While I appreciate some of the hoops you noted above that casters need to jump through -- and one wonders how many casters decided to take Profession: Ice Sculptor to get around it -- this spell has never seen the light of day in my recent games.
Those casters that had the level to get the spell didn't want it except one and she used it to create minor servants for the most part, and after seeing the rampant abuse threads over the years it went the way of the dodo and was house ruled out.
It would be nice to believe that people wouldn't abuse it, and I might be tempted to bring it back BUT there would be rules attached, like "created creatures cannot give wishes" as a prime example.
Because this spell tends to lead to a lot of arguments, here is the actual text:
School illusion (shadow); Level sorcerer/wizard 7, summoner 5; Elemental School void 7
CASTING
Casting Time 12 hours
Components V, S, M (ice sculpture of the target plus powdered rubies worth 500 gp per HD of the simulacrum)
EFFECT
Range 0 ft.
Effect one duplicate creature
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
DESCRIPTION
Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature. The duplicate creature is partially real and formed from ice or snow. 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). You can't create a simulacrum of a creature whose HD or levels exceed twice your caster level. You must make a Disguise check when you cast the spell to determine how good the likeness is. A creature familiar with the original might detect the ruse with a successful Perception check (opposed by the caster's Disguise check) or a DC 20 Sense Motive check.
At all times, the simulacrum remains under your absolute command. No special telepathic link exists, so command must be exercised in some other manner. A simulacrum has no ability to become more powerful. It cannot increase its level or abilities. If reduced to 0 hit points or otherwise destroyed, it reverts to snow and melts instantly into nothingness. A complex process requiring at least 24 hours, 100 gp per hit point, and a fully equipped magical laboratory can repair damage to a simulacrum.
Simulacrum, Lesser
Source Ultimate Magic
School illusion (shadow); Level sorcerer/wizard 4
CASTING
Casting Time 1 hour
Components V, S, M (an ice sculpture of the target plus powdered rubies worth 50 gp per HD of the simulacrum)
EFFECT
Duration 1 hour/level
DESCRIPTION
This spell functions as simulacrum, except you can’t create a simulacrum of a creature whose HD or levels exceed your caster level, and it has no magical abilities. The creature is not under your control, though it recognizes you are its creator.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I always liked having to have a piece of the creature. It severely limits what you can make.
In my opinion, most of the ways this spell can be abused rely on one or both of these:
1) a GM who is very liberal in how they interpret the quite vague and wooly description;
2) theorycrafting without a GM at all.
The classic example of theorycrafting is making efreet, to get Wishes at much lower level than is appropriate. I don't know of any GM who would actually permit this, the clause 'has...special abilities appropriate for that level or HD' allows a GM to say that granting wishes isn't appropriate - not that this stops rules-lawyers from trying to claim that is - hence the arguments.
Many PCs avoid using the spell at all, as do many GMs, to avoid these arguments. I have never seen it used by a PC in a real game in over 30 years of playing. I have had NPCs use it, so the PCs could think they had killed the bad guy, only to find that they hadn't and he/she was in fact twice as dangerous as they thought...
As an aside, detecting a simulacrum is quite easy - skill checks, as listed in the description, plus any sort of detection spell, will work - so it is unlikely to work as a deception for very long. I also wouldn't allow it have any of the original's personal knowledge - no using it to ask for details of its lair/code for a safe, etc.
I think the key rule that gets abused is how creatures retain all their abilities, as the only limitation is that it has half the HD, and only half the abilities based around HD. But most creature abilities are not tied to HD in any way. Hence, Sno-Cone Wish Granting machines.
How to rule that out? Blanket banning special abilities probably(?) goes too far. (Limiting any Supernatural and Spell-Like, perhaps?) Putting in a line about other abilities may be banned by GM Discretion works, but in a very inelegant way.
