creature, with various spell-like and supernatural powers that might not work in an anti-magic shell, but the creature itself would remain.

Silver Crusade

Set wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
Also, WWWW, the real question is whether or not the Antimagic Field has any effect. Because a simulacrum walk into it isn't so much similar to having a Fireball go off and then cast the spell, as it is having a partially-real illusion walk into said field that specifically shuts off ongoing magical effects.

Simulacrum has an Instantaneous duration.

The magic came and went in the moment of spellcasting and can't be dispelled after the fact.

What remains may be a magical creature, with various spell-like and supernatural powers that might not work in an anti-magic shell, but the creature itself would remain.

Actually no. The only thing that an Anti-Magic Field can't suppress is an instantaneous conjuration spell.

Anti-Magic Field page 243

The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an
antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect,
only its result.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hi all,
I've seen some excellent discussion on this thread. My own "fixes" I felt I had to apply when our group migrated to Pathfinder was to reinstate the requirement for a piece of the creature to be duplicated. This is not waivable via Eschew Materials, either. I also made up my own Simulacrum "creature type" back in 2nd Edition and ported those rulings into 3rd ed, and now Pathfinder. So, I'm not exactly a RAW user of Sims. I like to maintain some degree of verisimilitude when using the spell/alchemical feature, without letting things get too far out of hand (rubies are hard to find and Joe Adventurer is in competition with governments and other high level wizards for that scarce resource). With Alchemists, though, I fear it will...generic alchemical fluids with a cost of 100 gp/level/hd.

I've seen a lot of entries regarding sims and dispelling, anti-magic, their nature as "quasi-real" illusions, etc. That's great and all, but then how do you deal with the Greater Alchemical Simulacrums? Worse, those are 100 gp/level/hd per level of critter rather than the more controllable 500 gp of ruby dust/level/hd. Such sims are not illusions, they are flesh and blood creatures.

My genesis of a potential BBEG is going to be a Alchemist who is systematically murdering and replacing an entire town's worth of people. He is, of course, insane. A sane Alchemist would be busy building a proper army of useful "weapons" to rise first from a local, then to a regional, and then to a national, powerplayer. However, if not stopped, his "experiment" will become more sinister, as he starts to implement the same strategy on key government figures...

Fun spell/alchemical ability, but it does create some annoying challenges...


Dracovar wrote:
how do you deal with the Greater Alchemical Simulacrums?

You could treat them as Flesh Golems, or some sort of superior Zombies. Or... maybe the Alchemical Simularcra need to kill or at least touch their originals before they can access their skills and memories, and are more or less "blanks" until then.

Osirion

shallowsoul wrote:

Actually no. The only thing that an Anti-Magic Field can't suppress is an instantaneous conjuration spell.

Anti-Magic Field page 243

The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an
antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect,
only its result.)

So you'd allow an anti-magic field to suppress the effects of an Instantaneous transmutation spell like flesh to stone, or an Instantaneous evocation spell like holy word, or an Instantaneous illusion spell like color spray?

'Cause I wouldn't allow it to end any of those effects.

What about Instantaneous effects like mending (transmutation) or fireball (evocation)? Surely those effects wouldn't be retroactively negated by entering an antimagic field.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how I'd feel about anti-magic field interacting with the Instantaneous enchantment spell insanity. I could be persuaded either way, on that one...

Similarly, bless water and curse water, transmutation and necromancy, respectively, have an Instantaneous duration, and I'm not sure if I'd allow either to work in an anti-magic field, although that might be a special case, since it's not a lingering spell being suppressed, so much as the supernatural qualities of the transformed liquid. It would still be holy or unholy water, it just might not be able to do anything special in that field, which is a fine hair to split, I suspect...

.

In any event, looking at the text you quoted, it doesn't negate the text I linked to. It merely singles that out for clarification. IMO, anti-magic fields don't negate Instantaneous spells of ANY school, despite the text of the spell singling out conjurations, after talking about how it affects conjured creatures.


Pathfinder Modules Subscriber

Here's one that I'm certain one of my players is going to ask. Forgive me if it's already been addressed.

Can you make a simulacrum of someone at a given point in their history?

Suppose you're a 13th level wizard and you just got a hold of simulacrum. You decide "screw genies; I'm going to make my own personal copy of Lord Xamas, the 40th-level Emperor-Mage, known in legend as the man born with a spark of the divine that granted him the knowledge of the gods, and the only man to turn down godhood as 'too limiting'." (Assume that this character actually existed in this campaign world.) Now, obviously you can't make a simulacrum of a level 40 wizard. But can you make a simulacrum of that same wizard from when he was only level 26 (thereby making a level 13 version of him)?

