i'd say each specific concept is defined in it's statblock by what abilities it has. by RAW it has them, by RAW anything not from another source must be from concept.""Adding Racial Hit Dice
Adding racial Hit Dice to a monster is a similar process to building a monster from scratch. As additional Hit Dice are added, other abilities increase in power as well. Additional Hit Dice usually results in better attack bonuses, saves, hit points, and skills, as well as more feats. It can also include additional spellcasting capability and other powers."BAM! Spellcasting and other powers related to racial HD.
You need to find an exception to that to say the ability is not related to HD by RAW.
You are not reading very thoroughly. You missed the keyword. "Can".
Unfortunately that "can" is very rare, being restricted to only a few creatures and templates.
By there's plenty of proof that Efreets SLAs aren't tied to HD. Look at any advanced Efreets stat block and you'll see the SLAs are exactly the same. This is becoming inane.
Oh it's there, That is why I am not saying that the RAW way to run simulacrum is to remove all those abilities.
I am just saying there you can't keep those abilities and call it RAW. You've firmly moved into unknown territory.
Your "proof" is for an inductive argument. By the same qualifier for "proof" try to find a 20 racial HD genie. You will notice that there is no way to make a genie snow-cone with 10 racial HD, assuming you half all kinds of HD separately (something else the spell doesn't spell out). You can infer that that is intentional just as much as you are trying to infer that the wish SLA wouldn't change, because inductive arguments in a RAW discussion are silly.
Mathius: 749 is lowballing... but yeah. HP damage is ridiculous with M. Vital Strike.
I wouldn't bother looking to closely into regen, because I was able to pick Punishing Blow up (magic jar into something that doesn't need sleep and has blindsight were essential to this in freeing up abilities)
You might be able to find something that doesn't have extinguishable regen, and is also not unique. Maybe.
Honestly, I'm not sure what buffs, if any, persist into the Magic Jar. To be perfectly safe, I'll go ahead and assume that all of them will. Unless it is something that pretty much explicitly affects the body only (polymorph/wishes on physical stats/etc).
Contingent scroll is cast on a creature... I'm pretty sure an inert body counts as an object.
Contingency should stick with the mind (I believe), so object body is moot.
---
Also, I've made a mistake in previous posts. Increasing size only increases damage for melee, not projectiles (Gravity Bow still works, though). I could get around that with shape-change (legendary) and transformative (10000 GP) but I don't know if I need to bother.
Ive based the current build on the idea that I can recraft my weapon into a larger size on the cheap in the prep week. If this is not allowed, and shenanigans are called that prevent me from just claiming a gargantuan size weapon as my artifact, then I'll need to adjust the weapon layout. (I'd have to lose either the gr. teleport or a simulacrum, or my weapon would have to lose its teleport. I could live with any of these options... weapon teleport most likely)
---
I can get 2 targets with Ricochet shot (3 if I use Mythic Limited Wish to get the Mythic version, and then it will still be Cyclonic)
I can use contingent action to grab a second standard action
I can use amazing initiative to grab a 3rd.
---
I'm 120 ft away from you. My spellbane could have IP blocked at this range, and I'm totally invisible.
You could sweep the area during your contingent action time stop, but your duration spells wouldn't have any effect (on me) while youre moving around.
Its questionable whether that means I'm affected if I'm outside the area at the end of the spell, but I certainly am not affected during the Time Stop.
As possessing a body is a full round action, that would leave you vulnerable, regardless, at the end (unless you fled the area entirely, but then we are back to square one and the exercise was pointless).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In english : what is concept ? It is the form, the powers and the relative strength of the creature
We're not talking about english, we are talking about PF.
