Not sure about the rules for this (i'd say no as a dm) but surely rather than spend 5k to do this you can use the plnnar binding spell to summon 3 of them at a time for 9 wishes per spell :)
It says the creature has 'special abilities' not 'supernatural abilities'. Spell like abilities would be Supernatural. I would personally take the spell as saying it has any normal or EX abilities, but not supernatural (thus, no free wish spells).
Planar Binding has comsequences. My DM says that djinni or efreeti are really resilent to accomplish wishes if forced to. So if i bind them they will surely "modify" the wish meanings in something bad for me. Or if i succeed to dominate them, i would be surely chased by other djinni as soon as they discover what i did.
My DM also use an houserule that djinni language is "special": their language is made of words that mean a thing and is opposite too. so "raise" could mean raise or lower and so on. (that's a way for making REALLY REALLY hard to get free wishes by simply binding these creatures)
Sounds like basically your GM has banned the creatures from his game except as plot points.
It says the creature has 'special abilities' not 'supernatural abilities'. Spell like abilities would be Supernatural. I would personally take the spell as saying it has any normal or EX abilities, but not supernatural (thus, no free wish spells).
Spell-like abilities are not supernatural abilities. Supernatural abilities are supernatural abilities. Though I am pretty sure spell-like abilities aren't special abilities either.
It says the creature has 'special abilities' not 'supernatural abilities'. Spell like abilities would be Supernatural. I would personally take the spell as saying it has any normal or EX abilities, but not supernatural (thus, no free wish spells).
Spell-like abilities are not supernatural abilities. Supernatural abilities are supernatural abilities. Though I am pretty sure spell-like abilities aren't special abilities either.
Anything listed under special attacks and special qualities, along with anything that is supernatural, spell-like, or extraordinary, are all considered special abilities.
Actually according to the PFSRD they are all special abilities
Otherwise why can a similcrum of a person cast spells ect. like the person does?
On a side note i ran a campaign where the BBEG was a fighter/wizard/EK who used several simulcrums of himself made during different points in his career and his minions to carry out his dasterdly deeds.
Edit: ninja'd by RD the dasterdly rapscallion!
On a side note i ran a campaign where the BBEG was a fighter/wizard/EK who used several simulcrums of himself made during different points in his career and his minions to carry out his dasterdly deeds.
Edit: ninja'd by RD the dasterdly rapscallion!
One of the greates villains in MY campaing uses extensively Simulacrum. To add a new level of the concept of "recurring villain".
Copycat!
You can only create a "dijinn" of half the HD of the original. Since Noble Dijinn of only half that HD don't exist, the spell will not make this simulacrum.
By that logic, you couldn't really create anything with simulacrum since nothing truly exists at half hit dice unless the Gm says it does. As such, I don't think that, that is the intent of the spell.
I agree with Ravingdork, no really half-HD creature exist in bestary (cause monsters have fixed HD by default) so by that logic no one creature can be copied and that's surely not the intent of the spell. LazarX said something true about Djinni: only "some" powerful Djinni become Noble so it could be true that an half HD noble djinni could not have the same power of it's "original" but be considered as normal djinni.... HOWEVER this is not applied when talking about Solar or Efreeti!
So getting wishes this way should still be possible using RAW
It all boils down to this question: Do you think, that a 7 level spell costing up to 6000 gp, should be able to give you daily free castings of a level 9 spell that normally costs 25.000 in components?
To me, the answer is a pretty clear no.
Whether or not it is possible by RAW has (or should anyway) in this case no bearing on whether it is possible in a game. It might be an interesting discussion if the topic is finding flaws in the game design, but I doesn't make sense as a guide to what should work in our games.
I agree with Ravingdork, no really half-HD creature exist in bestary (cause monsters have fixed HD by default) so by that logic no one creature can be copied and that's surely not the intent of the spell. LazarX said something true about Djinni: only "some" powerful Djinni become Noble so it could be true that an half HD noble djinni could not have the same power of it's "original" but be considered as normal djinni.... HOWEVER this is not applied when talking about Solar or Efreeti!
So getting wishes this way should still be possible using RAWIt all boils down to this question: Do you think, that a 7 level spell costing up to 6000 gp, should be able to give you daily free castings of a level 9 spell that normally costs 25.000 in components?
To me, the answer is a pretty clear no.
Whether or not it is possible by RAW has (or should anyway) in this case no bearing on whether it is possible in a game. It might be an interesting discussion if the topic is finding flaws in the game design, but I doesn't make sense as a guide to what should work in our games.
Fortunately, the spell specifically says that the simulacrum does not gain special abililities unless of appropriate hit dice/level.
