Simulacrum


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

If you make a simulacrum of someone evil, does it count as evil for the purposes of using something like black robes of the archmagi?


wspatterson wrote:
If you make a simulacrum of someone evil, does it count as evil for the purposes of using something like black robes of the archmagi?

I reserve the right to change my stance on this, but after reading the spell I'd actually say no... You are creating a construct that looks like something basically, it has no real connection to them besides how well you make it look like them. As such the alignment would be neutral, it does as you ask but isn't particularly good at hiding itself besides outside appearances. It has no memories of the original creature either.


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
wspatterson wrote:
If you make a simulacrum of someone evil, does it count as evil for the purposes of using something like black robes of the archmagi?

A simulacrum is identical to the original in ever way, but for having half the hit dice/levels and being absolutely loyal to its creator.

As such, it would always have the same alignment as the original for the purposes of game mechanics.

If a simulacrum's alignment could be changed (such as it matching the creator's) than certain simulacrums would be inherently worthless much of the time (such as a simulacrum of a great paladin).

I like to think that my evil wizard can make paladin clones that can use many of the same powers as the original. If you need an explanation for why they aren't fallen by default, being servants of evil, I guess you could say they aren't true paladins, merely magical entities that can mimic paladin abilities.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

Ravingdork wrote:
it would always have the same alignment as the original for the purposes of game mechanics..

I think that is my interpretation also.


Ravingdork wrote:

A simulacrum is identical to the original in ever way, but for having half the hit dice/levels and being absolutely loyal to its creator?

As such, it would always have the same alignment as the original for the purposes of game mechanics.

If a simulacrum's alignment could be changed (such as it matching the creator's) than certain simulacrums would be inherently worthless much of the time (such as a simulacrum of a great paladin).

I like to think that my evil wizard can make paladin clones that can use many of the same powers as the original. If you need an explanation for why they aren't fallen by default, being servants of evil, I guess you could say they aren't true paladins, merely magical entities that can mimic paladin abilities.

That isn't what the spell says:

PFRPG pg 344 wrote:


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).

All the dup gets is half HD (so racial HD might do something), appropriate feats and skills ranks and Special abilities. That means it doesn't get special qualities either. Basically you're getting a loyal "robot" shaped like someone to play stand in.

As written it is rather lackluster for a 7th spell I'd guess.


Skylancer4 wrote:
All the dup gets is half HD (so racial HD might do something), appropriate feats and skills ranks and Special abilities. That means it doesn't get special qualities either.

I think you're mixing up "special abilities" (which is a very broad catch-all term for various special attacks and special qualities) with "special attacks".

At any rate, if you can't find a 26 HD creature that's still useful with 1/2 HD, then you're looking at the wrong creature.


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Sorry, Skylancer4, but you are mistaken. Special abilities is a catchall term for special attacks, special qualities, class and racial abilities. The only things the simulacrum would not have access to, are those that are dependent on level (such as a paladin's aura of justice).

Also, since it is included in parenthesis as part of a larger sentence, it is little more than clarifying text to remind the reader of what a change in HD can effect. It is be no means exclusive.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Simulacrum is far from a lackluster spell... it's actually one that's REALLY open to interpretation, though.

As folks have already mentioned, the phrase "special abilities for a creature of that level or HD" actually refers to ALL of its special abilities—this includes special attacks, special defenses, special qualities, senses, the whole deal. Simulacrum essentially creates a half-power duplicate of the source creature.

And it DOES keep its alignment, although it's not free to act upon that alignment and must follow its creator's orders, which means that if it's ordered to act outside of its alignment enough its alignment will change (when this occurs is up to the GM, as in ALL cases involving alignment change). Until this occurs, though, an evil simulacrum could indeed use a magic item that requires its user to be evil.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:

Simulacrum is far from a lackluster spell... it's actually one that's REALLY open to interpretation, though.

As folks have already mentioned, the phrase "special abilities for a creature of that level or HD" actually refers to ALL of its special abilities—this includes special attacks, special defenses, special qualities, senses, the whole deal. Simulacrum essentially creates a half-power duplicate of the source creature.

And it DOES keep its alignment, although it's not free to act upon that alignment and must follow its creator's orders, which means that if it's ordered to act outside of its alignment enough its alignment will change (when this occurs is up to the GM, as in ALL cases involving alignment change). Until this occurs, though, an evil simulacrum could indeed use a magic item that requires its user to be evil.

Thank you SO MUCH for the clarification James! Getting some answers about this confounding spell have been a long time coming.

If you have the time, could you please also shed some light on these commonly asked simulacrum questions that I've collected from various threads?

Sim Question Compilation wrote:

(1) Can anyone tell me, for sure, what you end up with if an evil character creates a simulacrum of a paladin? Or a goodly cleric? Will the paladin fall by default? Will the cleric be given spells by a deity it does not believe in? Or are they magical creations that have the inherent ability to mimic the powers of the originals and none of the above matters?

What is their alignment? Does it match the originals, or your own? [You already answered this one, thanks!]

(2) What about their creature type? Does it match the originals, or are they constructs?

(3) Healing a construct/simulacrum can be expensive, but is there anything preventing you from healing it normally (such as by cure spells) and thereby bypassing the costs?

(4) How does the level breakdown work? If you started with a human fighter 4/rogue 3/ranger 3, what levels does the simulacrum have? Does the order they took them matter? What if the original was a troll (6 HD) fighter 5? What would you have then?

(5) Do I have to subtract 1 point from ability scores for every 4 HD/levels of reduction? If so, from which scores?

(6) I remember the simulacrum spell used to need a body part or something of the creature to be copied. Does this mean I can simply "make up" a simulacrum since that no longer holds true? For example, could I make a dragon simulacrum even though I've never encountered a dragon, much less collected a body part? How about the King I've never met face to face (but have an accurate painting of), how does the resulting simulacrum possibly have half the king's abilities? Just because its magic? What if I were able to successfully make appropriate knowledge checks on the creature in question? Would I be able to create a sim of a creature I've never encountered then?

At least in the old rules, I would have to meet the king and steal a hair or something before I could so easily take over the kingdom with a double.