A secondary abuse was, if I recall, the 3.5 version of the spell required you have a portion of whatever creature you were making duplicates out of. Pathfinder removed this. Like the Ice Sculpture above, most GM's probably wouldn't allow every spell component pouch to have some hairs of the High Pasha of the City of Brass just sitting in it next to the bat guano and glass rods. And I bet there'd be a lot of potential for adventure in trying to get said body parts, both in obtaining, and avoiding retribution. (You think a powerful Genie Prince is going to like clones of him running around serving some mortal? That's a high insult if I ever heard one.)
I always liked having to have a piece of the creature. It severely limits what you can make.
This. Totally this. Fixes some of the problems with the spell pretty much instantly. It was one of my very first house rules when I converted from 3.0 over to Pathfinder. However, it can still create a massive amount of trouble.
Rubies, for example, have been snapped up as a strategic resource by power groups in my campaign. However, the Alchemist can get around that quite easily (and for cheaper, too). Keep in mind that most of OUR rubies here in reality land come from just a few specific places. Imagine how valuable such places would be on Golarion, if they are just as rare. Worse, imagine if ruby mines aren't rare...
I think many people consider it a real game breaker and hit it with the ban hammer. It's an integral part of my campaign (has been for years going all the way back to 1st/2nd edition). I assume that any high level wizard worth his Int Score is going to have a pile of handy sims of himself to deal with all sorts of menial tasks / act as decoys.
They will eventually have sims of some interesting monsters to help with things too - sims of funny multi-eyestocked floating ball critters (non-pathfinder IP sadly) have been awesome for drilling tunnels and sewers, creating instant moats, etc.
I always liked having to have a piece of the creature. It severely limits what you can make.
Yes. I'd apply that if any PC ever wanted to try it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I always liked having to have a piece of the creature. It severely limits what you can make.Yes. I'd apply that if any PC ever wanted to try it.
Yeah, that is one of the things listed in the currently-still-in-draft-stage simulacrum blog FAQ.
I think the key rule that gets abused is how creatures retain all their abilities, as the only limitation is that it has half the HD, and only half the abilities based around HD. But most creature abilities are not tied to HD in any way. Hence, Sno-Cone Wish Granting machines.
How to rule that out? Blanket banning special abilities probably(?) goes too far. (Limiting any Supernatural and Spell-Like, perhaps?) Putting in a line about other abilities may be banned by GM Discretion works, but in a very inelegant way.
"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)."
To me, it is totally up to the GM which special abilities would be 'appropriate for a creature of that level or HD'. It doesn't actually say to adjust them solely like feats, etc, which are tied to level or HD.
(Mind you, the original efreeti's Wishes aren't appropriate for its level or HD either.)
In my opinion, there isn't a genuine argument here: the GM says 'No'. I'd go for an inelegant way of still having a balanced result.
Yeah, that is one of the things listed in the currently-still-in-draft-stage simulacrum blog FAQ.I always liked having to have a piece of the creature. It severely limits what you can make.Yes. I'd apply that if any PC ever wanted to try it.
I'd like to see any additions/clarifications to Simulacrum to explicitly state that special abilities/spells/powers/etc/etc are at the GM's discretion and all need to be approved or the default position is that the simulacrum doesn't have them.
(whilst not wanting to overload the thread with my posts, I still wanted to add to this :))
And for Planar Binding/Ally type spells, again the problem seems to be efreet with their wishes. It might be worth combining whatever limitations you come up with for Simulacrum with the Binding/Allying spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to see any additions/clarifications to Simulacrum to explicitly state that special abilities/spells/powers/etc/etc are at the GM's discretion and all need to be approved or the default position is that the simulacrum doesn't have them.Yeah, that is one of the things listed in the currently-still-in-draft-stage simulacrum blog FAQ.I always liked having to have a piece of the creature. It severely limits what you can make.Yes. I'd apply that if any PC ever wanted to try it.
Also in the draft, with examples of one GM going through the process.
Needing a part of the creature or making rubies expensive does not balance simulacrum. Blood money and false focus aside, when you get simulacrum you also get planeshift. Rubies at market value are only a earth elemental plane away. Getting a part of the creature just involves casting a quick planar binding and you got yourself as many Efreeti kneecaps as you want. They are only CR 8 after all.
