Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 187
  1. - Top - End - #61
    Orc in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Aug 2017

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    Actually, I think you're right!

    1. Simulacrum DOES NOT TARGET ANYTHING.
    2. Effigies. Can you create an Effigy of a Great Wyrm even if no great wyrms exist? The answer is a resounding yes. Great Wyrms are creatures. Effigies can apply to Great Wyrms. Therefore I can create a Great Wyrm Effigy even if no great wyrms ever existed. So likewise, why can't a Simulacrum create a real creature that exists in d&d? Because they don't physically exist yet? Makes no sense. Simulacrum is essentially a template and if you can create templated creatures whose base form never existed, you can create simulacrum of such creatures too.
    3. Therefore Simulacrum can duplicate any real creature regardless of whether one physically existed in the world or not. Creatures with class levels and such are grey area (though DMGII says single classed NPCs are not unique), but all monsters in the MMs, including their advanced versions, are real creatures up for templating and creating simulacra of.
    Sounds like you might be on to something, so long as you can find a way around needing a piece of the specific creature you're making a duplicate of (you can, several such ways around it have been bandied about, I'm just mentioning it as a reminder to other readers that you have to actually make use of such a workaround, in the game, to make it work). As an aside, even being able to ignore material components, would you still need the snow? They refer to it in the Material Components section, but it's not really listed as actually being one of the components, just that you use some of the Material Components on it. The piece of the creature and the powdered ruby are listed as components, but the snow is just mentioned in that you cast the spell over it, and have to put the piece of the creature in it.


    But what do Effigies have to do with this in any way? They're basically constructs, crafted with the Craft Construct feat, while a Simulacrum is just the result of casting a spell. Sure, they're thematically quite similar, so I can see why you'd think of them when thinking of Simulacrum, but they arise from vastly different rules-mechanics for making them, and being thematically similar doesn't mean the rules for one have any bearing whatsoever on the rules for the other. Just like being good at making armor via Craft(Armorsmithing) doesn't have any bearing on whether you can use Mage Armor. They both provide an armor bonus to AC, and that's as far as the similarities go. I'm not discounting your claim here that since Simulacrum doesn't target anything, you don't need them to exist. Just that the Effigy crafting rules have no place in that claim.

  2. - Top - End - #62
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Crake's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    You're right, simulacrum doesn't have a target, and thus the only means for the spell to actually know what to duplicate is via the material component. If that material component is ignored, the spell cannot designate the original creature, and the spell just simply duplicates nothing, because the spell doesn't know which creature to duplicate.

    Also, if you read the text of simulacrum, it does specifically duplicate an existing creature, because it refers to an original. You can't have an original if it doesn't exist.
    World of Madius wiki - My personal campaign setting, including my homebrew Optional Gestalt/LA rules.
    The new Quick Vestige List

    Quote Originally Posted by Kazyan View Post
    Playing a wizard the way GitP says wizards should be played requires the equivalent time and effort investment of a university minor. Do you really want to go down this rabbit hole, or are you comfortable with just throwing a souped-up Orb of Fire at the thing?
    Quote Originally Posted by atemu1234 View Post
    Humans are rarely truly irrational, just wrong.

  3. - Top - End - #63
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Oct 2007

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Simulacrum is definitely an individual; it can even impersonate its original. When you copy a Pit Fiend, even a standard one, it isn't "a simulacrum of a Pit Fiend", it's "a simulacrum of Xyrrax Hearteater, Commander of the MCCXXXIV Infernal Legion", even if you don't particularly care about that.

    Wish can skip the component by emulating the spell (and in PF you don't even need a part), but there still needs to be an individual there to copy.
    Last edited by icefractal; 2019-05-18 at 02:38 PM.

  4. - Top - End - #64
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Drysdan View Post
    Sounds like you might be on to something, so long as you can find a way around needing a piece of the specific creature you're making a duplicate of (you can, several such ways around it have been bandied about, I'm just mentioning it as a reminder to other readers that you have to actually make use of such a workaround, in the game, to make it work). As an aside, even being able to ignore material components, would you still need the snow? They refer to it in the Material Components section, but it's not really listed as actually being one of the components, just that you use some of the Material Components on it. The piece of the creature and the powdered ruby are listed as components, but the snow is just mentioned in that you cast the spell over it, and have to put the piece of the creature in it.
    Mirror Mephits create Simualcra without the snow so I don't see why eschew materials wouldn't either.