(7) Determining things like hit points, saves, base attack, skill, feats, class abilities, ability DCs, etc. for the lowered HD/class levels is usually pretty easy, but what about more exotic abilities? If I made a simulacrum of a spellcasting creature, such as a dragon for example, how is its spellcasting effected, if at all? What about the duration on abilities like shapechange? What about things like natural armor (which often goes hand in hand with CR)? There are so many corner cases that would be difficult to interpret/rule on that the spell becomes almost silly to adjudicate unless you are doing something simple like a troll, ogre, or dinosaur.

(8) When a simulacrum dies, is it obvious to onlookers that it wasn't a normal creature of its kind? How likely is an observer of the killing to know that it was a simulacrum? Will they need to make a Spellcraft check? [Already answered in the spell text.]

(9) Can a simulacrum be destroyed via Dispel Magic or similar spell? I think it seems overwhelmingly that the answer is no, because the spell is instantaneous and Dispel Magic clarifies:
Quote:

"The effect of a spell with an instantaneous duration can't be dispelled, because the magical effect is already over before the dispel magic can take effect."

Still, if a magic item can be suppressed, can a magic creature? The fact that it is an Illusion spell really gets me hung up, because it suggests that without ongoing magic, the simulacrum couldn't exist at all.

(10) Would Detect Magic detect them as magic creatures?

(11) What would True Seeing do? My inclination is that True Seeing and similar effects would show an animated figure of snow and ice standing there (Frosty the Anti-Paladin?), since they see through the illusion to show what is really there.

(12) Are simulacrums immune to mind-affecting effects?

(13) Do any of these flavor-traits [this is, sims being illusion-based] mean anything game-wise, though? [see many of the above and below] Do they share any attributes with constructs?

- Do they eat, breathe, sleep? (They seem to, since they aren't immune to any attacks based on that) Can they starve or suffocate?
- Are they affected by death attacks, level drain, etc?
- Are they "alive" for the sake of any spells that detect that sort of thing?

(14) Can I make a sim of an incorporeal creature? Make a shadow out of the shadow subschools shadowstuff for example. The spell seems to allow for it, but if so, illusionists become more powerful than necromancers. Since sims have all the original creature's special abilities, I ould then order my shadow to kill people, thereby creating new REAL shadows. These shadows are loyal to their creator (the sim) and by extension, to my illusionist. Would that not bypass the caster level requirements and HD limitations of animate dead and create greater undead that many necromancers have to contend with? Note that I could do this with all kinds of different undead, not just shadows. I could even create sims of undead that necromancers can't normally create such as ghosts or vampires!

(15) Is there any kind of creature I could NOT create as a simulacrum? Constructs, undead, incorporeals, plants, elementals, templated creatures, etc.

(16) What happens if I create a simulacrum of a familiar, eidolon, animal companion, or steed (my own or somebody elses)? Does it gain all the abilities for being a familiar, animal companion, or eidolon?

There are so many questions that come up with this spell, I doubt anyone could ever NOT misuse it.

Please, take your time.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

9 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 36 people marked this as a favorite.

I was tempted to not do this, both because I don't REALLY have the time, and because it fosters the (in my opinion unfortunate) perception that 3rd edition engendered that if you don't get rulings from designers of the games, you're playing the game wrong. The FIRST place you should go for rulings like this is your GM. That's also the LAST place you should go.

Now, on the other hand, if it's a GM who's asking for advice on how to handle this spell, then here's my advice as one GM to another. As with all of my advice on rules, this should be taken with the philosophy of "It's okay for the GM to make the ruling—in fact, it's expected."

Ravingdork wrote:

(1) Can anyone tell me, for sure, what you end up with if an evil character creates a simulacrum of a paladin? Or a goodly cleric? Will the paladin fall by default? Will the cleric be given spells by a deity it does not believe in? Or are they magical creations that have the inherent ability to mimic the powers of the originals and none of the above matters?

What is their alignment? Does it match the originals, or your own? [You already answered this one, thanks!]

An evil character who creates a simulacrum of a paladin and then orders it to do non-lawful or non-good things would very quickly have a simulacrum of an ex-paladin.

Ravingdork wrote:
(2) What about their creature type? Does it match the originals, or are they constructs?

They are not constructs. Creature type is the same as the original.

Ravingdork wrote:
(3) Healing a construct/simulacrum can be expensive, but is there anything preventing you from healing it normally (such as by cure spells) and thereby bypassing the costs?

The only way to heal damage caused to a simulacrum is to do so as described in the last sentence of the spell—by spending 100 gp per hit point and 24 hours in a magical laboratory to fix the damage. Healing spells don't cut it. It's only partially real, after all.

Ravingdork wrote:
(4) How does the level breakdown work? If you started with a human fighter 4/rogue 3/ranger 3, what levels does the simulacrum have? Does the order they took them matter? What if the original was a troll (6 HD) fighter 5? What would you have then?

The GM decides how the level breakdown happens. My suggestion, halve the racial hit dice, halve the class levels, and go from there. Since there's an infinite number of possible combinations, it's impossible to list how to break down every combination. The GM gets to make that decision.

Ravingdork wrote:
(5) Do I have to subtract 1 point from ability scores for every 4 HD/levels of reduction? If so, from which scores?

Yes; subtract the ability scores as appropriate for reduced class levels. It's best to reduce the highest scores first, since logically those would be more likely the ones that would be increased in the first place. Of course, if you KNOW which scores got raised in the first place, you're ahead of the game. You do NOT need to reduce ability scores for lowered racial HD.

Ravingdork wrote:
(6) I remember the simulacrum spell used to need a body part or something of the creature to be copied. Does this mean I can simply "make up" a simulacrum since that no longer holds true? For example, could I make a dragon simulacrum even though I've never encountered a dragon, much less collected a body part? How about the King I've never met face to face (but have an accurate painting of), how does the resulting simulacrum possibly have half the king's abilities? Just because its magic? At least in the old rules, I would have to meet the king and steal a hair or something before I could so easily take over the kingdom with a double.

That's up to the GM. The best way to handle this is to set the Disguise DC check to be really high for correspondingly powerful monsters, but at the same point, a GM is well within his/her rights to limit the choices to monsters the PC has actually studied. Up to the GM.