In english though a concept is "an abstract idea; a general notion.", "a plan or intention; a conception.", "an idea or invention to help sell or publicize a commodity.", "an idea of what something is or how it works"
Huh seems like none of that has anything to do with mechanics. You still need a reason for why the monster does what it does, the concept doesn't give you that reason.
i'd say each specific concept is defined in it's statblock by what abilities it has. by RAW it has them, by RAW anything not from another source must be from concept.""Adding Racial Hit Dice
Adding racial Hit Dice to a monster is a similar process to building a monster from scratch. As additional Hit Dice are added, other abilities increase in power as well. Additional Hit Dice usually results in better attack bonuses, saves, hit points, and skills, as well as more feats. It can also include additional spellcasting capability and other powers."BAM! Spellcasting and other powers related to racial HD.
You need to find an exception to that to say the ability is not related to HD by RAW.
You are not reading very thoroughly. You missed the keyword. "Can".
Unfortunately that "can" is very rare, being restricted to only a few creatures and templates.
By there's plenty of proof that Efreets SLAs aren't tied to HD. Look at any advanced Efreets stat block and you'll see the SLAs are exactly the same. This is becoming inane.Oh it's there, That is why I am not saying that the RAW way to run simulacrum is to remove all those abilities.
I am just saying there you can't keep those abilities and call it RAW. You've firmly moved into unknown territory.
Your "proof" is for an inductive argument. By the same qualifier for "proof" try to find a 20 racial HD genie. You will notice that there is no way to make a genie snow-cone with 10 racial HD, assuming you half all kinds of HD separately (something else the spell doesn't spell out). You can infer that that is intentional just as much as you are trying to infer that the wish SLA wouldn't change, because inductive arguments in a RAW discussion are silly.
You have to show that those SLAs and other abilities are tied to HD. I don't have to show that they aren't. Because RAW they aren't as there is no language tying them to it. So get that language, then try and make an argument. Of course you won't find that language anywhere.
i'd say each specific concept is defined in it's statblock by what abilities it has. by RAW it has them, by RAW anything not from another source must be from concept.""Adding Racial Hit Dice
Adding racial Hit Dice to a monster is a similar process to building a monster from scratch. As additional Hit Dice are added, other abilities increase in power as well. Additional Hit Dice usually results in better attack bonuses, saves, hit points, and skills, as well as more feats. also include additional spellcasting capability and other powers."BAM! Spellcasting and other powers related to racial HD.
You need to find an exception to that to say the ability is not related to HD by RAW.
that was easier than i expected it to be really.
You have to show that those SLAs and other abilities are tied to HD. I don't have to show that they aren't.
Perhaps. Just because abilities "can be" that doesn't mean they do not have to be. You just have not explain where they come from then. In that absence, they would default to HD in a RAW discussion.
Because RAW they aren't as there is no language tying them to it.
That language has been cited.
So get that language, then try and make an argument.
This has already happened.
Of course you won't find that language anywhere.
Denial is an important phase to work through. I wish you luck.
In english : what is concept ? It is the form, the powers and the relative strength of the creatureWe're not talking about english, we are talking about PF.
In english though a concept is "an abstract idea; a general notion.", "a plan or intention; a conception.", "an idea or invention to help sell or publicize a commodity.", "an idea of what something is or how it works"
Huh seems like none of that has anything to do with mechanics. You still need a reason for why the monster does what it does, the concept doesn't give you that reason.
you misread his intent, by "in english" he meant "in layman's terms".
that was easier than i expected it to be really.i'd say each specific concept is defined in it's statblock by what abilities it has. by RAW it has them, by RAW anything not from another source must be from concept.""Adding Racial Hit Dice
Adding racial Hit Dice to a monster is a similar process to building a monster from scratch. As additional Hit Dice are added, other abilities increase in power as well. Additional Hit Dice usually results in better attack bonuses, saves, hit points, and skills, as well as more feats. also include additional spellcasting capability and other powers."BAM! Spellcasting and other powers related to racial HD.
You need to find an exception to that to say the ability is not related to HD by RAW.
Not all monsters have spellcasting and other powers. So yes, HD can give spellcasting and other powers, but it does not have to.
You have not found any other possible source for where the spellcasting and other powers come from.