    Quote Originally Posted by Drysdan View Post
    But what do Effigies have to do with this in any way? They're basically constructs, crafted with the Craft Construct feat, while a Simulacrum is just the result of casting a spell. Sure, they're thematically quite similar, so I can see why you'd think of them when thinking of Simulacrum, but they arise from vastly different rules-mechanics for making them, and being thematically similar doesn't mean the rules for one have any bearing whatsoever on the rules for the other. Just like being good at making armor via Craft(Armorsmithing) doesn't have any bearing on whether you can use Mage Armor. They both provide an armor bonus to AC, and that's as far as the similarities go. I'm not discounting your claim here that since Simulacrum doesn't target anything, you don't need them to exist. Just that the Effigy crafting rules have no place in that claim.
    Effigies is just an analogy to explain that players being unable to use creatures that doesn't phyiscally exist in your world but exists in d&d makes no sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crake View Post
    You're right, simulacrum doesn't have a target, and thus the only means for the spell to actually know what to duplicate is via the material component. If that material component is ignored, the spell cannot designate the original creature, and the spell just simply duplicates nothing, because the spell doesn't know which creature to duplicate.
    How does Greater Planar Binding call Pit Fiends without a material component?
    How does Gate call Pit Fiends without a material component?
    How does Polymorph turn you into a creature without a piece of the creature?

    Because the spellcaster knows about the creature.

    Again, I refer you to the mirror mephit who creates a simulacra of PCs (unique beings) without any material component.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crake View Post
    Also, if you read the text of simulacrum, it does specifically duplicate an existing creature, because it refers to an original. You can't have an original if it doesn't exist.
    "existing creature" = exists in d&d. Not physically exist in your vicinity. All advanced creatures exist if the base creature exists.

    We've established that Gated creatures are not unique. So if you can create Simulacra of gated creatures who have no name, why do you need to call one first before making a simulacra of it? The answer is you don't. As long as you know these generic creatures exist (in d&d) with a knowledge check you can create Simulacra of it.
    Last edited by RoboEmperor; 2019-05-18 at 02:49 PM.

  5. - Top - End - #65
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    Creatures don't need to physically exist for simulacrum.
    Then what "original" are you "duplicating?" Are you saying originals don't need to exist, or that duplicates don't need to copy anything?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    Cheers to Psyren the MVP "naysayer".
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  6. - Top - End - #66
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Then what "original" are you "duplicating?" Are you saying originals don't need to exist, or that duplicates don't need to copy anything?
    Original creature is the base creature. If someone says "I create a simulacrum of a Great Wyrm" then he creates a simulacrum of a generic Great Wyrm using the stats listed in the monster manual. If someone says "I create a simulacrum of Johnny the Great Wyrm" then he creates the simulacrum of Johnny the Great Wyrm.

    If the Draconomicon is an in-universe encyclopedia of dragons, a wizard can just pick any dragon in that book and create a simulacra of it just like how he can shapechange into one just from reading the book. In fact lets look at Shapechange.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shapechange
    it enables you to assume the form of any single nonunique creature
    So if Shapechange lets you assume the form of any single nonunique creature, why can you not create a duplicate of a single nonunique creature? Nonunique creatures are creatures. Duplicates of nonqunique creatures are duplicate creatures. Simulacrum creates duplicate creatures. In addition to everything Robo said in this thread, Shapechange is also proof that every single nonunique creature in the game "exists".

    You are correct if original creature means unique creatures exclusively. You are incorrect if original creatures include nonunique creatures. It is my opinion that you are incorrect because nonunique creatures are still creatures.

    edit: I'm also saying nonunique creatures "exist" even if none physically exist. If you can shapechange into a nonunique advanced troll in a setting without advanced trolls, you can also create simulacra of them.
    Last edited by gogogome; 2019-05-18 at 05:29 PM.

  7. - Top - End - #67
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2012

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    edit: I'm also saying nonunique creatures "exist" even if none physically exist. If you can shapechange into a nonunique advanced troll in a setting without advanced trolls, you can also create simulacra of them.
    Problem is -

    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature.

    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    You must make a Disguise check when you cast the spell to determine how good the likeness is.
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    A creature familiar with the original might detect the ruse with a successful Spot check (opposed by the caster’s Disguise check) or a DC 20 Sense Motive check.
    Where is your original creature to be duplicated?
    Last edited by redking; 2019-05-18 at 07:52 PM.