Ravingdork wrote:
(7) Determining things like hit points, saves, base attack, skill, feats, class abilities, ability DCs, etc. for the lowered HD/class levels is usually pretty easy, but what about more exotic abilities? If I made a simulacrum of a spellcasting creature, such as a dragon for example, how is its spellcasting effected, if at all? What about the duration on abilities like shapechange? What about things like natural armor (which often goes hand in hand with CR)? There are so many corner cases that would be difficult to interpret/rule on that the spell becomes almost silly to adjudicate unless you are doing something simple like a troll, ogre, or dinosaur.

Again, those choices are up to the GM. They should be reduced as appropriate, though. In the case of spellcasting ability, the best solution is to simply halve the creature's effective caster level and go from there. Things like natural armor would not be reduced... unless the GM wants them to be reduced, of coruse.

Ravingdork wrote:
(8) When a simulacrum dies, is it obvious to onlookers that it wasn't a normal creature of its kind? How likely is an observer of the killing to know that it was a simulacrum? Will they need to make a Spellcraft check?

When a simulacrum dies, it melts into a pile of snow; this is actually covered specifically in the text of the spell's description (second to last sentence).

Ravingdork wrote:

(9) Can a simulacrum be destroyed via Dispel Magic or similar spell? I think it seems overwhelmingly that the answer is no, because the spell is instantaneous and Dispel Magic clarifies:

Quote:

"The effect of a spell with an instantaneous duration can't be dispelled, because the magical effect is already over before the dispel magic can take effect."

Still, if a magic item can be suppressed, can a magic creature? The fact that it is an Illusion spell really gets me hung up, because it suggests that without ongoing magic, the simulacrum couldn't exist at all.

A simulacrum is not a real creature; it's a PARTIALLY real creature. It's more accurate to say it's a magical creation (this has no impact on the creature's type, though—that's set by the original creature). It's an illusion, but it's of the "shadow" type, which means that it's partially real as well. In any case, dispel magic clearly says that spells with a duration of instantaneous can't be dispelled, and in the case of simulacrum, that's exactly what it's duration is.

Ravingdork wrote:
(10) Would Detect Magic detect them as magic creatures?

No. Neither does detect magic detect constructs, magical beasts, undead, or other creatures created by magic.

Ravingdork wrote:
(11) What would True Seeing do? My inclination is that True Seeing and similar effects would show an animated figure of snow and ice standing there (Frosty the Anti-Paladin?), since they see through the illusion to show what is really there.

True seeing would reveal it to be an animated statue made of ice and snow, but would not otherwise affect the simulacrum's abilities.

Ravingdork wrote:
(12) Are simulacrums immune to mind-affecting effects?

Only if the original creature was immune to mind-affecting effects.

Ravingdork wrote:

(13) Do any of these flavor-traits [this is, sims being illusion-based] mean anything game-wise, though? [see many of the above and below] Do they share any attributes with constructs?

- Do they eat, breathe, sleep? (They seem to, since they aren't immune to any attacks based on that)
- Are they affected by death attacks, level drain, etc?
- Are they "alive" for the sake of any spells that detect that sort of thing?

They are subject to the same limitations and boons that the original creature was subject to. This includes starvation, suffocation, sleep, death attacks, level drain, life-detection, and so on.

Ravingdork wrote:
There are so many questions that come up with this spell, I doubt anyone could ever NOT misuse it.

If you're that worried that misuse of the spell could actually decrease the fun of game play, the only sane option is to not allow the spell in your game.


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Still working out how you want to answer 14, 15, and 16? Your previous answers kind of answer 14 and 15 by extension, but I'm still curious to know how you would handle 16 in your home games as GM.

In any case, thank you so much for your time. It's exactly that kind of dedication towards your fans that makes us love you so much.

Grand Lodge

6) The spell requires an ice sculpture of "the target", creates "a duplicate" and derives all its abilities from "the original". None of this could work for an original creature that doesn't exist.

14) The simulacrum is formed from ice and snow. It is, therefore, not incorporeal, even if it's possible to make it look like an incorporeal creature (at best, it might travel as a mist of ice crystals).

Since any create spawn ability it might have works by shadow magic, its spawn should have the penalties of simulacra (except that they can think for themselves, beyond the normal spawn control mechanic) and die when the original simulacrum is destroyed.

16) An animal companion's abilities come from a class feature, not the creature. I'd say you could nevertheless duplicate its individual statistics (half its HP and so on) but the simulacrum doesn't have any bond with the original's owner, who can sense this as soon as he tries to use any of the bond abilities, so, more or less immediately.

A simulacrum of someone who has an animal companion doesn't have a connection to the real companion. I'd allow the wizard to cast a second simulacrum at the same time to simulate a companion with the normal bond.

Liberty's Edge

Ravingdork wrote:
wspatterson wrote:
If you make a simulacrum of someone evil, does it count as evil for the purposes of using something like black robes of the archmagi?

A simulacrum is identical to the original in ever way, but for having half the hit dice/levels and being absolutely loyal to its creator.

As such, it would always have the same alignment as the original for the purposes of game mechanics.

If a simulacrum's alignment could be changed (such as it matching the creator's) than certain simulacrums would be inherently worthless much of the time (such as a simulacrum of a great paladin).

I like to think that my evil wizard can make paladin clones that can use many of the same powers as the original. If you need an explanation for why they aren't fallen by default, being servants of evil, I guess you could say they aren't true paladins, merely magical entities that can mimic paladin abilities.

Half everything, not just hit dice and level. Spells and spell like abilities too. Makes it damn confusing with creatures with natural spell like abilities.

Anyone else thinks the spell needs a major clarification/rewrite. Particularly now that XP penalty was replaced with gold penalty.


ciretose wrote:
Anyone else thinks the spell needs a major clarification/rewrite. Particularly now that XP penalty was replaced with gold penalty.

It was rewritten to take into account the missing XP cost; it used to be 100 gp/HD + 100 xp/HD (min 1000 xp), and now it's just 500 gp/HD.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

Still working out how you want to answer 14, 15, and 16? Your previous answers kind of answer 14 and 15 by extension, but I'm still curious to know how you would handle 16 in your home games as GM.

In any case, thank you so much for your time. It's exactly that kind of dedication towards your fans that makes us love you so much.