Silver Crusade

Set wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:

Actually no. The only thing that an Anti-Magic Field can't suppress is an instantaneous conjuration spell.

Anti-Magic Field page 243

The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an
antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect,
only its result.)

So you'd allow an anti-magic field to suppress the effects of an Instantaneous transmutation spell like flesh to stone, or an Instantaneous evocation spell like holy word, or an Instantaneous illusion spell like color spray?

'Cause I wouldn't allow it to end any of those effects.

What about Instantaneous effects like mending (transmutation) or fireball (evocation)? Surely those effects wouldn't be retroactively negated by entering an antimagic field.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how I'd feel about anti-magic field interacting with the Instantaneous enchantment spell insanity. I could be persuaded either way, on that one...

Similarly, bless water and curse water, transmutation and necromancy, respectively, have an Instantaneous duration, and I'm not sure if I'd allow either to work in an anti-magic field, although that might be a special case, since it's not a lingering spell being suppressed, so much as the supernatural qualities of the transformed liquid. It would still be holy or unholy water, it just might not be able to do anything special in that field, which is a fine hair to split, I suspect...

.

In any event, looking at the text you quoted, it doesn't negate the text I linked to. It merely singles that out for clarification. IMO, anti-magic fields don't negate Instantaneous spells of ANY school, despite the text of the spell singling out conjurations, after talking about how it affects conjured creatures.

It's not about what I want but what's there in the RAW. According to RAW, an Anti-Magic field cannot suppress an instantaneous conjuration.

If you are going to acknowledge the upsides to the spell you also have to acknowledge the downsides as well.

If a Sim ends up in an Anti-Magic field then it becomes just a statue until the field is taken away or the statue is broken.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
blahpers wrote:

Here's one that I'm certain one of my players is going to ask. Forgive me if it's already been addressed.

Can you make a simulacrum of someone at a given point in their history?

Suppose you're a 13th level wizard and you just got a hold of simulacrum. You decide "screw genies; I'm going to make my own personal copy of Lord Xamas, the 40th-level Emperor-Mage, known in legend as the man born with a spark of the divine that granted him the knowledge of the gods, and the only man to turn down godhood as 'too limiting'." (Assume that this character actually existed in this campaign world.) Now, obviously you can't make a simulacrum of a level 40 wizard. But can you make a simulacrum of that same wizard from when he was only level 26 (thereby making a level 13 version of him)?

I thought you could do a creature with no more than twice your caster level/HD? So, a 20th level Wizard (or Alchemist w/Greater Alchemical Sim) could do a 40th level target. The result being a 20th level/HD simulacrum. I like the Alchemist route - I'll take 20th level casters for 2000 gp, Alex...

Yikes.

To answer the specific question from blahpers - I wouldn't allow it, but there is nothing in RAW that addresses this that I know of.


Dracovar wrote:
blahpers wrote:

Here's one that I'm certain one of my players is going to ask. Forgive me if it's already been addressed.

Can you make a simulacrum of someone at a given point in their history?

Suppose you're a 13th level wizard and you just got a hold of simulacrum. You decide "screw genies; I'm going to make my own personal copy of Lord Xamas, the 40th-level Emperor-Mage, known in legend as the man born with a spark of the divine that granted him the knowledge of the gods, and the only man to turn down godhood as 'too limiting'." (Assume that this character actually existed in this campaign world.) Now, obviously you can't make a simulacrum of a level 40 wizard. But can you make a simulacrum of that same wizard from when he was only level 26 (thereby making a level 13 version of him)?

I thought you could do a creature with no more than twice your caster level/HD? So, a 20th level Wizard (or Alchemist w/Greater Alchemical Sim) could do a 40th level target. The result being a 20th level/HD simulacrum. I like the Alchemist route - I'll take 20th level casters for 2000 gp, Alex...

Yikes.

To answer the specific question from blahpers - I wouldn't allow it, but there is nothing in RAW that addresses this that I know of.

Note the bold.

Osirion

shallowsoul wrote:
It's not about what I want but what's there in the RAW. According to RAW, an Anti-Magic field cannot suppress an instantaneous conjuration.