"concept" is not a valid source as per what concept actually means. You will need to find a PF definition of the word to get around how in proper english things do not work because of a concept.
you misread his intent, by "in english" he meant "in layman's terms".In english : what is concept ? It is the form, the powers and the relative strength of the creatureWe're not talking about english, we are talking about PF.
In english though a concept is "an abstract idea; a general notion.", "a plan or intention; a conception.", "an idea or invention to help sell or publicize a commodity.", "an idea of what something is or how it works"
Huh seems like none of that has anything to do with mechanics. You still need a reason for why the monster does what it does, the concept doesn't give you that reason.
Which would have nothing to do with a RAW discussion.
RAW words have to mean what they do. Once you start replacing words with the layman's meaning it stops being RAW.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
that was easier than i expected it to be really.i'd say each specific concept is defined in it's statblock by what abilities it has. by RAW it has them, by RAW anything not from another source must be from concept.""Adding Racial Hit Dice
Adding racial Hit Dice to a monster is a similar process to building a monster from scratch. As additional Hit Dice are added, other abilities increase in power as well. Additional Hit Dice usually results in better attack bonuses, saves, hit points, and skills, as well as more feats. also include additional spellcasting capability and other powers."BAM! Spellcasting and other powers related to racial HD.
You need to find an exception to that to say the ability is not related to HD by RAW.
Not all monsters have spellcasting and other powers. So yes, HD can give spellcasting and other powers, but it does not have to.
You have not found any other possible source for where the spellcasting and other powers come from.
"concept" is not a valid source as per what concept actually means. You will need to find a PF definition of the word to get around how in proper english things do not work because of a concept.
if you're trying to prove a cat is brown you need to prove that, that specific cat is actually brown, not show that it can be brown.
in essence you have to prove that the ability in question is tied to HD, not that it CAN be tied to HD.
you misread his intent, by "in english" he meant "in layman's terms".In english : what is concept ? It is the form, the powers and the relative strength of the creatureWe're not talking about english, we are talking about PF.
In english though a concept is "an abstract idea; a general notion.", "a plan or intention; a conception.", "an idea or invention to help sell or publicize a commodity.", "an idea of what something is or how it works"
Huh seems like none of that has anything to do with mechanics. You still need a reason for why the monster does what it does, the concept doesn't give you that reason.
Which would have nothing to do with a RAW discussion.
RAW words have to mean what they do. Once you start replacing words with the layman's meaning it stops being RAW.
words don't actually mean anything though, the meaning of a sentence or phrase does. you can use different words to create the same meaning or phrase, which is what he did by using the appropriate context.
words don't actually mean anything though
Nope
words don't actually mean anything thoughNope
i don't understand, you didn't write a full sentence or thought.
in all seriousness, "nope" is improper grammar for "i disagree" which is a complete thought.
in all seriousness, "nope" is improper grammar for "i disagree" which is a complete thought.
Informal is not the same as improper grammar.
And 'nope' means 'no'.
Huh. While doing some more research into composite longbows, I noticed some inconsistencies I wasn't previously aware of.
So, if a bow is useable, it takes two hands regardless of size.
As written, the quality of handedness only applies to melee weapons.
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature wields a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon (it still takes the –2 penalty for using an inappropriately sized weapon). If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
Note: A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Also, you are only restricted by light/one handed/two handed classification.
---
As I read it, a Medium creature could technically (pedantically, at least) use a Gargantuan size composite longbow with two hands and a -6 penalty.
While it is a shenanigan, I no longer feel like I need to devote means to make the bow larger... I claim that the artifact starts off that way.
in all seriousness, "nope" is improper grammar for "i disagree" which is a complete thought.Informal is not the same as improper grammar.
And 'nope' means 'no'.
and no is still an improper response for i disagree.
and no is still an improper response for i disagree.in all seriousness, "nope" is improper grammar for "i disagree" which is a complete thought.Informal is not the same as improper grammar.
And 'nope' means 'no'.
