| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There isn't an upper limit to the total number of simulacra that a caster can have at one time, according to the spell. This lack of a limit is one of the reasons many people consider the spell too powerful, since one could build an army given time and money.
As far as item creation, if you mean "can a simulacra aid another on the item creation roll?" then yes they can. If you mean "can they create items on your behalf?", then the answer is yes, but (as in yes, but the simulacra has to be of a target with the magic item creation feats, and since their HD will be halved, they might lose access to some feats and skills and become less competent at doing so... and most DMs will probably hate the idea of it).
Simulacrum is probably the most disputed, banned, and disliked spell in all of Pathfinder.
Just to be clear, unless the race has an explicitly spoken tied-to-hit dice element to their abilities, as it is currently written, the spell simulacrum leaves them with all abilities intact, if potentially reduced in effectiveness due to having a lower hit dice. Given as there are no guides for how to reduce feats, that has to come directly from the GM (though if the creature has any "you must have X to have Y" feats, it'll have to lose Y before it loses X). It does not change creature type (the spell is "instantaneous" and creates a replica), and otherwise just leaves you in charge of a creature.
The difference with leadership is that with leadership you actively have to manage your followers to a degree (getting them killed or being too cruel can hurt your standing).
That said
That spell is as create construct but with less level.
I don't understand this?
If you mean it takes less levels to have a simulacrum, that's incorrect. Create Construct requires 7 levels. simulacrum is a 7th level spell, meaning it requires 13 character levels.
If you mean that simulacrum requires less investment (a spell instead of a feat), you'd be correct.
If you mean that simulacrum creates a creature with less hit dice than Craft Construct... it depends on the construct you create with that feat, and the simulacrum you create with the spell.
Simulacrum is probably the most disputed, banned, and disliked spell in all of Pathfinder.
Quite possible. I, however, like it, and, as a GM, think it's interesting as well. I recognize that I am not a majority.
Otherwise, Scythia is correct. :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given as there are no guides for how to reduce feats, that has to come directly from the GM (though if the creature has any "you must have X to have Y" feats, it'll have to lose Y before it loses X).
This isn't quite true, but the guidelines are pretty indirect. In the section on Monster Advancement it says that "Creatures gain one feat at 1 Hit Die and one additional feat for every 2 Hit Dice above 1," a guideline that is also generally followed by humanoid PCs.
So a 20 hit die cairn linnorm, suddenly dropping to 10 hit dice because it's only a simulacrum, would lose five feats. (I also note that it has 10 feats as written, which is the correct number under the guidelines.) However, it's up to the GM which five feats it loses.
More importantly, it certainly makes sense that the crafting feats would be among those routinely lost, both for game balance reasons and because simulacra lack independent will.
Given as there are no guides for how to reduce feats, that has to come directly from the GM (though if the creature has any "you must have X to have Y" feats, it'll have to lose Y before it loses X).
This isn't quite true, but the guidelines are pretty indirect. In the section on Monster Advancement it says that "Creatures gain one feat at 1 Hit Die and one additional feat for every 2 Hit Dice above 1," a guideline that is also generally followed by humanoid PCs.
So a 20 hit die cairn linnorm, suddenly dropping to 10 hit dice because it's only a simulacrum, would lose five feats. (I also note that it has 10 feats as written, which is the correct number under the guidelines.) However, it's up to the GM which five feats it loses.
More importantly, it certainly makes sense that the crafting feats would be among those routinely lost, both for game balance reasons and because simulacra lack independent will.
Ah, you misunderstand what I was saying, but that's because I had a confusing word choice.
What I meant was that there was no way to determine (outside of GM fiat, or obvious feat-chains as above) the order of which feats were lost - they are all presented in alphabetical order in a monster's stat block (certain exceptions notwithstanding).
That feats are lost according to hit dice was something I presumed was obvious from my inference, but I can see why it might be confusing. My apologies for that.
What I meant was, unless a X requires feat Y, there's no non-GM-fiat method for determining which of those feats are lost first; since monsters generally don't have long feat chains, it often makes it hard to choose which should be done in what order.
The problem with simulacra and item creation feats is when a character, say, makes a simulacra of themselves. We know, for a fact, when that character took the item creation feats - hence we know when and how they acquired them, and whether they would have them at "half" their current hit dice, unless, again, the GM fiats something unusual, as a ruling (which could make it's own sort of sense for treating all creatures the same way).
That was what I actually meant, not that there was no way to tell whether or not a creature lost feats in the first place.