It also doesn't say that it suppresses any other Instantaneous spell. In a paragraph where it's talking about suppressing other types of conjuration spells (summonings, specifically), there's a sentence explicitly stating that it *doens't* suppress Instantaneous conjurations.

In the section under the Instantaneous duration, in the Magic chapter, *all* Instantaneous spells 'come and go' at the moment of casting, and are not subject to being dispelled afterwards.

If there was a specific rule under anti-magic field that it *did* suppress Instanenous non-conjuration spells, then that would indeed trump the general rule, but there isn't one, only a reminder in a write up of how the spell effects other conjuration spells that it still doesn't suppress Instantaneous ones.

Silver Crusade

Set wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
It's not about what I want but what's there in the RAW. According to RAW, an Anti-Magic field cannot suppress an instantaneous conjuration.

It also doesn't say that it suppresses any other Instantaneous spell. In a paragraph where it's talking about suppressing other types of conjuration spells (summonings, specifically), there's a sentence explicitly stating that it *doens't* suppress Instantaneous conjurations.

In the section under the Instantaneous duration, in the Magic chapter, *all* Instantaneous spells 'come and go' at the moment of casting, and are not subject to being dispelled afterwards.

If there was a specific rule under anti-magic field that it *did* suppress Instanenous non-conjuration spells, then that would indeed trump the general rule, but there isn't one, only a reminder in a write up of how the spell effects other conjuration spells that it still doesn't suppress Instantaneous ones.

Antimagic Field

School abjuration; Level cleric 8, sorcerer/wizard 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (pinch of powdered iron or iron filings)
Range 10 ft.
Area 10-ft.-radius emanation, centered on you
Duration 10 min./level (D)
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance see text
An invisible barrier surrounds you and moves with you. The
space within this barrier is impervious to most magical effects,
including spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities.
Likewise, it prevents the functioning of any magic items or spells
within its confines.
An antimagic field suppresses any spell or magical effect used
within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it.
Time spent within an antimagic field counts against the suppressed
spell’s duration.
Summoned creatures of any type wink out if they enter an
antimagic field. They reappear in the same spot once the field goes
away. Time spent winked out counts normally against the duration
of the conjuration that is maintaining the creature. If you cast
antimagic field in an area occupied by a summoned creature that has
spell resistance, you must make a caster level check (1d20 + caster
level) against the creature’s spell resistance to make it wink out.
(The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an
antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect,
only its result.)

A normal creature can enter the area, as can normal missiles.
Furthermore, while a magic sword does not function magically within
the area, it is still a sword (and a masterwork sword at that). The spell
has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with
magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting
(unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like
any other summoned creatures). Elementals, undead, and outsiders
are likewise unaffected unless summoned. These creatures’ spell-like
or supernatural abilities may be temporarily nullified by the field.
Dispel magic does not remove the field.
Two or more antimagic fields sharing any of the same space have
no effect on each other. Certain spells, such as wall of force, prismatic
sphere, and prismatic wall, remain unaffected by antimagic field.
Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this.
Should a creature be larger than the area enclosed by the barrier,
any part of it that lies outside the barrier is unaffected by the field.

Here is the spell from the Core rulebook. Now if you wish to homebrew something different then that's fine but above is RAW. If a Sim walks into an Anti-Magic Field it ceases to function until either the field is removed or the statue is removed.

Not all instantaneous spells work like Fireball. Now if a fireball travels into an Anti-Magic field it winks out.

PS: I know exactly what you are trying to do but unfortunately it doesn't work that way. You are trying to use the instantaneous argument to get around the affect being dispelled or effected by an Anti-Magic Field.

What you are referring to with instantaneous is after the spell as gone off and there is nothing left to target. You can't target a fireball that has already exploded but you can't cast a Fireball in an Anti-Magic Field and like I said before, if one travels into the field it will wink out.

You can't cherry pick rules to make them suit you RAW. The Anti-Magic field clearly states what it can and cannot effect. A Sim in not a conjuration affect so therefore it can be effected by the field. You can argue all day long but it's going to change the RAW.


VRMH wrote:
Dracovar wrote:
how do you deal with the Greater Alchemical Simulacrums?
You could treat them as Flesh Golems, or some sort of superior Zombies. Or... maybe the Alchemical Simularcra need to kill or at least touch their originals before they can access their skills and memories, and are more or less "blanks" until then.

Resident Evil anyone?

Osirion

You seem to be reading something into the text you are quoting that is not written.