Forumites, please don't let this awesome thread end this way
in all seriousness, "nope" is improper grammar for "i disagree" which is a complete thought.Informal is not the same as improper grammar.
And 'nope' means 'no'.
and no is still an improper response for i disagree.
Roan, I think that only Mathius and I are still kicking ideas seriously back and forth. It's been a little derailed, but I don't think Mathius had as much time this weekend as the rest of us to devote to this thread. (Or the derailed topic obscured the on-topic posts)
If possible, I'd prefer the derailing tangent moved to another thread like the past one was, but I'm not interested enough to create a new thread for it.
if you're trying to prove a cat is brown you need to prove that, that specific cat is actually brown, not show that it can be brown.
in essence you have to prove that the ability in question is tied to HD, not that it CAN be tied to HD.
In a RAW discussion we have to assume there are rules for what we are talking about.
If we were having a discussion about what color the cat is, and I showed it could be brown. If no one else showed that the cat could be any other color with all the possible evidence before them, then we can assume the cat is brown.
You are positing that the spellcasting and other powers come from nowhere, or that the cat is in-fact colorless.
if you're trying to prove a cat is brown you need to prove that, that specific cat is actually brown, not show that it can be brown.
in essence you have to prove that the ability in question is tied to HD, not that it CAN be tied to HD.
In a RAW discussion we have to assume there are rules for what we are talking about.
If we were having a discussion about what color the cat is, and I showed it could be brown. If no one else showed that the cat could be any other color with all the possible evidence before them, then we can assume the cat is brown.
You are positing that the spellcasting and other powers come from nowhere, or that the cat is in-fact colorless.
actually no, you still only proved the cat could be brown. it is still not a proof.
we've mentioned we believe it comes from concept, which is defined as the source of abilities not having a source. I'm saying in essence the cat could be blue (and come from the concept) meaning you cannot make a change unless you know the cat is brown.
Rhedyn and Bandw2, I concur with Roan and Adept in regards to taking that topic to another thread. There are legitimate discussions to be had about Simulacrum (many have happened in the past and I suspect many more will happen again in the future), but when you're arguing about the color of nonexistent cats who may or may not be able to use magic depending on the shade of their fur…it's time to step back and take a breather. =P
For the purposes of this particular thread, it has been assumed that Simulacrum can be used to make a copy of almost any creature with a body. Unless we actually reach a point where we need to get a GM to adjudicate a fight, there is not much point in arguing about limitations on it. IF an actual fight were to occur, there would need to be a GM and ONLY THEN would limitations be put on the spell. Arguing about it in this thread doesn't aid the broader subject, so let's assume for now that it works.
@ Adept, the bow description says "at least two hands" so some would argue against the interpretation. Interesting idea though. I read a book of historical fiction some time ago where a one-handed man used an over-sized bow and had his feet push the wood while has good arm pulled the string, as he lay on his back. That's the image that comes to mind for a medium-sized character using a gargantuan-sized bow. I'd have to look into it more before agreeing with it though.
I was looking through the Mythic Spells list and came across a couple things I found that, when combined, may be a 100% effective kill-shot against any target.
Normally, Wish can do many things, including this effect:
Undo misfortune. A wish can undo a single recent event. The wish forces a reroll of any roll made within the last round (including your last turn). Reality reshapes itself to accommodate the new result. For example, a wish could undo an opponent's successful save, a foe's successful critical hit (either the attack roll or the critical roll), a friend's failed save, and so on. The reroll, however, may be as bad as or worse than the original roll. An unwilling target gets a Will save to negate the effect, and spell resistance (if any) applies.
Mythic Wish adds a few more to the list, including this effect:
Alter fate. By expending a second use of mythic power, you can cast mythic wish as an immediate action before a 1d20 roll is attempted and choose what number you want to come up on the die.