Besides, you will need to set a price for the statue, the super rare rubies and Efreeti kneecap. And unless you set the price to something astronomical, the simulacrum pays for itself almost immediately.
Honestly, what everyone is completely missing in the discussion of the really powerful uses of Simulacrum, is that even the almost certainly intended use of it is crazy powerful. A copy of your full casting self with half-HD is an incredible source of spells per day. And even paying the cost out of pocket instead of your blood, that's still a very very powerful minion for all of 500 gp per actual HD the Simulacrum has. So assuming you use it at 14th level, you get a 7th level caster for 3,500 GP. That's a ton of additional spells and of course action economy for a low low price.
Mind you monster design is a big part of the problem here to. Like a really big part. Like 60% of it. With the remaining 40% being split evenly between the really very affordable cost and the fact that permanent minions are incredibly strong in general.
Honestly, what everyone is completely missing in the discussion of the really powerful uses of Simulacrum, is that even the almost certainly intended use of it is crazy powerful. A copy of your full casting self with half-HD is a powerful source of spells per day. And even paying the cost out of pocket instead of your blood, that's still a very very powerful minion for all of 500 gp per actual HD the Simulacrum has. So assuming you use it at 14th level, you get a 7th level caster for 3,500 GP. That's a ton of additional spells and of course action economy for a low low price.
Yes, but that isn't quite how I think it would be more likely to be used. I think it'd be best used as an item crafter left at home, guarding/operating the original wizard's home base. Along with another 3, and one each of the other PCs, etc.
If you take it into combat, any level-appropriate foe is likely to dispose of it very quickly. If you keep doing that, you'll end up without much money - so leave it at home making money!
So, one more suggestion: only one simulacrum per original (per wizard casting simulacrum?, who also would need to not be a copy?)
Leaving aside the 'broken' ways of using this spell with spell-like abilities it is still extremely powerful. A 13th level wizard can create a 6th level copy of himself for a meager 3,000 gp. While the copy won't have the really powerful spells, he will have quite a few good utility and buffing spells, and of course a full set of actions in which to use them. I can't think of anything else that gives that much power for that little price.
The original posts methods of 'nerfing' the spell, by assigning a cost to the ice sculpture, increasing the cost (either with money or time) of the rubies, adding in melting rules for the ice sculpture may be good or bad ideas as house-rules, but that is what they are. As written, you don't have to figure out how you get the ice sculpture anymore than you have to figure out how you get bat guano for your fireball. Rubies are not a controlled substance, they are in fact commodities.
A few points. In terms of sculpting creatures, I think it is reasonable to require the sculpture to be reasonably accurate, as a result I would require the crafter to either have seen the creature duplicated or to at least have studied it. The rarer the creature the harder the research, with some creatures flat out Unknown. I think the assumption is that spell components that fit in your pouch are free - life size statues of ice are not.
Secondly the simulacrum is an intelligent creature who is essentially a slave. The simulacrum might not feel that way - though it does bring up Frankenstein like questions about what it means to create life. Other organisations may not be very happy about creating life - even if quasi illusory. If it looks like life and smells like life it's gonna get treated like life.
As for copying oneself. I think that 6th level casters should be fairly easily killable, particularly without any equipment or magic items. I would have the adventure intrude on the clone factory and do some damage, but not if it was a one off or reasonable use of the spell.
Any use of the simulacrum to gain batteries of spells, or magic item factories or remote operation PCs would get very short shrift in our group. I wouldn't need to act as the other players would tell the clone-Meister to get a grip.
Part of the problem with SLAs is that some are not tied to level, and so are not halved. One way to limit that power is the way shadow spell copies work: 50% usage/50% effective. Another is to assign a research DC to unpegged SLAs: Higher DC for more powerful effects. Another could be no SLAs of a spell level equal or greater than the simulacrum spell creating the creature. Even so, it can still be abused.