Weird how I might miss a few questions on an enormous list of complicated questions, eh? ;-P

Ravingdork wrote:
(14) Can I make a sim of an incorporeal creature? Make a shadow out of the shadow subschools shadowstuff for example. The spell seems to allow for it, but if so, illusionists become more powerful than necromancers. Since sims have all the original creature's special abilities, I ould then order my shadow to kill people, thereby creating new REAL shadows. These shadows are loyal to their creator (the sim) and by extension, to my illusionist. Would that not bypass the caster level requirements and HD limitations of animate dead and create greater undead that many necromancers have to contend with? Note that I could do this with all kinds of different undead, not just shadows. I could even create sims of undead that necromancers can't normally create such as ghosts or vampires!

As part of the spell, you have to create a body out of ice and snow that becomes the simulacrum. As incorporeal creatures do not have bodies at all, you can't make an ice sculpture of one of them, therefore you can't make an incorporeal creature using simulacrum at all.

Frankly, I really REALLY wish we'd kept the "You must use a fragment of the target creature's body" as a material component. Not only because that's really cool flavor for the spell, but it more obviously makes it clear that you can't create an incorporeal creature with this spell.

As for monsters that create spawn, I would rule that "create spawn" would fall under the aegis of "getting more powerful," something that a simulacrum can't actually do. So a simulacrum of a creature that can create spawn would not be able to create spawn.

Ravingdork wrote:
(15) Is there any kind of creature I could NOT create as a simulacrum? Constructs, undead, incorporeals, plants, elementals, templated creatures, etc.

No incorporeal creatures. Beyond that, the GM has final say. Opening up templates is a slippery slope, though. Certainly you can't create a simulacrum of a monster or creature that doesn't exist in your game, and the GM has the final word on what is and isn't included in his/her game, so that's pretty much what sets those limits.

Ravingdork wrote:
(16) What happens if I create a simulacrum of a familiar, eidolon, animal companion, or steed (my own or somebody elses)? Does it gain all the abilities for being a familiar, animal companion, or eidolon?

It has half the abilities of the target creature, just as with any other simulacrum. It doesn't count as a familiar or an animal companion or an eidolon for the purposes of anything else.

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:

Simulacrum is far from a lackluster spell... it's actually one that's REALLY open to interpretation, though.

As folks have already mentioned, the phrase "special abilities for a creature of that level or HD" actually refers to ALL of its special abilities—this includes special attacks, special defenses, special qualities, senses, the whole deal. Simulacrum essentially creates a half-power duplicate of the source creature.

And it DOES keep its alignment, although it's not free to act upon that alignment and must follow its creator's orders, which means that if it's ordered to act outside of its alignment enough its alignment will change (when this occurs is up to the GM, as in ALL cases involving alignment change). Until this occurs, though, an evil simulacrum could indeed use a magic item that requires its user to be evil.

Thank you for the extended feedback on the spell. This type of input is very much appreciated (even if I hate that the monk can't act after abundant step despite it being a move action...)

I will say in the case of this spell I wish some major revisions would be considered regarding what can be created. The special abilities is open to abuse when you consider things like Genies can grant wishes.

Even a line about maximum spell level equivalent would fix most of the issues and keep the flavor of the spell.

I know it is a carry over from 3.5, but as written it is begging for abuse.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ciretose wrote:

I will say in the case of this spell I wish some major revisions would be considered regarding what can be created. The special abilities is open to abuse when you consider things like Genies can grant wishes.

Even a line about maximum spell level equivalent would fix most of the issues and keep the flavor of the spell.

I know it is a carry over from 3.5, but as written it is begging for abuse.

Keeping it from being abused is what a good GM does.

A bad GM won't, but then again, a bad GM's game is going to have more problems than abused simulacrum spells.

Could it benefit from rewriting? Certainly. Does it need it to function in game? Nah.

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:
ciretose wrote:

I will say in the case of this spell I wish some major revisions would be considered regarding what can be created. The special abilities is open to abuse when you consider things like Genies can grant wishes.

Even a line about maximum spell level equivalent would fix most of the issues and keep the flavor of the spell.

I know it is a carry over from 3.5, but as written it is begging for abuse.

Keeping it from being abused is what a good GM does.

A bad GM won't, but then again, a bad GM's game is going to have more problems than abused simulacrum spells.

Could it benefit from rewriting? Certainly. Does it need it to function in game? Nah.

Fair enough.


James Jacobs wrote:

Frankly, I really REALLY wish we'd kept the "You must use a fragment of the target creature's body" as a material component. Not only because that's really cool flavor for the spell, but it more obviously makes it clear that you can't create an incorporeal creature with this spell.

Specificially for this thread I reread the PF version of simulacrum and my first reaction was "what the heck?! no part of the body required as material component? designers must have missed this one..." and intended to ask here and point it for errata. Actually if you ever plan do 2nd edition or at least revision I would say that adding piece of body as material component for simulacrum should be on a to-do list.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

James Jacobs wrote:
I was tempted to not do this ... because it fosters the (in my opinion unfortunate) perception that 3rd edition engendered that if you don't get rulings from designers of the games, you're playing the game wrong.

I'm very happy you did reply.

I prefer to think of it as "this is the intent, play the game any way you choose" over "playing the game wrong" .

GM's are free to Rule 0 it however they wish.

The odd thing is that I seem to have more trouble when a ruling isn't clear (there is no clear assertion which way a rule should be handled) getting my players to accept a ruling than I do when Paizo replies to posts like this.

Meaning, I have to do it this way:
1) I agree with you player, it works as you suggest. But I house rule it this way.

As opposed to this way:
2) I don't agree, I think it works this way by the rules.

#1 gets it settled and us back playing. #2 goes into long debates.

So to me, the more answers as to how it works, the better.

Dark Archive

Wow, that 'body part required' material component is gonna get added back in pronto, if I ever use stuff of that level in a home game! The thought that any wizard with simulacrum can just whip up half-strength solars and pit fiends and oldish dragons without finding the necessary parts (which, as GM, will be my discretion to allow him to locate and acquire) is scary!

Granted, calling spells can alleviate some of that, but, for the most part, the material component requirement prevented the player from just creating half-strength duplicates of any dragon he fancied, without going out there and finding a real dragon of the appropriate color and HD size (and, in that case, the GM would get to choose it's feat, skill and spell selection, since the player couldn't dial it up to his exact specifications), or, if he found and raided some 'dragon's graveyard,' gave the GM the option of surprising him with something unforeseen.