A 1d20 roll. With a Legendary Item of sufficient power, a Mythic character with enough Mythic Ranks can use any save-or-die attack, spell or special ability they want on an enemy and then hand them a natural 1 on the save, which results in auto-failure and death, regardless of what their bonus is to the save. Undo Misfortune allows a Will Save and Spell Resistance. Alter Fate does not. This tactic is available at Mythic Tier 9. Does the Wizard have a way to re-roll? That re-roll can also be forced to come up as a natural 1, resulting in automatic failure and death.
For the record, I think this is really dumb, but I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
Cuuniyevo, as has been mentioned upstream in this thread, the presence of a qualifier like -- 'at least' two hands -- is meaningless unless the rules present things that explicitly dictate when more than two hands are needed (and when such things mean that the weapon is no longer wieldable).
We have such rules for melee weapons, but the phrasing does not carry over.
Unfortunately, the fact that it requires at least two hands to wield doesn't actually make a bow a two-handed weapon, because the bow does not fall under the umbrella of handedness (something reserved for melee weapons and, via later rules, firearms)
There is a FAQ for firearms that could be relevant -- however, firearms actually already fall under the umbrella of handedness. So comparison is not quite apples-to-apples.
The text of the rule is, "The size of a firearm never affects how many hands you need to use to shoot it." The intent of that rule was to prevent a Medium character from using a Small rifle as a one-handed pistol; it wasn’t intended to let a Medium character use a Large, Huge, Gargantuan, or Colossal two-handed firearm as a two-handed weapon. Just like with non-firearms, a creature cannot wield a weapon that’s far too big or small for it. Specifically in the case of firearms, a Medium character can’t use a two-handed firearm sized for a Large or larger creature, and a Small character can’t use a two-handed firearm sized for a Medium or larger creature.
It also doesn't specifically address bows, so it would be insufficient for RAW against this matter, regardless.
---
I'm not sure how to get Wish. We have been limited to no 'spellcasting saving' shenanigans.
We can get Limited Wish, but that wouldn't be enough.
---
Edit: 'Meaningless', above, is in terms of RAW. I'm defending it only from that standpoint (RAI is fairly shreds by now anyway)
Ah, my mistake. I missed the "These abilities are added at the rate of one per day" line. That certainly does change thing. Still a crazy ability, but not relevant to this discussion, yes.
if you're trying to prove a cat is brown you need to prove that, that specific cat is actually brown, not show that it can be brown.
in essence you have to prove that the ability in question is tied to HD, not that it CAN be tied to HD.
In a RAW discussion we have to assume there are rules for what we are talking about.
If we were having a discussion about what color the cat is, and I showed it could be brown. If no one else showed that the cat could be any other color with all the possible evidence before them, then we can assume the cat is brown.
You are positing that the spellcasting and other powers come from nowhere, or that the cat is in-fact colorless.
Sorry, the RAW requires you to prove a given cat is brown. "The rules don't say it can't be HD dependent therefore it is.", is not and can never be RAW. The opposite however, "The rules don't say it is HD dependent, therefore it is not." is completely supported.
This tactic is available at Mythic Tier 9. Does the Wizard have a way to re-roll? That re-roll can also be forced to come up as a natural 1, resulting in automatic failure and death.
Except you can't use 2 immediate actions on the same round.
So, your strategy doesn't grant auto win. However, it can make the enemy trigger their re-roll, or require more investment from the target to be immune to most save or die situations.
|
if you're trying to prove a cat is brown you need to prove that, that specific cat is actually brown, not show that it can be brown.
in essence you have to prove that the ability in question is tied to HD, not that it CAN be tied to HD.
In a RAW discussion we have to assume there are rules for what we are talking about.
If we were having a discussion about what color the cat is, and I showed it could be brown. If no one else showed that the cat could be any other color with all the possible evidence before them, then we can assume the cat is brown.
You are positing that the spellcasting and other powers come from nowhere, or that the cat is in-fact colorless.
Sorry, the RAW requires you to prove a given cat is brown. "The rules don't say it can't be HD dependent therefore it is.", is not and can never be RAW. The opposite however, "The rules don't say it is HD dependent, therefore it is not." is completely supported.