I have heard of the 1st/2nd edition duplicate being equipped with a percentage of the original's knowledge. If you had a piece of their head, then maybe you could do that, but with no part of the original, I think you can only get a generic critter with no special knowledge. Even if you make a dupe of yourself, they are only a generic person with half your class levels, and no spells of their own. However, they could use your spell books. For a caster with spells known, it would be come with spells appropriate to half level, but they are all spells you already know. Likewise, they come without equipment. If they are to survive direct combat, you need to equip them, which is way more than 500 gp/HD.
I don't see direct combat support as all that viable, however before combat buffing and after combat recovering can work OK. Any minion needs support in terms of protection from the rigors of CR appropriate combat, and in terms of upkeep (room and board, magic items, etc.).
Snow-cone wish machines are a non-starter (or should be). Crafting slaves can be handled the same way any stay-at-home crafting cohort: have others interested in their output, skill, or wealth, placing them at peril. Any player that abuses the spell can be brought short any number of ways.
On the flip side, the spell is perfect for the bad guy that always seems to escape. What really happens is that the current bad guy is a dupe of a greater bad guy that the party has yet to encounter.
/cevah
Considering the possible ways this could be used by nefarious individuals, large quantities of ground rubies could also be considered a "controlled substance" by some kingdoms. It wouldn't stop you from using it, but if you planned something evil you'd need to get it "underground", which might cost more.
But, if ground rubies cost more, then you just need less of it ...
:-)
If the GM doesn't want to mess with those types of things and allows casters and crafters to make things just by marking off the required amount of gp and assuming "we picked up the items in town" its fine if that's how they run their game. But, I would submit it could be a dangerous practice if not at least monitored. I think GMs can lose control of their storyline and end up with major power creep if the Players just run this type of thing with no in game realities, even if its just a quick RP at local shop to see if they have those compos, or to put an order in and come back in a few weeks to pick it up. My group likes doing these kind of role-playing opportunities and its a chance for story hooks as well, so easy enough to package and ensure some sanity on rare components.
This suggestion is a completely ineffective control measure. At the level Wizards are casting Simulacrum, they have access to Teleport and Plane Shift. Or better yet, minions with Greater Teleport at will. Sure a GM can say Metropolis just doesn't have the magical components for making X magic item, but then the PCs will just shop in Gotham. A GM can't keep saying each city just magically doesn't have the what the PCs want and maintain any semblance of verisimilitude. Making things magically unavailable everywhere is nothing more then a stealth ban. The GM should just come right out and tell their players "No, you can't use your feat because I don't want you to." I don't recommend a GM make a habit of that though, because rule -1 always wins.
I'd apply the 1/2 HD to caster level for SLA/spells as well, and have them lose whatever spells are above the new caster level for access.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A couple people now mentioned a 6th or 7th level Sim of the caster as a possible way to use it. So far nobody has said they'd seen it in game.
*Waves*
Hi!
I actually made use of simulacrum clones of my wizard in a long running game towards the end, though not as combat doubles. Given their poor saves, lack of items, and difficulty in healing, that was asking to get them blown up pretty quickly by the first stray AoE, gaze, aura, etc.
Instead I used them as stand-in teachers for the character's apprentices, and to help run her businesses and keep tabs on shady but not particularly threatening NPCs (like former prisoners).
Overall it's probably one of my top five favorite spells in the game, because it can be used in many ways very creatively as you move into the late game. I really fell in love with it in the Tales of Wrye, particularly with Shomei the Infernal's use of it. (Incidentially, Tales of Wyre is a fantastic, if slightly dated high level campaign read that really quantifies what I want out of high level play).
Doubles of yourself have a variety of uses, none of them "game breaking" in my experience. As an emissary, as a scout, as a bodyguard for an NPC (especially if others can't tell that it isn't actually you), as a crafter, as an adviser to someone, etc. That said, given the price, in practice it's often just as easy to hire someone to do many of these tasks, if you are so inclined. Or to use a follower. Or to bind a creature to do it. In my experience it's an added tool in a toolbox.