  8. - Top - End - #68
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    Original creature is the base creature. If someone says "I create a simulacrum of a Great Wyrm" then he creates a simulacrum of a generic Great Wyrm using the stats listed in the monster manual.
    Stats are a metagame construct. Your wizard is not pulling out MM1 and flipping to the "Pit Fiend" entry, and even if they were, those stats are not an actual creature to duplicate.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    Cheers to Psyren the MVP "naysayer".
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  9. - Top - End - #69
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Stats are a metagame construct. Your wizard is not pulling out MM1 and flipping to the "Pit Fiend" entry, and even if they were, those stats are not an actual creature to duplicate.
    How do you explain shapechange? It turns you into a single nonunique creature. If those stats are not an actual creature to duplicate, then they're also not an actual creature you can assume the form of. Shapechange turns you into an actual creature. Why can't simulacrum duplicate this "actual creature"?

    You need to understand that the "original creature" can be a "single nonunique creature" and all "single nonunique creatures" exist, otherwise a lot of things fail to function. Shapechange, Gate, and Cosmic Descryer are three, and Shapechange doesn't need actual physical creatures to exist. You are duplicating a "single nonunique creature". You are creating a simulacrum of a "single nonunique creature".

    As I mentioned before whether you're right or not relies completely on whether "original creature" is exclusive to unique creatures. If it is not, and "original creature" includes "single nonunique creatures", then you are incorrect.
    Last edited by gogogome; 2019-05-19 at 12:31 AM.

  10. - Top - End - #70
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ursoule
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    Body parts are nonmagical mundane items. Wish can create 25,000gp of nonmagical items. Therefore Wish can create a corpse (or a part of a corpse if the corpse is worth more than 25,000gp. No matter how expensive the corpse is you only need a microscopic portion of it) of a 36hd pit fiend you can create simulacra out of it. In this scenario Wish created a new creature despite being dead so it can be duplicated.
    Heh... any piece of a 36 HD Pit Fiend is hardly a "mundane" item. And it is to be used to make a Simulacrum..? I'd say that this Wish has to be GRANTED by the DM, with all associated risks and interpretations. But that's just DM fiat for Wish.

    Heck, in PF, Simulacrum doesn't even require a piece of the creature to be duplicated.. just ice or snow.

    Still, I want to be behind the screen when some hot-shot conjurer of simple tricks pulls this one out of their hat...
    Save your tears, my fetid friends, the dead have Wept enough!
    The Tears of Blood Campaign Setting - Latest Release September 4, 2018 - (From the Tears of Blood GiTP Forums 2004-2009)

    “Story tellers are always careful to point out that the reputed dungeons lie in close proximity to the foundations of an older, pre-human city, to the graveyard, and to the sea.” - Dr. J. Eric Holmes

    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    It's like being handcuffed to a time-bomb that only displays random numbers.

  11. - Top - End - #71
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Shadows View Post
    Heh... any piece of a 36 HD Pit Fiend is hardly a "mundane" item. And it is to be used to make a Simulacrum..? I'd say that this Wish has to be GRANTED by the DM, with all associated risks and interpretations. But that's just DM fiat for Wish.

    Heck, in PF, Simulacrum doesn't even require a piece of the creature to be duplicated.. just ice or snow.

    Still, I want to be behind the screen when some hot-shot conjurer of simple tricks pulls this one out of their hat...
    Doesn't need to be mundane. Just needs to be nonmagical.

  12. - Top - End - #72
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2012

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Stats are a metagame construct. Your wizard is not pulling out MM1 and flipping to the "Pit Fiend" entry, and even if they were, those stats are not an actual creature to duplicate.
    You win this thread.

    This is correct. When you use planar binding or gate without naming a specific creature, you get a random creature of the type you are asking for, such as a succubus. You don't necessarily get the succubus from the SRD, though, which is only for DM convenience. Instead of a succubus with the dodge feat, it may instead have point blank shot.

    Summonings are different. For a short time you conjure a creature which may or may not exist. Perhaps they are conjured copies. Perhaps they are echoes of creatures that existed. We do know that no harm comes to them - the conjuration simply fades on death.

    Expedition to the Ruins of Castle Greyhawk had a scroll of simulacrum. Scrolls do not require material components according to the rules. Yet the scroll required a piece of the creature to be duplicated to work. This indicates that the material components are the ice and ruby dust, and the piece of the creature is an additional requirement that is not a material component.
    Last edited by redking; 2019-05-19 at 04:45 AM.

  13. - Top - End - #73
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by redking View Post
    You win this thread.