Huh, just noticed that the Tarrasque is only 30 HD, which means that a 15th level Wizard could make a 'half-strength' copy, if he was completely nutters... Pass!

ciretose wrote:
I will say in the case of this spell I wish some major revisions would be considered regarding what can be created. The special abilities is open to abuse when you consider things like Genies can grant wishes.

Simulacra, like shapeshifting into a monster, charming / dominating a monster, playing monster PCs, using diplomacy or shrewd bargaining to get monsters to use their abilities on behalf of the PCs, taking a monster as cohort via Leadership, or summoning / calling such a beastie to serve a PC, is only as 'broken' as the monster abilities allow for. Simulacra is an amazing spell, but it's not the spell (or shapeshifting, or summoning, or enchantment, or monster PCs) that are necessarily 'broken,' so much as the fairly ridiculous open-ended monster powers, like Grant Wish or Create Spawn or Split or 3.x version of the Barghest's Feed.

The more creatures with powers that would be ridiculously out of line in the hand of a party of that CR exist, the more spells and abilities involving shapeshifting, charm, summoning, etc. need to be tweaked to prevent them from being exploited by PCs, which still does nothing to explain why Efreeti don't sit around all day with diplomacied mortal friends, granting them Wishes for mutual benefit, or Shadows/Wraiths/Wights/Spectres haven't taken over the world, or some mad 3.X plant domain Cleric hasn't lodged a +1 shocking dagger into the back of a shambling mound he's rebuked until it has a Con score of 135, growing each round for the rest of eternity.

Pathfinder fixed some scary loops, such as limiting the Barghest to using Feed once / month, but left Create Spawn, Electrical Fortitude, Grant Wish and Split in play. A Simulacra of a Shambling Mound or Efreeti, will be just as 'broken' as charming or befriending or playing or summoning or calling or shapeshifting* into such a beastie.

*Assuming a version of shapeshifting that allows one to actually turn into a creature, and not a spell that gives you a flat plus to some attributes and makes you look like the monster, but grants none of it's abilities.

I suspect this is why spells that summon, charm, shapeshift, etc. have changed so significantly in 4th edition, which has moved even further away from designing monsters with abilities that would be balanced to fall into the hands of PCs. If there is no way for a PC to charm, summon or turn into a specific monster, and thus place it's abilities under their (temporary) control, then there's no balance problem with giving the monsters open-ended infinite-loop abilities (other than the versimilitude quibble of wondering why the *monsters* never think of taking over the world with their free wishes or unlimited create spawn).


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

There are SO many new simulacrum threads appearing lately, many of which having redundant questions that have already been answered, I thought I would bump this very old thread in order to give it some more exposure.

Obviously, people don't know where to find it. Hopefully this will reduce some of the confusion floating about, about the spell.


Bump cool threads shant die!

I love the disguise check part so you can make so many variations on a theme.
Truly just to get a Purple Teranisaur that has a magic mouth collar Evil Icarnate! I wuv you you wuv me! evil! hahahahah!

Seriously perfect spell for making hired help at your base of operations take your fighter friend make a copie that does not look like him and he gets to train followers/new recrutes and run simple patrolls.
Rogues get to look out for thieves and infiltrators.

Well you get the idea you can Have quaified folk run your shop laboring 24/7 none looking like another.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ancient thread... but it's new to me, and I like it. But I'm not just bumping it, I wish to contribute.

On the subject of not having a body part requirement, as a GM I would(and do) rule that the spell's range of 0 ft means the original creature has to be present for the full casting time.

Also: the material component mentions an ice sculpture of "the target", I understand the spell doesn't have a target, but I ruled: This spell targets the original creature, duplicating its powers with shadow magic and placing these powers in the ice sculpture and thereby animating it. (I believe my original wording contained: "with shadowy stuff")

Awesome thread for all those of us who love simulacra.


"bump"

I'm using simulacra as part of a villains plan to infiltrate certain organizations (including the Seelie/Unseelie courts, bazing!).

This thread has been immensely helpful, so I'm bumping it. I would like there to be more discussion on this, maybe if someone feels inspired to do a simulacrum guide that would be cool.

I do have several fey already statted up along with some unusual NPC's as simulacrums. I do wonder about simulacra of clerics to non-evil gods and the viability of simulacra spies.

Thoughts?


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Thanks for bumping such an awesome thread (more people need to know this stuff), but this is the rules forum. Perhaps you would like to throw up a simulacrum related rules question we could discuss?


Alright then, here goes.

I understand the opinion is that a regenerating or fast healing simulacrum would be able to self heal, I disagree with this, but the rules seem silent about it. Fixing (healing) a sim requires A LOT of monies to do, so I imagine the RAI is that they cannot be healed magically or over time (resting) which would indicate that fast healing and regen are out.

None of the sims for my game have FH or Regen, so far. I'll probably avoid them since I don't think they would be able to do it.

It also means a sim wouldn't heal non-lethal overtime either. That's my take on it, the question would be is there any precedence for this PF? Can the sim heal itself and if so, should it be able to?


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Of course a sim can heal itself, it's just terribly costly to do so. ;P


Ravingdork wrote:
Of course a sim can heal itself, it's just terribly costly to do so. ;P

Let me rephrase, RAW states healing cannot be done without a lab and costly components. RAW also state that sims get all the abilities of whatever they're copying. However, does that mean that fast heal/regen bypasses the costly requirements to heal a sim?

I also wonder what would happen with a simulacrum of a manticore. Would the tail spikes regrow day after day or would they need to be replenished in a lab with some kind of cost tied in? How about a creature with poison? Do the poison sacs just refill or is it a onetime use until the creator can craft some snow into a fresh batch of illusory poison for the sim?


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I've always interpreted it as fast healing and regeneration working on a sim normally, but that's just me.

Liberty's Edge

A simulacrum eat, sleep and do everything the original do. It maintain the original abilities, so it will surely regrow tail spikes, refill poison sacks and so on. Al those thins have nothing to do with healing damage.

About healing damage:
There is no explicit rule against healing spells or fast healing. What the spell say is:
"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."
not
"is required to repair a simulacrum"

The Healing skill say:
"Treat Deadly Wounds: When treating deadly wounds, you can restore hit points to a damaged creature."
that don't mean that there aren't other way to heal wounds.
The simulacrum spell has very similar wording.