You want to use it in combat? Feel free, but I'd expect them to die pretty frequently. You want to use it to buff before you teleport in somewhere? Sure, but 'll eventually catch up with you given the weak caster level - and really, at 3,500gp each, couldn't you just buy some scrolls, or hire some people? It's a spell that creates some options, especially for a self-contained character.
That's about it.
As for wanting designers to explicitly call out the spell with regard to SLAs and such - they've done so. Many times. I've cited at least three or four different designer posts to Anzyr in which the designer explicitly states that SLAs should be rebuild and reevaluated by the GM.
One of the few times 5e has more codified rules is this spell.
Yeah, that is one of the things listed in the currently-still-in-draft-stage simulacrum blog FAQ.
Isn't that more errata style than FAQ style.
Yeah, that is one of the things listed in the currently-still-in-draft-stage simulacrum blog FAQ.Isn't that more errata style than FAQ style.
On Paizo it is.
Adding a part of the copied creature as a material component is a awkward balancing measure. I haven't seen it used for simulacrum specifically, but I have for polymorph in D&D 3.0. If the GM has to consider whether the very shape of the enemy is treasure then there's an additional and easily screwed-up level of balance. (Medium-size Fang Dragons, yay!)
Simulacrum, unlike polymorphing or invisibility or flight, doesn't need to be in the game. If you want to have a disposable impersonator then illusions, shapeshifters or constructs will do the job.
Adding a part of the copied creature as a material component is a awkward balancing measure. I haven't seen it used for simulacrum specifically, but I have for polymorph in D&D 3.0. If the GM has to consider whether the very shape of the enemy is treasure then there's an additional and easily screwed-up level of balance. (Medium-size Fang Dragons, yay!)
So awkward that it was part of the spell in 3.5.
Simulacrum, unlike polymorphing or invisibility or flight, doesn't need to be in the game. If you want to have a disposable impersonator then illusions, shapeshifters or constructs will do the job.
The vast majority of the spells in the game don't need to be there. What I'd prefer is a reason why it shouldn't be there, other than cheese theory craft that explicitly goes against the intended function of the spell as explained by designers on multiple occasions.
So what's the intended function?
So what's the intended function?
That simulacrum copies of creatures be built by the GM. That SLAs be reduced in a manner the GM finds appropriate, along with most other abilities (Ex, Su, etc).
Basically, the spell has a built in loophole to prevent people from getting cheesy with their copies of various creatures (e.g. snowcone wish machine).
Edit Reference Here
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I was waiting for this one to show up. Simulacrum really exploded in usefulness once PF removed the restriction on having part of the creature...it allows all kinds of theoretical shenanigans.
I had a 1e DM who used this spell all the time - often you'd fight a major bad guy only to have it melt away into snow when killed.
Honestly, the way it's currently written, this spell is best handled by table agreement on its power level. Making a level 6 copy of yourself to stay home and craft is probably fine. Making a half-HD efreet for wishes not so much.
Generally players aren't going to be casting simulacrum in the middle of combat, so you can take time out of game to sit down and hash out how your table wants the spell to function and what they want to do with it. Is it a campaign changing spell? It can be. Your group will be much happier if everyone agrees on approved uses of the spell rather than trying to surprise each other with it.
Honestly, the way it's currently written, this spell is best handled by table agreement on its power level. Making a level 6 copy of yourself to stay home and craft is probably fine. Making a half-HD efreet for wishes not so much.Generally players aren't going to be casting simulacrum in the middle of combat, so you can take time out of game to sit down and hash out how your table wants the spell to function and what they want to do with it. Is it a campaign changing spell? It can be. Your group will be much happier if everyone agrees on approved uses of the spell rather than trying to surprise each other with it.
This is also true as a rule. In all three games I'm in, every week, we post feedback on the game. This can include plans for the future, concerns about past events in the last session (airing of grievances) and so forth. The overall purpose though is remaining on the same page as players and gms. No one likes the guy who shows up at the table to surprise everyone with some new shenanigans, and when you get talking a reasonable accommodation can almost always be reached.
lol. I feel that I'm entering dangerous territory by even commenting here ;)
However I would say that, as a rule, "you need 500 gp of powdered rubies". is a terrible thing to say. It should be something along the lines of "you need 1 lb of rubies per level or HD of the creature, x2 for every size category above medium. Now go talk to your GM about the going rate for powdered ruby in the kingdom."