    This is correct. When you use planar binding or gate without naming a specific creature, you get a random creature of the type you are asking for, such as a succubus. You don't necessarily get the succubus from the SRD, though, which is only for DM convenience. Instead of a succubus with the dodge feat, it may instead have point blank shot.

    Summonings are different. For a short time you conjure a creature which may or may not exist. Perhaps they are conjured copies. Perhaps they are echoes of creatures that existed. We do know that no harm comes to them - the conjuration simply fades on death.

    Expedition to the Ruins of Castle Greyhawk had a scroll of simulacrum. Scrolls do not require material components according to the rules. Yet the scroll required a piece of the creature to be duplicated to work. This indicates that the material components are the ice and ruby dust, and the piece of the creature is an additional requirement that is not a material component.
    Didn't I say cite a rule or we're done here? I don't see one rule text for any of your claims. So we're done here. Especially since I know the rules say you're completely wrong and you'd know it too if you spent even a second looking them up instead of wasting all your time trying your best to ignore clear cut RAW. There's not even any ambiguity to the rule texts you're so adamantly against.

  14. - Top - End - #74
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by redking View Post
    You win this thread.
    Says who? You?

    Quote Originally Posted by redking View Post
    This is correct. When you use planar binding or gate without naming a specific creature, you get a random creature of the type you are asking for, such as a succubus. You don't necessarily get the succubus from the SRD, though, which is only for DM convenience. Instead of a succubus with the dodge feat, it may instead have point blank shot.
    Says who? Where does it say you can swap monster's feats out? I actually looked into this for Golem creation and turns out you can't. If you create a Golem it will have the feats in the MM, no exception. So where does it say a generic non-unique creature can use different feats than the ones written in the MM? Do you even know what the words generic, typical, nonunique, and common mean?

    Why don't you give us actual rule text that support your claims so that we know you're not literally pulling **** out of your ***?

    Quote Originally Posted by redking View Post
    Summonings are different. For a short time you conjure a creature which may or may not exist. Perhaps they are conjured copies. Perhaps they are echoes of creatures that existed. We do know that no harm comes to them - the conjuration simply fades on death.
    Quote Originally Posted by Summoning
    A summoning spell instantly brings a creature or object to a place you designate. When the spell ends or is dispelled, a summoned creature is instantly sent back to where it came from, but a summoned object is not sent back unless the spell description specifically indicates this. A summoned creature also goes away if it is killed or if its hit points drop to 0 or lower. It is not really dead. It takes 24 hours for the creature to reform, during which time it can’t be summoned again.

    When the spell that summoned a creature ends and the creature disappears, all the spells it has cast expire. A summoned creature cannot use any innate summoning abilities it may have, and it refuses to cast any spells that would cost it XP, or to use any spell-like abilities that would cost XP if they were spells.
    Where does it say you can summon echoes of creatures that existed? Is this your attempt to counter Cosmic Decryer's rule text?

    Why don't you give us actual rule text that support your claims so that we know you're not literally pulling **** out of your ***?

    Quote Originally Posted by redking View Post
    Expedition to the Ruins of Castle Greyhawk had a scroll of simulacrum. Scrolls do not require material components according to the rules. Yet the scroll required a piece of the creature to be duplicated to work. This indicates that the material components are the ice and ruby dust, and the piece of the creature is an additional requirement that is not a material component.
    Oh, so an adventure module is correct when it works in your favor and is a mistake when it proves you're wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simulacrum
    Material Component

    The spell is cast over the rough snow or ice form, and some piece of the creature to be duplicated (hair, nail, or the like) must be placed inside the snow or ice. Additionally, the spell requires powdered ruby worth 100 gp per HD of the simulacrum to be created.
    Made it big since I think you're blind or illiterate. Perhaps the bigger letters will let you see better. Do you understand what the word "additionally" means? Do you? So if these things are "additional material components", then what is everything before it? And why the **** do I have to argue that things listed under material components are in fact matieral components?

    Why the **** am I here wasting time arguing the most basic, unambiguous, direct, and clearest of all RAWs? Why?