Nowhere does it say that Instantaneous spells of schools *other than conjuration* are suppressed.

Note this detail;

shallowsoul wrote:
Time spent within an antimagic field counts against the suppressed spell’s duration.

It's impossible to count time sppent within an anti-magic field against the duration of a spell that happened a long time ago, possibly even centuries ago, and has since stopped being a magical spell or effect.

There is no duration to be counted against. It stopped being a magical effect at the end of the standard action that created it.

In the case of a simulacrum, it's now a creature, of the type of the creature it was made in the image of.

With the exception of summoned creatures and incorporeal undead, both of which are spelled out explicitly in the text, other creatures, no matter how magical their origins, including corporeal undead (created via animate dead or create greater undead), elementals, genies, native outsiders, non-native outsiders, clones, people who've been raised from the dead and are not alive save for the effects of some Instantaneous spell cast upon them to ressurect them, etc. do not cease to be magical creatures (or disappear) when they enter an anti-magic field.

Nowhere in the text you quote does it say that Instantaneous spells *other* than Conjuration have their effects suppressed by an anti-magic field.

If I hit you with color spray (illusion) or holy word evocation, and one round later, an anti-magic field goes up, you remain as killed, unconscious, paralyzed, stunned, blinded or deafened as you were *before* the anti-magic field went up, to the usual amount of time, based on the effect and the spell. A hold person or summon swarm would wink out like a light, for the duration, but a previously-cast Instantaneous duration spell, regardless of school, is already over, and whatever remains, be it wall of stone or a zombie created via animate dead, is no longer a 'spell' that can be detected with detect magic, dispelled with dispel magic or suppressed via anti-magic field.


shallowsoul wrote:

Here is the spell from the Core rulebook. Now if you wish to homebrew something different then that's fine but above is RAW. If a Sim walks into an Anti-Magic Field it ceases to function until either the field is removed or the statue is removed.

Not all instantaneous spells work like Fireball. Now if a fireball travels into an Anti-Magic field it winks out.

PS: I know exactly what you are trying to do but unfortunately it doesn't work that way. You are trying to use the instantaneous argument to get around the affect being dispelled or effected by an Anti-Magic Field.

What you are referring to with instantaneous is after the spell as gone off and there is nothing left to target. You can't target a fireball that has already exploded but you can't cast a Fireball in an Anti-Magic Field and like I said before, if one travels into the field it will wink out.

You can't cherry pick rules to make them suit you RAW. The Anti-Magic field clearly states what it can and cannot effect. A Sim in not a conjuration affect so therefore it can be effected by the field. You can argue all day long but it's going to change the RAW.

If anyone is cherry picking I would say it would be you. If you are going with the results of instantaneous spells that are not conjurations being suppressed in antimagic fields then the rule must be applied uniformly to everything. That means damage, death, knowledge, petrification, mending, fabrication, etc.


It also makes the comment about instantaneous conjurations in parenthesis, after discussing summoned creatures and similar conjurations. That makes it a bit suspect to me to think that it's only conjuration spells, but instead a clarification.

For example, if you cast acid splash into an AMF, the AMF does diddly to stop the acid splash because it's an instantaneous conjuration, and even though it was created with magic, the result is not.


Why on earth is that spell not on the Witch list?


beej67 wrote:
Why on earth is that spell not on the Witch list?

There's a lot that the witch is lacking that would be thematically appropriate.

Silver Crusade

WWWW wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:

Here is the spell from the Core rulebook. Now if you wish to homebrew something different then that's fine but above is RAW. If a Sim walks into an Anti-Magic Field it ceases to function until either the field is removed or the statue is removed.

Not all instantaneous spells work like Fireball. Now if a fireball travels into an Anti-Magic field it winks out.

PS: I know exactly what you are trying to do but unfortunately it doesn't work that way. You are trying to use the instantaneous argument to get around the affect being dispelled or effected by an Anti-Magic Field.

What you are referring to with instantaneous is after the spell as gone off and there is nothing left to target. You can't target a fireball that has already exploded but you can't cast a Fireball in an Anti-Magic Field and like I said before, if one travels into the field it will wink out.

You can't cherry pick rules to make them suit you RAW. The Anti-Magic field clearly states what it can and cannot effect. A Sim in not a conjuration affect so therefore it can be effected by the field. You can argue all day long but it's going to change the RAW.