Also, how easy is it to get 7th level spells. I know that by the time my wizard is hitting 7th level spells, I'm being very judicious about what I'm taking at the start of each level. And maybe it's just the GMs I play with, but its next to impossible to trade for high level spells. There was always a mini-quest or something connected to it. Which is fine, considering how world-changing some of these spells are.
While you're at it, how are these wizards managing to do all this while at the same time making a secure home so they aren't stabbed to death in their sleep by rival wizards / rogues / enemies? Where's all this money coming from?
However I would say that, as a rule, "you need 500 gp of powdered rubies". is a terrible thing to say. It should be something along the lines of "you need 1 lb of rubies per level or HD of the creature, x2 for every size category above medium. Now go talk to your GM about the going rate for powdered ruby in the kingdom."
As a GM I'd find that annoyingly vague.
And maybe it's just the GMs I play with, but its next to impossible to trade for high level spells.
It's just your GMs. Pathfinder has rules for the availability of items. According to those rules, 7th level spell scrolls cost 2,275gp and are sold in all cities.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
half hd things are incredibly cheap. For example, a pit fiend is 5000g and blows pretty much every martial out of the water, even at half hit dice.
you roughly have 140k gp by level 13, so its 3.5% of your wealth for a pit fiend. That is a steal imo
This reminds me of another thing my group does...reduce all the creature's ability scores and special abilities to be appropriate for a roughly half-CR creature. To us the intention of the spell is not to get "pit fiend with half hp" but instead "pit fiend scaled down to half power."
So we play a simulacrum pit fiend as having the slam attack of a CR10 monster, with at best 4th level SLAs and CR 10 AC and defenses. Honestly it was easier to do this in previous version where the simulacrum simply just took half the numbers of the base creature.
So a 170 hp, AC19, DR 5/good, SR 15,claws +16 (1d8+6), bite +16(2d6+6), tail +16(1d8+3+grab) (and so forth) guy is still pretty darn strong, but not crazy broken. Any 13th level martial should be able to way outperform that.
s for wanting designers to explicitly call out the spell with regard to SLAs and such - they've done so. Many times. I've cited at least three or four different designer posts to Anzyr in which the designer explicitly states that SLAs should be rebuild and reevaluated by the GM.
I don't recall you citing any errata or FAQ. If you have such a thing by all means do cite it.
As to rebuilding and reevaluating SLA's of half-HD creatures with Simulacrum, it's very easy to do. A half-HD Efreeti still can grant 3 Wishes at CL 11th after rebuilding and reevaluating since it's not a HD based ability and is something all Efreeti possess.
A half-HD Efreeti still can grant 3 Wishes at CL 11th after rebuilding and reevaluating since it's not a HD based ability and is something all Efreeti possess.
The Efreeti from my Efreeti bottle never seemed to possess any wishes...
Standard Efreeti have a certain number of HD and wishes per day. Higher-HD Efreeti might have unlimited wishes or whatever abilities the GM creating them thinks appropriate. Lower-HD Efreeti might have no wishes, or whatever abilities the GM thinks appropriate.
Anzyr, I'm not going to dance this dance again.
Link above to designer post explicitly responding to simulacrum, and specifying that like everything else, SLAs should be reduced as the Gm feels is appropriate (and that gm builds simulacrum, not players).
You can argue that such is not how you interpret the RAW, but that is just that, your interpretation in direct opposition to how designers have explained.
You see on this very thread that the designers intend on a FAQ on the subject. But by all means, argue snow cone wish machines to your heart's content. Technically you aren't "wrong" or "right" going strictly by RAW.
If that is how you want to play the game, by all means, have fun. But please stop insisting it is the way explicitly supported by the rules, because even going only by RAW, with no clarification, it goes both ways.