As such a GM would be perfectly within his rights to say a noble djinn at half HD is not of the appropriate level/hit dice to gain the wish ability. A similar ruling could easily be made for similar creatures such as solars.
Hi, i'm just turned 13 with my wizard and i focused attention to simulacrum spell.
I was wondering....it could be used for game-breaking.
It's a ridiculous spell, made even more ridiculous by the fact that Pathfinder removed the requirement to have a piece of the creature you're duplicating.
I would just leave it alone unless you want to get into an arms race with your GM.
Simulacrum would definitely work better in terms as balance as a template (similar to animated objects) rather than what it is now.
I think the biggest problem is the "twice your caster level" hit dice restriction. That's way, way too generous.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Simulacrum is arguably one of the most powerful spells in the 3 edition + era.Along with Ice Assassin,Wish(3.5 version),Shapechange(3.5 version),Gate,Morderkainen's Disjunction,Travel The Paths Of Mind, and the dreaded Time Stop and Timereaver they are a hall of fame for spells with so much power potential that most people prefer to forget about them.
I on the other side find everyone of them appealing.It's the stuff where great stories come from.But if one is afraid of power..well,woe to him.
One great drawback simulacrum always had (but not in pathfinder)is that it had the requirement of a body part of the creature being copied.
The second great weakness it exposes (still) is that it needs knowledge of the specific creature that is to be copied.
And the third is that the creature has its own personality and may turn against you unless you make it in time to command it to do otherwise.If it is clever enough it might find a way to paraphrase your commands and find a way to become immune to them for example by becoming deaf or having a silence spell cast on you as you must command it verbally.
The fourth is that it is an illusion itself and the whine of a moondog or a hit with a vanishing weapon can whisk it out of existence.For those that play 3,5 with 3,75 material I suppose.But is there anyone not doing so?I personally find no reason as that's why I started pathfinder in the first place:to stick with 3,5 while having new stuff come out every now and then to add to campaigns and builds.
Apart from those the simulacrum is an almost unstoppable power for the hands it falls in.It can copy efreet that become wish makers and can built armies by copying simulacrum with wish,solars (that do not have their spells tied to their HD),the tarasque,powerfull wizards that their simulacrum will be at the caster's level of power,any creature with unique abilities,and so on..
One way to go around its power during world building is to make it scarce and difficult to find (demand research for it ect.),while have well prepared creatures find ways to become immune to copying from it by stealing special abilities like the archetypal shape of the sharn or the later void child ability of the sceaduinar with epic spells, rebuilding,infernal contracts,the sarruck ability,ability rips made permanent with the alter reality divine ability and so on.This of course leaves out the brutes and the weak as meal for the strong and the devious,but that has always been the case.
Simulacrum is arguably one of the most powerful spells in the 3 edition + era.Along with Ice Assassin,Wish(3.5 version),Shapechange(3.5 version),Gate,Morderkainen's Disjunction,Travel The Paths Of Mind, and the dreaded Time Stop and Timereaver they are a hall of fame for spells with so much power potential that most people prefer to forget about them.
I on the other side find everyone of them appealing.It's the stuff where great stories come from.But if one is afraid of power..well,woe to him.
One great drawback simulacrum always had (but not in pathfinder)is that it had the requirement of a body part of the creature being copied.
The second great weakness it exposes (still) is that it needs knowledge of the specific creature that is to be copied.
And the third is that the creature has its own personality and may turn against you unless you make it in time to command it to do otherwise.If it is clever enough it might find a way to paraphrase your commands and find a way to become immune to them for example by becoming deaf or having a silence spell cast on you as you must command it verbally.
The fourth is that it is an illusion itself and the whine of a moondog or a hit with a vanishing weapon can whisk it out of existence.For those that play 3,5 with 3,75 material I suppose.But is there anyone not doing so?I personally find no reason as that's why I started pathfinder in the first place:to stick with 3,5 while having new stuff come out every now and then to add to campaigns and builds.
Apart from those the simulacrum is an almost unstoppable power for the hands it falls in.It can copy efreet that become wish makers and can built armies by copying simulacrum with wish,solars (that do not have their spells tied to their HD),the tarasque,powerfull wizards that their simulacrum will be at the caster's level of power,any creature with unique abilities,and so on..
One way to go around its power during world building is to make it scarce and difficult to find (demand research for it ect.),while...
Interesting handle Ravendark. It used to be mine, before I changed it to Ravingdork.
As to your post: None of those apply in Pathfinder. They either no longer exist, or didn't exist to begin with.
Much of it, like needing prior knowledge of the creature being copied, is up to the GM. Game designers have already confirmed that there is no such restriction except for what the GM sets.