No, he's saying that it might be brown, but you're building a strategy around a non-brown cat.
The rules say that spellcasting can be related to HD. Nowhere does it say it isn't. They also say you're supposed to adjust special abilities for a simulacrum "as appropriate for their new HD" without specifying what is or is not appropriate. It comes down to the individual GMs, which makes trying to generalize from any giving ruling pointless. Which is, incidentally, why I didn't bother participating in the sham of a contest, because it would prove nothing that would ever be relevant to my table, or really any table but the thread itself. Waste of time.
so, are we still arguing over magic jar outsider minutae?
can't you guys just put it aside and use those big brains/book collections to find an ultrabody that ISN'T an outsider (just for the sake of avoiding these arguments)?
if you're trying to prove a cat is brown you need to prove that, that specific cat is actually brown, not show that it can be brown.
in essence you have to prove that the ability in question is tied to HD, not that it CAN be tied to HD.
In a RAW discussion we have to assume there are rules for what we are talking about.
If we were having a discussion about what color the cat is, and I showed it could be brown. If no one else showed that the cat could be any other color with all the possible evidence before them, then we can assume the cat is brown.
You are positing that the spellcasting and other powers come from nowhere, or that the cat is in-fact colorless.
Sorry, the RAW requires you to prove a given cat is brown. "The rules don't say it can't be HD dependent therefore it is.", is not and can never be RAW. The opposite however, "The rules don't say it is HD dependent, therefore it is not." is completely supported.
No, he's saying that it might be brown, but you're building a strategy around a non-brown cat.
The rules say that spellcasting can be related to HD. Nowhere does it say it isn't. They also say you're supposed to adjust special abilities for a simulacrum "as appropriate for their new HD" without specifying what is or is not appropriate. It comes down to the individual GMs, which makes trying to generalize from any giving ruling pointless. Which is, incidentally, why I didn't bother participating in the sham of a contest, because it would prove nothing that would ever be relevant to my table, or really any table but the thread itself. Waste of time.
If the rules don't say something is HD-related... it isn't. That's literally how rules work. In the same way something isn't Fire damage unless it's labeled as such. Please use RAW when making your argument.
|
|
One last time.
The spell - not the general HD rules, not the monster creation rules, the spell itself - says to reduce special abilities as appropriate for the new HD.
Special abilities are not tied to HD anywhere in the RAW.
You still have to reduce them, by the spell's own text.
The spell cannot be adjudicated by RAW. Period. It's all houserules.
The comparison is pointless while simulacrum remains as printed.
One last time.
The spell - not the general HD rules, not the monster creation rules, the spell itself - says to reduce special abilities as appropriate for the new HD.
Special abilities are not tied to HD anywhere in the RAW.
You still have to reduce them, by the spell's own text.
The spell cannot be adjudicated by RAW. Period. It's all houserules.
The comparison is pointless while simulacrum remains as printed.
Incorrect. There is an appropriate way to reduce a monster based on it's reduced hit die. There are rules for what needs changed when you gain or lose hit die. If you apply those, the monster has appropriate abilities for it's new HD. SAdly, this does not include many special abilities. This is the RAW of Simulacrum.
A Half-Celestial or a Half-Fiend would have several abilities lost when losing HD, because they are explicitly HD dependent. I can also show that abilities like the Efreets Wish SLA never change regardless of how many HD are added. Not even the CL or uses per day. Because it turns out Wish 3/day is simply part of being an Efreet and no amount of effort can improve, because it is (all together now) not HD dependent.
SAdly, this does not include many special abilities. This is the RAW of Simulacrum.
How are houserules RAW?
RAW you are ignoring
1) Most of the lines in the spell
2) whole sections in the bestiary
SAdly, this does not include many special abilities. This is the RAW of Simulacrum.How are houserules RAW?
RAW you are ignoring
1) Most of the lines in the spell
2) whole sections in the bestiary
Nothing was ignored. In either section. I applied the appropriate HD reduction to my Simulacrums and left their abilities that weren't tied to HD in tact as the RAW requires.
|
|
No. The RAW "requires" nothing of the kind.