If anyone is cherry picking I would say it would be you. If you are going with the results of instantaneous spells that are not conjurations being suppressed in antimagic fields then the rule must be applied uniformly to everything. That means damage, death, knowledge, petrification, mending, fabrication, etc.

I know "exactly" how the spell works. If you cast a fireball through an Anti-Magic field the Fireball will actually wink out when it hits the field and come out the other side if the fireball has any range left. If you direct a Fireball to land in an AMF it will wink out and hurt nobody. If you try and cast a Fireball while standing in an AMF it will not work.

What the description is saying is that you can't AMF a Wizard after he has cast Fireball because there is nothing left.

AMF does not dispel, it only suppresses. Because the description of a Sim has the instantaneous word in it doesn't protect it from AMF.

Nightmare works the same way. If you put someone who is the victim of a Nightmare spell the AMF will suppress the effect but it will not dispel it. Nightmare by the way has a duration of instantaneous.

The description for for AMF also tells which spells it does not effect such as Wall of Force, Prismatic Sphere and Prismatic Wall.

I know I am right and I will bet you anything that I am right.


shallowsoul wrote:

I know "exactly" how the spell works. If you cast a fireball through an Anti-Magic field the Fireball will actually wink out when it hits the field and come out the other side if the fireball has any range left. If you direct a Fireball to land in an AMF it will wink out and hurt nobody. If you try and cast a Fireball while standing in an AMF it will not work.

What the description is saying is that you can't AMF a Wizard after he has cast Fireball because there is nothing left.

AMF does not dispel, it only suppresses. Because the description of a Sim has the instantaneous word in it doesn't protect it from AMF.

Nightmare works the same way. If you put someone who is the victim of a Nightmare spell the AMF will suppress the effect but it will not dispel it. Nightmare by the way has a duration of instantaneous.

The description for for AMF also tells which spells it does not effect such as Wall of Force, Prismatic Sphere and Prismatic Wall.

I know I am right and I will bet you anything that I am right.

Eh whether you are right or not about how simulacrum is not really that important at the moment. What is important is that your position is inconsistent for no reason.


shallowsoul wrote:
I know I am right and I will bet you anything that I am right.

Anything? >:)

*puts on glasses* Please sign here on the dotted line, using this specially prepared red ink. Ignore the fine print; as it's merely some copyright notices and stuff like that. If you are correct, then we shall bow to you out of respect. If you are wrong, then I shall take my due.

*disappears in a puff of sulfurous smelling smoke*


Pathfinder Modules Subscriber
Quote:
The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures).

Given that, it doesn't seem likely that a simulacrum would be affected. Once it's created, it's a bonafide creature, just with strange properties not unlike a specific kind of construct.

Silver Crusade

blahpers wrote:
Quote:
The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures).
Given that, it doesn't seem likely that a simulacrum would be affected. Once it's created, it's a bonafide creature, just with strange properties not unlike a specific kind of construct.

Show me where it says that a Simulacrum is a golem.


Pathfinder Modules Subscriber
shallowsoul wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Quote:
The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures).
Given that, it doesn't seem likely that a simulacrum would be affected. Once it's created, it's a bonafide creature, just with strange properties not unlike a specific kind of construct.
Show me where it says that a Simulacrum is a golem.

Did I say that a simulacrum is a golem?

*scrolls up*

No, sir, I did not.

Silver Crusade

blahpers wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Quote:
The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures).
Given that, it doesn't seem likely that a simulacrum would be affected. Once it's created, it's a bonafide creature, just with strange properties not unlike a specific kind of construct.
Show me where it says that a Simulacrum is a golem.

Did I say that a simulacrum is a golem?

*scrolls up*

No, sir, I did not.

Then why did you quote something talking about Golems and other constructs?

It doesn't say anything about a Sim being a Golem or any other type of construct. It is purely a Shadow Illusion.


Pathfinder Modules Subscriber

I don't think I'll be able to get the reason across to you, since you've already made up your mind about the subject. Suffice it to say that a simulacrum is not merely a shadow illusion. While it is created via a shadow illusion spell, once created it is a creature in its own right, just as, once created, a golem is a creature in its own right (and, thus, is not subject to antimagic field).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
blahpers wrote:
I don't think I'll be able to get the reason across to you, since you've already made up your mind about the subject. Suffice it to say that a simulacrum is not merely a shadow illusion. While it is created via a shadow illusion spell, once created it is a creature in its own right, just as, once created, a golem is a creature in its own right (and, thus, is not subject to antimagic field).