RAW there is nothing that say "you must use a lab to heal the simulacrum", it simply say that you can use one.

RAI I am almost sure that the intention is to limit the ability to repair damage only to a lab. Personally I would allow fast healing and regeneration to work but not healing spells.
Non lethal damage is tricky. Probably I would allow it to heal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I played D&D in the 70s and early 80s. Simulacrum was always my favorite spell. We used it to create stronghold guard, watchmen for camp, gain tactical information when questioning an enemy didn't produce results, replace overlords, princes, or local magistrates to gain control over the region politically...or even sims of lost party members we all liked (like Jim's character "Bubbles" who lived on as a sim long after the character died at level 10. Nefarious magic users would create sims of his party to find out if they were stealing from them or keeping secrets. And if you were like me, create a horde of minions for as many purposes as you can think of to store in your Mirror of life trapping: from Green Slime, and Rust Monsters, to Brass Dragons, and sims of that really great chef at that particularly cool Inn.

In PF, I can't wait for my Wizard to get Sim. I'll use it in much the same way (I've already got my eyes on a cook we met I plan to sim), though will suggest several AD&D inspired limitations to my DM to make the spell reasonable.

In AD&D, the rules were DISTANTLY more clear. In 3.5's push to vagueness which PF made even more vague, it's hard to figure. For me, remembering clearly the "spirit and intent" of the spell, even the PF vague description isn't much of a challenge for me and my group to work out. Here's Simulacrum in AD&D:

Simulacrum (Illusion/Phantasm)
Level: 7 Components: V, S, M Range: Touch Casting Time: Special Duration: Permanent Saving Throw: None Area of Effect: One creature
Explanation/Description: By means of this spell the magic-user is able to create a duplicate of any creature. The duplicate appears exactly the same as the real. There are differences: the simulacrum will have only 51% to 60% (50% + 1% to 10%) of the hit points of the real creature, there will be personality differences, there will be areas of knowledge which the duplicate does not have, and a Detect Magic spell will instantly reveal it as a simulacrum, as will a True Seeing spell. At all times the simulacrum remains under the absolute command of the magic-user who created it, although no special telepathic link exists, so command must be exercised in the normal manner. The spell creates the form of the creature, but it is only a zombie-like creature. A Reincarnation spell must be used to give the duplicate a vital force, and a Limited Wish spell must be used to empower the duplicate with 40% to 65% (35% + 5% to 30%) of the knowledge and personality of the original. The level, if any, of the simulacrum, will be from 20% to 50% of the original creature. The duplicate creature is formed from ice or snow. The spell is cast over the rough form, and some piece of the creature to be duplicated must be placed inside the snow or ice. Additionally, the spell requires powdered ruby. The simulacrum has no ability to become more powerful, i.e. it cannot increase its levels or abilities.

With Sim, we would make duplicates of the local arch villain or dark lord and pump him for information (any memory or question would have the previously set40%to60% chance of knowing the detail). For powers, DMs would either roll knowledge percentage (lets say he'd roll 50%). Now the sim would have a 50% chance to have each ability or skill the original had including every known spell, etc. Some DMs would say he has 50% of the total number of abilities randomly determined (so if the original had 8 abilities, he would have 4, if he had 6 level 2 spells he'd have 3, etc...randomly rolled for). The level caviate only came into play when duplicating humanoids since few monsters in AD&D had levels (levels and HD were different for such purposes...thus the line "level, if any."

I hope to convince my DM to impose the knowledge percentage limitation the original version of the spell had. Without it, I'd feel like I was cheating. I WILL be using simulacrum to gather information (and to replace local magistrates and nobles to control the local politics). Besides, questioning a sim of an opponent was fun going around the table and the DM rolling to see if it knew the answers. Hehe.

Dark Archive

What are people's favorite uses for Simulacrum? I love using them for extremely skilled craftsmen, unwavering guards and for spies. I have wondered on using them to do things like staff businesses, but a prince (advisor), warlord (blacksmith) or archmage(sage/alchmist) does not always make the best in those despite the fact it might have the best rolls. I have Karzoug as headmaster of my mage school.....I can't help but think of him as evil dumbeldor.


Jarazix wrote:
What are people's favorite uses for Simulacrum? I love using them for extremely skilled craftsmen, unwavering guards and for spies. I have wondered on using them to do things like staff businesses, but a prince (advisor), warlord (blacksmith) or archmage(sage/alchmist) does not always make the best in those despite the fact it might have the best rolls. I have Karzoug as headmaster of my mage school.....I can't help but think of him as evil dumbeldor.

I'm trying to develop a version that allows me to have a number of duplicate bodies so my wizard can be in two or more places at once and aware of what's happening there. E.g I'm relaxing on a tropical beach in my own private dimension, keeping an eye on events developing in a small country with a very charismatic cult leader and advising the family member ruling out hone country on magical matters. Sadly when I posted my trial version to get feedback all I got was a bunch of this is broken replies in relation sto stuff retained from the original spell and not my own homebrewed things.

Basically raised the level, added a limit on the number of active clones based on int bonus, required a blood component from the creature being simulcrumed (1 litre per simulcrum, didn't need to all be given at once) and most worryingly from a balance perspective removed the hd halving as its essentially a duplicate body for the real being. That is if a simulcrum of a sorcerer cast a fireball spell that spell/spell slot is used up as normal so instead of a hundred 5th level wizard simulcrums all casting fireball at once you were limited to the number the orginal had available. Because of the fact it was one mind in X bodies if someone dominated any of the bodies original or a simulcrum it didn't matter as the being inside was dominated (and yes in my example case they could then order the wizard in those three areas to kill their relative and then themself, with the usual extra saves etc).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have something to add to the debate.

Bestiary p304 wrote:
For creatures with spell-like abilities, a designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature’s caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature’s Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is 10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature’s Charisma modifier.

I think this gives RAW support to keeping ALL spell-likes on the simulacrum. Yeah, the DC and CL are changed, per the spell due to HD and class level reduction, but they would still have the SLAs unless called out as being tied to HD or level.

Thoughts?

/cevah

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
wspatterson wrote:
If you make a simulacrum of someone evil, does it count as evil for the purposes of using something like black robes of the archmagi?

A simulacrum is identical to the original in ever way, but for having half the hit dice/levels and being absolutely loyal to its creator.