The simulacrum gets
the appropriate hit points, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities for a creature of that level or HD
and nothing else.
You have to make a positive case for any special ability being appropriate for "that level or HD" in order for the RAW to "require" it. So your half-fiends and half-celestials? Done. Anything else? Sorry, not "required" for "a creature of that level or HD." Note: it doesn't even tell you that the special abilities have to be appropriate for the target creature at that level or HD. Just the generic "a creature."
A further note: the spell says nothing about reducing (or conversely adding) HD. Nothing at all. So arguments to the effect that reducing or adding HD doesn't affect spell-like abilities are irrelevant; the spell doesn't say to reduce HD, so that doesn't matter.
It is because those abilities are not HD dependent and therefore my simulacrums have appropriate HD, feats, skills ranks and special abilities for a creature of that HD. Your argument is "I don't think those abilities are appropriate even though they are not based on HD and therefore the creature should not have." That is not a RAW argument or a valid one. Please make an actual argument using the rules (preferably ones that support your argument) since your quotation above supports my side not yours.
Mathius, are you sure that duplicated spells pass through spellbane? That makes wished dispels a lot more dangerous.
Total cover will protect you, if that's what you're getting. When would I be trying for an AoO though?
Shrink Item is the perfect spell to banish my fretting about weapon size (when I magic jar, my bow does not increase in size, thus my conundrum). I no longer need to be a half-elf, so I can choose to be a small sized fighter. Gargantuan is 4 sizes off of small, so a permanent shrink item on the bow will let it switch comfortably between small (when not in magic jar) and gargantuan.
Does magic jar confer regular feats (that don't require activation, but are constantly active? What if there is a constant effect, and a second effect that can be activated?)
If you win Init, why don't you just cast time stop? What will you accomplish by winning Init that will allow you to find me and affect me before my readied action teleport kicks off? If necessary, it can be a readied action wish away.
|
|
Ironically, "I think those abilities are appropriate because they aren't based on HD" isn't a valid argument either. Both arguments are circular - they assume their own conclusion.
However, you are mistaking my argument significantly. I'm not saying they're automatically inappropriate. I'm saying their appropriateness is ambiguous, and thus "this is RAW" is factually untrue; moreover, arguments built on the premise are likewise unreliable. Rule simulacrum to work however you like, it's your game. But you do the discussion a disservice not to admit it's a houserule.
And with that, I am done. I've wasted enough time here.
Ironically, "I think those abilities are appropriate because they aren't based on HD" isn't a valid argument either. Both arguments are circular - they assume their own conclusion.
However, you are mistaking my argument significantly. I'm not saying they're automatically inappropriate. I'm saying their appropriateness is ambiguous, and thus "this is RAW" is factually untrue; moreover, arguments built on the premise are likewise unreliable. Rule simulacrum to work however you like, it's your game. But you do the discussion a disservice not to admit it's a houserule.
And with that, I am done. I've wasted enough time here.
It's not ambiguous. They aren't tied to HD and are therefore appropriate for the creature to have regardless of what HD the creature. If HP weren't tied to HD, it would be appropriate for a reduced HD creature to have the same HP. That's what the word appropriate means. Unless you are taking it to be "What I personally think is appropriate." as you seem to be doing. But that isn't RAW and can never be.
if you're trying to prove a cat is brown you need to prove that, that specific cat is actually brown, not show that it can be brown.
in essence you have to prove that the ability in question is tied to HD, not that it CAN be tied to HD.
In a RAW discussion we have to assume there are rules for what we are talking about.
If we were having a discussion about what color the cat is, and I showed it could be brown. If no one else showed that the cat could be any other color with all the possible evidence before them, then we can assume the cat is brown.
You are positing that the spellcasting and other powers come from nowhere, or that the cat is in-fact colorless.