A..about the simulacrum efreeti not gaining its wishes/day.Although HD don't play any role with the wishes the efreeti gains,if one is willing to rule-lawyer it to that level, there are funny ways to pass through these hilarious limitations with ease.Copy an advanced efreeti/an efreeti with levels would be some of them.
Also the nickname is a mix of my two favorite dnd characters' surnames:
Raven and Darkborn.The second one's full name is Darioth Darkborn which I usually use as a nickname except on this site.I didn't mean to steal anybody's nickname,it was just a change of pace.
Also the infernal contract (and wish as it happens) and the sceaduinar's ability "void child" are from pathfinder and are truly effective measures to stop it theoretically.At least for some.Moreover I don't see how the third weakness of the simulacrum (personality) doesn't apply to strict pathfinder play.
Aside from those simulacrum is a great roleplaying opportunity and gives great new opportunities to create memorable stories.It adds a chaotic element in the possibilities of a campaign that seems rather charming. I think it's great to use in a campaign if one is not afraid of power and of the "bad" players "destroying" their "beautiful" (streamlined) storylines.
When you wrote "They either no longer exist,or didn't exist to begin with"are you by the second half implying that they existed only in my imagination?!
The voices where right,I'm mad it seems MUUhahahaHA.
Well in the case it meant something other than an error of expression I'd like to know what (seriously I can't figure out).
I didn't mean to steal anybody's nickname,it was just a change of pace.
You needn't worry. I haven't used the name in some years.
Keep in mind, however, people might mistake you for me from time to time, particularly if you use it over on the WotC boards. As long as you don't further any such misconceptions, we shouldn't have any problem.
At WotC I am Darioth.
Ok, here is the deal. The spell is poorly worded and quite vague. All that aside there is one thing you are missing.
The spell says you create a creature with half the hit dice and corresponding abilities. the question then becomes how do you determine what half of a spell like ability etc is?
I think the answer becomes more common sense than anything else. Another point is that you also need a piece of the creature to be copied, which is a major difficulty, to say the least.
My last point is this. This is a spell that requires both the player and the dm to use their heads. If you try to abuse it, you can. if you want to be really cool with it, you can. If you try to get cheesy, you will suffer under a brutal dm, or ruin the game.
So, sure, maybe your wish-machine works. Best case for you, right? Congrats, game is over. You just gamed the system, ruined the party, pissed off the dm, etc.
You don't need parts in Pathfinder. If your GM were inclined to allow it, you could copy a creature you had absolutely no knowledge of, much less a body part (such as the king you've never met).
one of the problems with simulcras is their utter lack of initiative. They are quite happy to sit in a room for a millennia just waiting for the next order.
Told to head to town to purchase bread. Okie theyll do that, but will also ignore say wounded kids on the walk there (quite bad if its pretending to be the paladin), and will go into a "blue screen of death" -mode incase the bread price is different from what the master told it.
Still it has its uses, like as dragon steeds or homeguards. (titan! keep the door, and defend the tower from attackers, let noone except me in)
As for wishes, id have a genie army show up over "illegal wishing", after a few wishes extracted.
As for dumb guards: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3YiPC91QUk (1:50 -> )
I once had a player who asked me something along the lines of: "Could [character name] have the simulacrum spell so that he can make multiple simulacrums of himself and send them into dungeons while controlling them through a crystal ball?"
Ummm... no.
I wouldn't award said player any XP for not partaking in the adventure personally, but otherwise, I don't see why what you describe wouldn't be allowed in the rules.
Generally, the threat of XP loss is enough to get most players back in the game.
That's not true.
The simulacrum first and foremost has it's own personality as it has intelligence,wisdom and charisma.There isn't anywhere saying it has no initiative on its own right.In fact it can turn against you given time and clever preparation (becoming deaf or casting silence to you for example).
Although it is constantly under your absolute commands you have to find a way of communicating them to it.Permanent telepathic bonds would be sufficient to make an army of simulacra and send them on a crusade in the dungeon where the poor monsters live their lives peacefully eating non-simulacrum using adventurer flesh.
Pretty sure that the barely sentient concept of simulacra is incorrect.
In the Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk (by several Paizo employees) one of the chief villains is a Simulacra with independent thoughts, plans, etc.
I think that definitely illustrates the idea that not only is a Simulacra fully capable of independent thought and action but that at least in 3.x it could undermine the creators.
Removing the necessity of having a component of the original was not a good choice for 3.P.
For the most part I'm okay with the actual effect of Simulacra as it's a moderately decent alternative to summoning or calling a creature.