As such, it would always have the same alignment as the original for the purposes of game mechanics.

If a simulacrum's alignment could be changed (such as it matching the creator's) than certain simulacrums would be inherently worthless much of the time (such as a simulacrum of a great paladin).

I like to think that my evil wizard can make paladin clones that can use many of the same powers as the original. If you need an explanation for why they aren't fallen by default, being servants of evil, I guess you could say they aren't true paladins, merely magical entities that can mimic paladin abilities.

As one might imagine Simulacra are heavily houseruled in my game, you want to be able to pull that kind of crap, you're going to have to get a fresh piece of the original in my games.

Otherwise, the only simulacra you can make are those of yourself and they won't have any spellcasting ability, and not much of anything else outside of construct hit dice and BAB.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cevah wrote:

I have something to add to the debate.

Bestiary p304 wrote:
For creatures with spell-like abilities, a designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature’s caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature’s Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is 10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature’s Charisma modifier.

I think this gives RAW support to keeping ALL spell-likes on the simulacrum. Yeah, the DC and CL are changed, per the spell due to HD and class level reduction, but they would still have the SLAs unless called out as being tied to HD or level.

Thoughts?

/cevah

RAW support is a meaningless term. After all, you can find RAW support for a whole horde of things the system was never meant to do, such as Swords of True Strike. RAW will support the total destruction of the game system, so by itself, it's not a reason to say YES.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Sword of True Strike is not supported by RAW. In fact given that you just said that I feel forced to ask if you understand what RAW is. A guideline that requires GM permission is not RAW. You will never see someone make a RAW argument that a Wizard can research Cure Light Wounds, even though under spell research, with a permissive GM they could. Those of us who talk about RAW like to actually stick to it and thus would not suggest a Wizard simply Spell Research their way to CLW, because it has no basis in RAW.

Simulacrums keeping SLAs (that aren't based on HD, there are a few) however is RAW. Though those who read the rules that written already know that.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cevah wrote:

I have something to add to the debate.

Bestiary p304 wrote:
For creatures with spell-like abilities, a designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature’s caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature’s Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is 10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature’s Charisma modifier.

I think this gives RAW support to keeping ALL spell-likes on the simulacrum. Yeah, the DC and CL are changed, per the spell due to HD and class level reduction, but they would still have the SLAs unless called out as being tied to HD or level.

Thoughts?

/cevah

Wishful thinking.

You are taking a rule that it meant to say: Even if a efreeti has a caster level of 11 he is still capable to cast wish and use it to negate this piece of the rules "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)."
An efeeti has 10 HD and a CL of 11. You create a simulacron of it? The GM decide what are the "appropriate special abilities for a creature with 5 HD", included his spell like abilities and caster level.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:

Sword of True Strike is not supported by RAW. In fact given that you just said that I feel forced to ask if you understand what RAW is. A guideline that requires GM permission is not RAW. You will never see someone make a RAW argument that a Wizard can research Cure Light Wounds, even though under spell research, with a permissive GM they could. Those of us who talk about RAW like to actually stick to it and thus would not suggest a Wizard simply Spell Research their way to CLW, because it has no basis in RAW.

Simulacrums keeping SLAs (that aren't based on HD, there are a few) however is RAW. Though those who read the rules that written already know that.

1. I could use the pricing rules to price out...

a. An intelligent sword that has true strike x/day, a bracer that grants true strike as a move action.

b. an arm bracer that can cast mage armor for for cheaper than bracers +4

2. And yes, we get posts about wizards researching cure light wounds at the rate of twice a month on average.

People use RAW on a constant basis in this board to justify rules abuse. All that means is that the game can't be set up to run itself. that even RAW must be subordinate to the human judgement factor.

And as far as simulacra keeping SLAs have you forgotten the threads about wish factories composed of efreeti simulacra? If Wizards are as quadratic as many wish to claim, they are most likely so by abuse of RAW allowed by permissive GMs.


LazarX wrote:
And as far as simulacra keeping SLAs have you forgotten the threads about wish factories composed of efreeti simulacra? If Wizards are as quadratic as many wish to claim, they are most likely so by abuse of RAW allowed by permissive GMs.

Spellcasters don't need planar binding or simulacrum abuse. Taking standard options from the CRB on its own is enough to outclass non casting classes without breaking a sweat. No permissive rulings are required to employ virtually unbeatable battlefield control or to employ useful divinations or utility spells outside of combat.


LazarX wrote:
Anzyr wrote:

Sword of True Strike is not supported by RAW. In fact given that you just said that I feel forced to ask if you understand what RAW is. A guideline that requires GM permission is not RAW. You will never see someone make a RAW argument that a Wizard can research Cure Light Wounds, even though under spell research, with a permissive GM they could. Those of us who talk about RAW like to actually stick to it and thus would not suggest a Wizard simply Spell Research their way to CLW, because it has no basis in RAW.

Simulacrums keeping SLAs (that aren't based on HD, there are a few) however is RAW. Though those who read the rules that written already know that.

1. I could use the pricing rules to price out...

a. An intelligent sword that has true strike x/day, a bracer that grants true strike as a move action.

b. an arm bracer that can cast mage armor for for cheaper than bracers +4

2. And yes, we get posts about wizards researching cure light wounds at the rate of twice a month on average.

People use RAW on a constant basis in this board to justify rules abuse. All that means is that the game can't be set up to run itself. that even RAW must be subordinate to the human judgement factor.

And as far as simulacra keeping SLAs have you forgotten the threads about wish factories composed of efreeti simulacra? If Wizards are as quadratic as many wish to claim, they are most likely so by abuse of RAW allowed by permissive GMs.

They aren't pricing rules though. They are a guideline subject to GM approval, exactly like the spell research I mentioned and not RAW for the same reasons. Your GM *can* allow it, but your GM allowing it is not a rule and thus should not be relied upon in RAW discussions.

No one is using RAW to justify rules abuse. That would be extremely hard considering that using RAW is rule *USE* not rules abuse. If the RAW leads to something that is undesirable in the game, I think the fault lies with the individual who wrote the rules no? If the rules of the game lead to an undesirable outcome why would you believe it is the players fault for following the rules of the game and not the writers of the rules?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Anzyr wrote:

Sword of True Strike is not supported by RAW. In fact given that you just said that I feel forced to ask if you understand what RAW is. A guideline that requires GM permission is not RAW. You will never see someone make a RAW argument that a Wizard can research Cure Light Wounds, even though under spell research, with a permissive GM they could. Those of us who talk about RAW like to actually stick to it and thus would not suggest a Wizard simply Spell Research their way to CLW, because it has no basis in RAW.