There's a process to follow for increasing or decreasing a monsters HD in the back of the Bestiary and my process follows it. It "interprets" nothing. It takes the rules and applies them. Your "interpretation" requires adding or removing things from the language to get your desired result. Just because someone can interpret something a certain way, doesn't make that interpretation valid. Tell me how one can "interpret" that Wish is not appropriate for an Efreeti. While following the rules in the Bestiary. I'm genuinely curious.
A half-HD Efreeti still can grant 3 Wishes at CL 11th after rebuilding and reevaluating since it's not a HD based ability and is something all Efreeti possess.The Efreeti from my Efreeti bottle never seemed to possess any wishes...
Standard Efreeti have a certain number of HD and wishes per day. Higher-HD Efreeti might have unlimited wishes or whatever abilities the GM creating them thinks appropriate. Lower-HD Efreeti might have no wishes, or whatever abilities the GM thinks appropriate.
No, they don't. Higher HD Efreeti and Efreeti with class levels, still have only CL 11, Wish.
Jhavhul-Al-Bazan:
Male advanced HD efreeti fighter 4
...
hp 363 (22 HD; 18d10+4d10+242)
...
Spell-Like Abilities (CL 11th; concentration +15, +19 defensive)
...
1/day—grant up to 3 wishes (to nongenies only), gaseous form, permanent image (DC 20)
So... the rules disagree with your "interpretation".
Part of the problem with SLAs is that some are not tied to level, and so are not halved.
I'm not even sure how to respond to this. There literally are no rules about what is halved and what isn't, so saying "such and such is not halved" is only true if you, the game master, want it to be true.
Since the GM is the ultimate arbiter of the powers that a half-strength pit fiend or efreeti has, there's nothing game-breaking or overpowering about monster simulacra unless the Game Master wants there to be.
In particular, a rough pass through the bestiary suggests that most wish-granting creatures tend to be at least in the CR teens, so the efreeti at CR 8 being able to grant wishes is already very unusual (and arguably overpowered)..... there's a very strong case that a `wish' is not an "appropriate ... special ability" for a CR 4 creature. (Anzyr's claim is simply rank nonsense.)
Part of the problem with SLAs is that some are not tied to level, and so are not halved.I'm not even sure how to respond to this. There literally are no rules about what is halved and what isn't, so saying "such and such is not halved" is only true if you, the game master, want it to be true.
Since the GM is the ultimate arbiter of the powers that a half-strength pit fiend or efreeti has, there's nothing game-breaking or overpowering about monster simulacra unless the Game Master wants there to be.
In particular, a rough pass through the bestiary suggests that most wish-granting creatures tend to be at least in the CR teens, so the efreeti at CR 8 being able to grant wishes is already very unusual (and arguably overpowered)..... there's a very strong case that a `wish' is not an "appropriate ... special ability" for a CR 4 creature. (Anzyr's claim is simply rank nonsense.)
*cough*
The following rules allow you to adjust monsters, increasing (or even decreasing) their statistics and abilities while still creating a balanced and fun encounter.
...
Step 5: Adjust Statistics
Next, adjust the creature's derived statistics, such as its initiative, AC, saving throws, melee and ranged attack bonuses, BAB, CMB, and CMD. Adjust any special attacks or qualities that are based on the creature's size, Hit Dice, or ability scores. If the creature changed in size, be sure to adjust its AC, attack, CMB, and CMD accordingly (as noted on Table: Size Bonuses and Penalties). Table: Monster Advancement also tracks the average change to the creature's AC, attack rolls, and damage rolls. Add up these values for each step of change between the creature's original and new CR. If the creature changed size, make sure to make changes to its natural armor bonus, as noted on Table: Size Changes. If the creature does not meet these averages, you should consider adjusting its ability scores or Hit Dice to get it closer to the target.
Rank nonsense? So demonstrating that 1. Wish is not tied to HD and that 2. The rules for advancing monster special abilities says to adjust only those that are based on Hit Dice, means that 3. the not tied to HD Wish SLA is appropriate for a half HD Efreeti is somehow "rank nonsense". I must disagree.