Or rather, it is not a creature, but a magical effect that is treated as a creature in almost all ways.


Pathfinder Modules Subscriber

Right. It's as much a creature as, say, a golem. More so, in some ways.

Silver Crusade

blahpers wrote:
Right. It's as much a creature as, say, a golem. More so, in some ways.

Big big big problem with this. You can't just decide that it's a golem because certain advantages can be gained from this.


Come now people no one is saying it is a golem. What it is is the result of a spell (regardless of duration) that exists after the spell has been cast such as damage, death, knowledge, petrification, mending, fabrication, etc.


Pathfinder Modules Subscriber
shallowsoul wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Right. It's as much a creature as, say, a golem. More so, in some ways.
Big big big problem with this. You can't just decide that it's a golem because certain advantages can be gained from this.

It may come as a shock, but sometimes a person has another motive for disagreeing with you besides wanting to pull one over on the ol' GM.

This thread is beginning to get rude, and I'm afraid I may have contributed to it. Bowing out now.


Simulacrum is one of those spells that is just rife with cheesy exploitation written all over it.

I've pointed this out before, but it still gets ignored:

simulacrum spell description wrote:
It appears to be the same as the original, but it has only half of the real creature's levels or HD (and the appropriate hit points, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities for a creature of that level or HD).

Emphasis mine.

So if you create a copy of yourself at level 10, the copy you make will only have as many feats as a level 5 version of you would have. That's what "for a creature of that level or HD" means.

So you'll have to pick which feats your simulcrum has. And if the feat has prerequisites, your simulacrum will have to have the prerequisites.

That's how I read the RAW.

As far as RAI is concerned, this spell has no discernible RAI. The fact that it hasn't been errata'd to death already to stop the cheesy exploitation just means that the developers assume most GMs won't allow players to create armies of crafting slaves in their own image.

Of course that's a bad assumption.


The AM spell only affects spells with a duration, instaneous spells are assumed to create an instantaneous effect that is no longer considered magical after the spell has been cast.

The paragraph discussing summoned creatures simply clarifies that summoned creatures brought by an instantaneous effect do not wink out, the whole paragraph is infact just a clarification on how it would work in the case of summoned creatures. The fact that the provided logics for instantaneous conjuration magic works for any kind of magic should tip you off.

Silver Crusade

Remco Sommeling wrote:

The AM spell only affects spells with a duration, instaneous spells are assumed to create an instantaneous effect that is no longer considered magical after the spell has been cast.

The paragraph discussing summoned creatures simply clarifies that summoned creatures brought by an instantaneous effect do not wink out, the whole paragraph is infact just a clarification on how it would work in the case of summoned creatures. The fact that the provided logics for instantaneous conjuration magic works for any kind of magic should tip you off.

Summoned creatures of any type wink out if they enter an

antimagic field. They reappear in the same spot once the field goes
away. Time spent winked out counts normally against the duration
of the conjuration that is maintaining the creature. If you cast
antimagic field in an area occupied by a summoned creature that has
spell resistance, you must make a caster level check (1d20 + caster
level) against the creature’s spell resistance to make it wink out.
(The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an
antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect,
only its result.)

Osirion

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

So if you create a copy of yourself at level 10, the copy you make will only have as many feats as a level 5 version of you would have. That's what "for a creature of that level or HD" means.

So you'll have to pick which feats your simulcrum has. And if the feat has prerequisites, your simulacrum will have to have the prerequisites.

I assumed that the Simulacrum would have the same feats you had at 5th level. No cherry-picking just the ones you want for a 'crafting Sim' if you happened to put off Craft Wondrous Item till 7th level (which means you'll have to wait until 14th level to make a 'crafting Sim').

That being said, you could have picked Craft Wondrous Item at 3rd level, or be creating a Simulacrum of the Dean of Magical Item Creation at the Academae, who took it at 3rd level, and be getting around that assumption of mine anyway.

(At least, in the old days, you'd need a piece of the Dean to make gumbies of him...)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

So if you create a copy of yourself at level 10, the copy you make will only have as many feats as a level 5 version of you would have. That's what "for a creature of that level or HD" means.

So you'll have to pick which feats your simulcrum has. And if the feat has prerequisites, your simulacrum will have to have the prerequisites.