Sorry, the RAW requires you to prove a given cat is brown. "The rules don't say it can't be HD dependent therefore it is.", is not and can never be RAW. The opposite however, "The rules don't say it is HD dependent, therefore it is not." is completely supported.
No, he's saying that it might be brown, but you're building a strategy around a non-brown cat.
The rules say that spellcasting can be related to HD. Nowhere does it say it isn't. They also say you're supposed to adjust special abilities for a simulacrum "as appropriate for their new HD" without specifying what is or is not appropriate. It comes down to the individual GMs, which makes trying to generalize from any giving ruling pointless. Which is, incidentally, why I didn't bother participating in the sham of a contest, because it would prove nothing that would ever be relevant to my table, or really any table but the thread itself. Waste of time.
you need to prove something is something for it to change. unless you can prove the cat is brown no change occurs...
anyway, while the fight in general is not going to prove something, we're simply trying to see if a fighter with 10/any mythic tiers can kill a wizard on a semi-reliable basis.
Mathius,
Ah, I see.
Well, the text on mythic spellbreaker says
I'm not so far gone that I'll argue that I'd get an attack as an AoO when you're in total cover (despite the fact that that is a situation in which you wouldn't normally provoke attacks of opportunity)... I think plain cover (when I could theoretically hit you and see you) should be ok.
---
For init optimization, if it matters.
I am adding the following spells to my pre-buff list for init.
M. Anticipate Peril (from sim of M. Red Dragon. You can get this too, so its really a wash)
M. Heroism. (same as above - really a wash)
Moment of Greatness (doubles above, again... a wash)
I am picking up, item wise
+4 Courageous Dueling Compassionate Gauntlet for one of my arms.
Banner of the Ancient Kings
Luckstone
Circlet of Persuasion
Ioun stone for Initiative
I'm going to replace my regular Eagle Eyes feat with Noble Scion (Scion of War) - to replace DEX with CHA for init. I am going to optimize CHA because my physical stats are not going to matter.
CHA = 20 + 5 (level) + 5 (enh) + 6 (item) + 10 (mythic) - 2 (alchemical) = 44.
I will also lock in my traits: Reactionary and Fate's Favored
As I read it, I get constantly active natural ability and natural feat bonuses (that are not spells/SLAs), then my Init bonus can look like:
+ 17 (CHA)
+ 3 (circlet of persuasion)
+ 10 (Amazing Initiative)
+ 14 (M. Imp. Init - Guardian Dragon -- cant activate auto-20)
+ 15 (M. Anticipate Peril - sim of M. Gr Wyrm Red Dragon)
+ 4 (+4 Courageous Dueling Gauntlet on my Vestigial Arm)
+ 6 (mor - M Heroism + Courageous)
+ 6 (Moment of Greatness)
+ 2 (ins - compassionate weapon)
+ 2 (Luckstone + Fortune's Favored Trait)
+ 4 (circ - Banner of the Ancient Kings)
+ 1 (comp - ioun)
+ 2 (reactionary)
86 + 1d20 + 1d12
that's +23 coming from things you can't arbitrarily reproduce (unless you change into a specific creature with 10 MR and Improved Init though... but those might not be friendly for casting), and a +17 from the modifier.
(+27 from buff spells, each of which you could reproduce)
I still have a Mythic Ability (from Eagle Eyes) that I really would rather not spend on initiative.
Ill work through the cost in GP soonish
...
Thoughts?
Celanian: Yes, that is what we are assuming.
That looks pretty effective.
It's like an automatic Disjunction, shutting down all magic transport and freedom of movement. If you can manage to pin the opponent down in your field's space (pin down or stand still might do, or mythic cage enemy), they don't get their magic back. Also, magic jar would be suppressed...
What does a suppressed, but not dispelled, Magic Jar even do?
---
Wait. As soon as the antimagic comes up, your own magic jar fails too.
---
On my build, I'll need to take a -2 on attack bonus from M Weapon Focus to pick up Path Dabbling (Cage Enemy) - Stand Still is not nearly guaranteed enough to be worth it.