The primary problem is that there are creatures like Efreet that simply have spell like abilities that are not level appropriate for when simulacra shows up. Wish is the obvious culprit but there are a few other SLAs that are bad news.
A simulacra of some epic level isn't that bad because it's a 13-15 level wizard. The problem is that things like Solars have massive power levels even when halved.
Pretty sure that the barely sentient concept of simulacra is incorrect.
In the Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk (by several Paizo employees) one of the chief villains is a Simulacra with independent thoughts, plans, etc.
I think that definitely illustrates the idea that not only is a Simulacra fully capable of independent thought and action but that at least in 3.x it could undermine the creators.
Removing the necessity of having a component of the original was not a good choice for 3.P.
For the most part I'm okay with the actual effect of Simulacra as it's a moderately decent alternative to summoning or calling a creature.
The primary problem is that there are creatures like Efreet that simply have spell like abilities that are not level appropriate for when simulacra shows up. Wish is the obvious culprit but there are a few other SLAs that are bad news.
A simulacra of some epic level isn't that bad because it's a 13-15 level wizard. The problem is that things like Solars have massive power levels even when halved.
Lots of good points I agree with here. Sims have been a messy part of my campaign for a long time, and I've adapted only a few rules for Pathfinder. My house rules and guidelines:
1) As per older versions, you need a piece of the creature. Otherwise, the abuse capability of the spell is unbelievable. I instituted that requirement immediately upon reading the spell in PF.
2) Material component is Ruby, right? Not exactly common. I recommend a quick read of wikipedia to see just how hard it is to find Rubies here on good ol' planet Earth. If your world's version of the Mogok valley hasn't been discovered, well, maybe rubies are really RARE. Make the players work for the material component - Bob's Jewelry Shop down in the Gem district should not be overflowing with tens of thousands of gps worth of rubies (IMO).
3) With sims being so very, very useful - governments take an active role in procuring rubies too - so, have fun with that. Rubies become a strategic resource.
4) Lots of extraplaner creatures are ripe for abuse with the spell. But how do you think the real Solars, Balors, Pit Fiends, Noble Djinns and Efreeti, etc might react when news of their buddies getting hacked up for parts for fakes reaches their ears? I'm thinking something epic, and probably unhealthy, is headed in the abusers direction. So, a bit of wisdom and circumspection is required when choosing creatures for sim usage. Sometimes a sim of yourself is the safest bet.
5) I wrote up an entry for Creature Type = Sim. Not unlike a certain sentient construct entry from a certain company's campaign world. Define what a sim can and cannot do as a GM, and that helps a lot.
Just a few observations of my own for folks to mull over.
My personal preference for a house rule would be to exclude Outsiders (exception could be made for native outsiders) and potentially Undead and Constructs as legitimate targets for Simulacra plus a return of the physical piece is required (to avoid Tarrasque simulacra).
For undead so much of their power is tied to negative energy, I don't really see a good fluff reason for allowing simulacra of undead creatures. That being said a necromantic spell that provides a similar effect that would work with undead would be cool.
A simulacra of a construct, particularly Golems, just doesn't work for me personally. Living constructs like warforged might be worth an exception but I'm pretty meh of living constructs in general.
As written, the only thing you CAN'T copy are incorporeal creatures, since the illusion covers animated snow (which is physical). This was clarified by Paizo developers not too long ago.
Simulacra of (physical) constructs and undead work fine for me as the illusion is duplicating the creature, no matter what kind of creature. When magic is involved, creating an illusion of a golem is just as easy as creating an illusion of a child.
Here's the text of the spell ...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).
This bit of text is the key. It clearly indicates that the simulacrum should be a powered down version of the original, without spelling out exactly how it should be powered down, other than the rough guideline of "half". Therefore, it falls squarely within the category of GM discretion. Other GMs may differ, of course, but for me, I'd say ain't no way, no how that a simulacrum of anything is going to be able to cast a Wish or any other 9th level spell for you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This bit of text is the key. It clearly indicates that the simulacrum should be a powered down version of the original, without spelling out exactly how it should be powered down, other than the rough guideline of "half". Therefore, it falls squarely within the category of GM discretion. Other GMs may differ, of course, but for me, I'd say ain't no way, no how that a simulacrum of anything is going to be able to cast a Wish or any other 9th level spell for you.
Here's the text of the spell ...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).
Yep.
Simulacrum isn't broken, it just needs GM adjudication as to what special abilities are "appropriate" for a creature of half the HD of the original. When the player tries to claim that the simulacrum can use wish as a SLA, you say, "No, it can't. Not an appropriate ability for its number of HD."