I assumed that the Simulacrum would have the same feats you had at 5th level. No cherry-picking just the ones you want for a 'crafting Sim' if you happened to put off Craft Wondrous Item till 7th level (which means you'll have to wait until 14th level to make a 'crafting Sim').

That being said, you could have picked Craft Wondrous Item at 3rd level, or be creating a Simulacrum of the Dean of Magical Item Creation at the Academae, who took it at 3rd level, and be getting around that assumption of mine anyway.

(At least, in the old days, you'd need a piece of the Dean to make gumbies of him...)

This is how I see it as well. No cherry picking at all.

Osirion

Ravingdork wrote:
This is how I see it as well. No cherry picking at all.

Which leads to the meta-game-y-but-kind-of-funny situation where a wizard might drag someone out adventuring, to 'level him up' because he's only 5th level, and a half HD Sim of him won't have that Craft Wondrous Item feat he wants.

"No, just hang out behind me while I fireball these ogres and use the wand of magic missiles I gave you. I need you to be 6th level."

"Why?"

"Um, it's complicated..."

Silver Crusade

Set wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
This is how I see it as well. No cherry picking at all.

Which leads to the meta-game-y-but-kind-of-funny situation where a wizard might drag someone out adventuring, to 'level him up' because he's only 5th level, and a half HD Sim of him won't have that Craft Wondrous Item feat he wants.

"No, just hang out behind me while I fireball these ogres and use the wand of magic missiles I gave you. I need you to be 6th level."

"Why?"

"Um, it's complicated..."

Sims can't become more powerful or gain any levels.


He wasn't stating or implying that they could shallowsoul.

Silver Crusade

Jak the Looney Alchemist wrote:
He wasn't stating or implying that they could shallowsoul.

"Which leads to the meta-game-y-but-kind-of-funny situation where a wizard might drag someone out adventuring, to 'level him up' because he's only 5th level, and a half HD Sim of him won't have that Craft Wondrous Item feat he wants."

What is he implying here then?

Osirion

Jak the Looney Alchemist wrote:
He wasn't stating or implying that they could shallowsoul.

Jak has the right of it.

I'm 'implying' that before making a Sim of a 5th level NPC Crafter who learned Craft Wondrous Item at 3rd level, the Simulacrum casting wizard would have to 'level him up' (the original person, that is) to 6th level, so that he could then create a half-HD Sim (which would be 3rd level and would have Craft Wondrous Item).

If he attempted to make a Sim of the 5th level dude, whether he's got Craft Wondrous Item or not, he'd end up with a 2nd level Sim, with no Craft Wondrous Item feat (since the original person didn't get it until 3rd level, and the feat requires 3rd level), and be sad that he wasted some powdered ruby.

And I think any humor in the scenario has been thoroughly extracted and stomped into the dirt by this over-explication. :)


That the wizard in question is fifth level (we're assuming that he can cast simulacrum somehow in this hypothetical situation) and he needs to be sixth so that his simulacrum he is planning to make has enough hd that it can have the craft wondrous item feat.


Ravingdork wrote:
Set wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

So if you create a copy of yourself at level 10, the copy you make will only have as many feats as a level 5 version of you would have. That's what "for a creature of that level or HD" means.

So you'll have to pick which feats your simulcrum has. And if the feat has prerequisites, your simulacrum will have to have the prerequisites.

I assumed that the Simulacrum would have the same feats you had at 5th level. No cherry-picking just the ones you want for a 'crafting Sim' if you happened to put off Craft Wondrous Item till 7th level (which means you'll have to wait until 14th level to make a 'crafting Sim').

That being said, you could have picked Craft Wondrous Item at 3rd level, or be creating a Simulacrum of the Dean of Magical Item Creation at the Academae, who took it at 3rd level, and be getting around that assumption of mine anyway.

(At least, in the old days, you'd need a piece of the Dean to make gumbies of him...)

This is how I see it as well. No cherry picking at all.

Well, when you have the history of a character that was created at level 1 and advanced to level 10, then sure, take the feats you had at level 5. I think lots of characters are made at level 10 and there is no actual "feat history" beyond "well, I must have had feat X before feat Y since it's a prerequisite". But when there is a history, I absolutely agree with you.

Osirion

Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Well, when you have the history of a character that was created at level 1 and advanced to level 10, then sure, take the feats you had at level 5.

True, and it would be even more of a handwave for skills, since few characters outside of PBP have a record of how they spent their skill points level by level...

101 to 150 of 161 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Simulacrum used by PCs. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.