Simulacrums keeping SLAs (that aren't based on HD, there are a few) however is RAW. Though those who read the rules that written already know that.

1. I could use the pricing rules to price out...

a. An intelligent sword that has true strike x/day, a bracer that grants true strike as a move action.

b. an arm bracer that can cast mage armor for for cheaper than bracers +4

2. And yes, we get posts about wizards researching cure light wounds at the rate of twice a month on average.

People use RAW on a constant basis in this board to justify rules abuse. All that means is that the game can't be set up to run itself. that even RAW must be subordinate to the human judgement factor.

And as far as simulacra keeping SLAs have you forgotten the threads about wish factories composed of efreeti simulacra? If Wizards are as quadratic as many wish to claim, they are most likely so by abuse of RAW allowed by permissive GMs.

They aren't pricing rules though. They are a guideline subject to GM approval, exactly like the spell research I mentioned and not RAW for the same reasons. Your GM *can* allow it, but your GM allowing it is not a rule and thus should not be relied upon in RAW discussions.

No one is using RAW to justify rules abuse. That would be extremely hard considering that using RAW is rule *USE* not rules abuse. If the RAW leads to something that is undesirable in the game, I think the fault lies with the individual who...

It's the GM's fault for following it blindly, and the players fault for deliberately exploiting a corner or hole in the rules. Perfection is not something we expect in real life, why should we single out a game author for otherwise?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

No one expects perfection, merely correction.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't argue for all SLAs, only those not awarded at HD levels no longer held. A number of player races get SLAs at specific character levels. If the simulacrum has sufficient level, it would have the SLAs for those levels. However, some SLAs are not pegged to levels. Those are what I am talking about.

However, I am also interested in non-SLAs. Specifically the Coven ability of Hags. I want to know how "A simulacrum has no ability to become more powerful" interacts with the fact ALL hags can support a coven, from the 4HD one to the 18HD one. If I start with one > 7HD, I think it would support a coven just fine, since it's simulacrum will have as many hit die as another hag that can support a coven. I know JJ thinks it would loose the coven ability because that makes it more powerful, but I disagree. It is not gaining any power it did not already have, nor is it increasing power via any spawn like or summoning ability. The coven ability is not listed as (Su), (Sp), or (Ex). The ability appears keyed to the creature's subtype. In fact, the CL dropped because of the loss of HD, unless another in the coven has a better CL, which would be the case for me.

As I am a Ninja/Witch, I don't have sufficient CL to cast the spell. (I don't even get the spell.) I need a way to finesse it. UMD looks like 33 to use the scroll. I have CHA 18, so I can emulate a sorcerer casting without needing the UMD the stat.

An alternate way I thought of was a Ring of Spell Storing, since the summoner can get it at 5th level, but that costs 50,000 gp. It would still be a good ring to have, but not that great.

Another alternate method I thought of was a Staff @ 13th, that needed 5 charges to do the spell. Price for that staff is 400 * 5 * 13 * (1/5) * 2 = 10,400 gp. Does that sound reasonable?

/cevah


What about the material component cost? So far as I can tell, there's no coherent way to price a staff for a spell that has a material component of varying cost. You have to pay 50x the material component fee (divided by number of charges the ability uses), but it's not obvious what you pay for a staff of simulacrum.

I suppose I'd say, pick a number, pay enough for that, and you can do the spell if and only if it would work with the number you picked, otherwise you can't.

... Of course, that still leaves you with problems. Imagine a staff of Trap the Soul. Where does the soul go? You don't actually have a gem...

I note also, on the SLA topic: Advanced creatures exist. You can advance an efreet to 20HD. Therefore you can do a half-hit-die advanced efreet, which is a 10HD creature, and obviously a 10HD creature can have the abilities of a normal 10HD efreet, right?


Yeah, I realized that after I posted. For 5HD on that staff, it would add 25,000 gp. That would cover a target up to 10HD, more then enough for what I am looking for. Still cheaper than the ring.

Scrolls and Wands have the same issue. I have heard of GMs allowing creation w/o components, and components supplied at casting time.

As to advancing a critter to double HD than using that as the target, I think any sane GM would say such a creature does not exist. I also would prefer the "part of creature" requirement be placed back in to prevent such things.

So....

Do you think the "coven" ability would stay on a simmed hag?

/cevah


I wouldn't ban "coven", any more than I'd say that a simulacrum of a 16th level cleric can't cast divine power on the grounds that it "grants them power".

Liberty's Edge

Cevah wrote:

Yeah, I realized that after I posted. For 5HD on that staff, it would add 25,000 gp. That would cover a target up to 10HD, more then enough for what I am looking for. Still cheaper than the ring.

Scrolls and Wands have the same issue. I have heard of GMs allowing creation w/o components, and components supplied at casting time.

As to advancing a critter to double HD than using that as the target, I think any sane GM would say such a creature does not exist. I also would prefer the "part of creature" requirement be placed back in to prevent such things.

So....

Do you think the "coven" ability would stay on a simmed hag?

/cevah

Your earlier post about a ninja/witch is a bit unclear, I think it is missing a row of text or some such. The Coven hex isn't a spell.

The coven hex is a hex and you need it to be part of a coven. So it is a level dependent class ability.
When you make a simulacrum of a witch it has half of the original witch levels and you should change her class abilities accordingly.
A tent level witch would have 5 hex and 1 major hex, his simulacrum would be 5th level and would have 4 hex and 0 major hex.
If the coven hex is one of the 3 hex you have chosen to keep the witch can be part of a hag coven, if you don't have kept the coven hex she can't.

About this question. "Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature." and "The duplicate creature is partially real and formed from ice or snow."

While it retain the creature type for effects related to it I don't think it count as the actual creature for the coven ability of hags.


Coven is not a hex in this instance. Its an ability that hags possess. And yes, a simulacrum of a hag could participate in a coven. The simulacrum is not "gaining power" as it already had the power to join a coven and is merely benefiting from using the ability.

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Simulacrum All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.