Vague wording doesn't mean "the player gets to drive a game-breaking truck through a strained interpretation," it means "the GM gets to decide what's appropriate."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Simulacrum isn't broken, it just needs GM adjudication as to what special abilities are "appropriate" for a creature of half the HD of the original. When the player tries to claim that the simulacrum can use wish as a SLA, you say, "No, it can't. Not an appropriate ability for its number of HD."
Okay. So a PC creates a simulacrum of a Solar; the resulting creature has 11 HD (22/2). The player asks if Wish is an appropriate ability for an 11 HD creature. Do you say:
- No, and then rip the page marked "Efreeti" out of your Bestiary, or
- Yes, and watch game balance fly out the window as the PC has fun with his new, Wish-granting, 10th level cleric outsider slave (with a shedload of other "appropriate" spell-like abilities)?
Answers on the back of a postcard, please.
Yep.Simulacrum isn't broken, it just needs GM adjudication as to what special abilities are "appropriate" for a creature of half the HD of the original. When the player tries to claim that the simulacrum can use wish as a SLA, you say, "No, it can't. Not an appropriate ability for its number of HD."
Vague wording doesn't mean "the player gets to drive a game-breaking truck through a strained interpretation," it means "the GM gets to decide what's appropriate."
Well, whether it is broken or not boils down to semantics. I wouldn't regard "broken" as that far off, considering how easily it is interpreted (an regurlarly is by the look of this discussion) in ways that are game-breaking.
I am all for GM adjudication, and it becomes really necessary in this case, but I am still left with the wish to have a clearer description of, what abilities are intended. Heck, I would even go for a list of creatures that you are able to copy, based on caster level just as create undead.
Just as a side-note. Has any GM considered allowing it, but interpret the "wish" as follows: Unless you provide the full material component per wish (25k diamond) you only get the equivalent of a wish without the material component. (Basically a "miracle" without the 25k diamond).
Simulacrum isn't broken, it just needs GM adjudication as to what special abilities are "appropriate" for a creature of half the HD of the original. When the player tries to claim that the simulacrum can use wish as a SLA, you say, "No, it can't. Not an appropriate ability for its number of HD."Okay. So a PC creates a simulacrum of a Solar; the resulting creature has 11 HD (22/2). The player asks if Wish is an appropriate ability for an 11 HD creature. Do you say:
- No, and then rip the page marked "Efreeti" out of your Bestiary, or
- Yes, and watch game balance fly out the window as the PC has fun with his new, Wish-granting, 10th level cleric outsider slave (with a shedload of other "appropriate" spell-like abilities)?
Answers on the back of a postcard, please.
Forget about the HD. The guiding principle, which is apparent to me from the spell description, is that a simulacrum should have roughly half the power of the original. That means no Wishes or other high-level uber-abilities, or watered down versions of them.
By the way, here's a trip down memory lane. (For me, anyway.)
Forget about the HD. The guiding principle, which is apparent to me from the spell description, is that a simulacrum should have roughly half the power of the original. That means no Wishes or other high-level uber-abilities, or watered down versions of them.
What would your version of a Solar simulacrum look like, then?
By the way, here's a trip down memory lane. (For me, anyway.)
Forget about the HD. The guiding principle, which is apparent to me from the spell description, is that a simulacrum should have roughly half the power of the original. That means no Wishes or other high-level uber-abilities, or watered down versions of them.What would your version of a Solar simulacrum look like, then?
Sorry, can't do that well without access to my books and spending more time than I'm willing to do. Quick and dirty, my approach would be to look at all special abilities and halve the power of each of them. If that isn't possible/practical, I'd keep the ones that more closely resemble lower-level spells and abilities and drop the ones that more closely resemble higher-level spells and abilities. Another guiding principle would likely be that I would never give anything created by the simulacrum access to spells (or spell-like abilities or even powers that approximate spells) higher than the level of the Simulacrum spell, which is 7th, I believe. Other DMs may well do it differently, and I respect that, but that's how I see it.
Limited wish maybe?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay. So a PC creates a simulacrum of a Solar; the resulting creature has 11 HD (22/2). The player asks if Wish is an appropriate ability for an 11 HD creature. Do you say:
- No, and then rip the page marked "Efreeti" out of your Bestiary, or
- Yes, and watch game balance fly out the window as the PC has fun with his new, Wish-granting, 10th level cleric outsider slave (with a shedload of other "appropriate" spell-like abilities)?
Answers on the back of a postcard, please.
The question is not "if Wish is an appropriate ability for an 11 HD creature", it's "if Wish is an appropriate ability for an 11 HD Solar."
Can we generalize from that answer to 11 HD cretures in general? No. Which is why it's in the realm of GM adjudication.
Postcard-enough for you?