A couple people now mentioned a 6th or 7th level Sim of the caster as a possible way to use it. So far nobody has said they'd seen it in game.
I was thinking that through and probably hasn't been done enough to be worth mentioning for a reason. It would cost you the 3000gp, in theory its your clone so could study from your spell book, but you're looking at a ~30hp 6th level battle buddy who's going to either have very low AC or spend 1 or 2 rounds casting shield and mage armor (no action economy gain for the real caster), and fighting CR 12-14 monsters things getting +~20/15/10 to hits and base+10-15 damages (Ice Devil; or AoEs in the 12d6 (blue dragon) just as a couple examples. It seems like the likelihood of survival through even 1 combat is low, even if you try to hide it (but then no action economy gain either), so that 3000gp could have been spent on something better. You could cast a Summon Monster VII and used a CR9 Greater Lightening Elemental with 110hp and much more damage output for cannonfodder (and no 3000gp component).
I have seen it used in this manner both in games I have run and games I have played in. It is quite powerful and effective. No, it doesn't 'end' a game or anything, but compared to other options it is a very powerful one.
I simulacrum at half your level is roughly as survivable as a familiar. People spend a feat to get a familiar with a lot less flexibility than a 6th level caster. Obviously it has to be careful, and yes it is likely to be killed off at some point, but it doesn't take all that many fights for the extra spells (not to mention extra action economy) to pay for itself compared to other consumables.
But the best point about it being a very powerful spell, is that if it wasn't you wouldn't feel the need to nerf it by making ice sculptures or rubies difficult to acquire.
Part of the problem with SLAs is that some are not tied to level, and so are not halved.I'm not even sure how to respond to this. There literally are no rules about what is halved and what isn't, so saying "such and such is not halved" is only true if you, the game master, want it to be true.
Since the GM is the ultimate arbiter of the powers that a half-strength pit fiend or efreeti has, there's nothing game-breaking or overpowering about monster simulacra unless the Game Master wants there to be.
In particular, a rough pass through the bestiary suggests that most wish-granting creatures tend to be at least in the CR teens, so the efreeti at CR 8 being able to grant wishes is already very unusual (and arguably overpowered)..... there's a very strong case that a `wish' is not an "appropriate ... special ability" for a CR 4 creature. (Anzyr's claim is simply rank nonsense.)
*cough*
The following rules allow you to adjust monsters, increasing (or even decreasing) their statistics and abilities while still creating a balanced and fun encounter.
Rank...
Except that's not even relevant. The point of simulacrum is that it adds another criterion, "appropriateness."
Rank nonsense?
Absolutely.
s for wanting designers to explicitly call out the spell with regard to SLAs and such - they've done so. Many times. I've cited at least three or four different designer posts to Anzyr in which the designer explicitly states that SLAs should be rebuild and reevaluated by the GM.I don't recall you citing any errata or FAQ. If you have such a thing by all means do cite it.
As to rebuilding and reevaluating SLA's of half-HD creatures with Simulacrum, it's very easy to do. A half-HD Efreeti still can grant 3 Wishes at CL 11th after rebuilding and reevaluating since it's not a HD based ability and is something all Efreeti possess.
So did this happen in a game you've played in (Wizard using this spell to get wishes), how frequently, what did the GM do, and how did the players respond?
A real game example has more potential to provide useful dialogue. If you're just looking for everyone's feedback on how they'd handle this theoretical situation, then taking what is being offered on this thread and arguing its not a valid solution isn't meeting the intent of the thread. You're of course welcomed and encouraged to pro-offer how you'd handle it, that might help other GMs and players.
The problem is that *not* doing that requires the player to make their 26+ INT PC carry the "idiot ball". Saying "Here's this cool ability, but if you actually use it with anything approaching basic human intelligence you will completely ruin the game." is a problem. Real game example is a massive cop out to scenarios like this, where the spell is unable to be used intelligently without breaking the game.