    You know what, i'm done with you. I respond to people who disagree with me on how rules work because I could be wrong and I don't want to cheat. I don't respond to people who hate something to the point they will bend over backwards mashing random crap they just made up together while ignoring even the most unambiguous, direct, and clearest of RAWs just to pretend things work the way they want it to. Because, you know, these people are not interested in how the rules work, but instead are throwing a tantrum because... how the **** should I know. I have no interest in wasting precious time and effort dealing with your tantrum especially when there is a literal 0% chance of you accepting how the rules actual work so good bye. I will no longer be reading your posts in this thread. so don't bother replying to this post.

    edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    Didn't I say cite a rule or we're done here? I don't see one rule text for any of your claims. So we're done here. Especially since I know the rules say you're completely wrong and you'd know it too if you spent even a second looking them up instead of wasting all your time trying your best to ignore clear cut RAW. There's not even any ambiguity to the rule texts you're so adamantly against.
    Yeah, I'm not gonna waste anymore time digging up even the most basics of the basics of rule texts to address all the random **** he makes up on the top of his head.
    Last edited by RoboEmperor; 2019-05-19 at 06:25 AM.

  15. - Top - End - #75
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Crake's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    How does Greater Planar Binding call Pit Fiends without a material component?
    They are literally the target of the spell.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    How does Gate call Pit Fiends without a material component?
    You name them as part of the casting of the spell: "By naming a particular being or kind of being as you cast the spell"

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    How does Polymorph turn you into a creature without a piece of the creature?
    Because Polymorph allows the caster to decide what form to take.

    Simulacrum however, doesn't allow the caster to decide, which creature is duplicated is determined by the part of the creature that is put into the snow. You can't, for example, put in a piece of a pit fiend, and then change your mind, saying "nah, I wanna make a solar actually".

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    Says who? Where does it say you can swap monster's feats out?
    You don't swap out anything, the DM does. When you say "I planar bind a succubus", the DM plucks a random succubus from the planes and plonks her in front of you. She may well have the elite array instead of base succubus stats, she may have different feats, she may have flaws to grant her ADDITIONAL feats, hell, she may even be half dead because you just pulled her out of a fight with a vrock.

    When you planar bind a creature, you aren't guaranteed the stock standard, because it doesn't specify that you do (unlike with polymorphing or shapechanging, which specifically says you gain the abilities of a standard member of that race).

    Technically summoning is subject to the same whims of the DM, as nothing in the summoning subschool, nor the summon monster spell says that you get a full hp, all abilities unused, stock standard version of the creature you summon, but I think customizing every summon is beyond the effort that most DMs are willing to put in, so they just default to the standard. There is actually a summoning variant which allows you to have an array of customized summons, though if they die, they can't be summoned again for 24 hours. They can even be equipped with gear by actually planar binding them, or visiting them with plane shift, which seems to me to suggest that it's quite possible to randomly summon a monster who just happens to have a tonne of loot by pure chance, and have an incredibly overpowered summon once in a while.
    World of Madius wiki - My personal campaign setting, including my homebrew Optional Gestalt/LA rules.
    The new Quick Vestige List

    Quote Originally Posted by Kazyan View Post
    Playing a wizard the way GitP says wizards should be played requires the equivalent time and effort investment of a university minor. Do you really want to go down this rabbit hole, or are you comfortable with just throwing a souped-up Orb of Fire at the thing?
    Quote Originally Posted by atemu1234 View Post
    Humans are rarely truly irrational, just wrong.

  16. - Top - End - #76
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Crake View Post
    Simulacrum however, doesn't allow the caster to decide, which creature is duplicated is determined by the part of the creature that is put into the snow. You can't, for example, put in a piece of a pit fiend, and then change your mind, saying "nah, I wanna make a solar actually".
    So how do Mirror Mephits create simulacrums? Stop ignoring the fact that 100% of spells, even Fabricate, can have their material component ignored. We've had this argument before in another thread too. I'll repeat it here too.

    Major and Minor Creation lets me create any vegetable matter, but its material component requires a tiny piece of the material to be created. So if I want to create grass i need a small amount of grass in my hand. Are you going to stand there and say that Major Creation fails when you use Eschew Materials to ignore the grass component because the spell wouldn't know what kind of material it's creating? And that I'm not deciding what material I create with major creation but my grass component is? And that every single creature with Minor or Major Creation as an SLA like Djinni can't ignore that material component?

    If no then how the **** is Simulacrum any different? What the **** is so special about simulacrum's goddamn material component? How is deciding to create Iron without a piece of Iron any different than creating a Pit Fiend without a piece of Pit Fiend?

    I am no longer going to respond to anyone saying simulacrum's material component is not ignorable especially since those people keep ignoring mirror mephits, both SLA and eschew material rule texts, and just plain common sense. Stop trying to make up whatever BS reason you can to try to defy RAW because whatever reason you come up with is gonna cause dysfunction elsewhere just like your reasoning caused a dysfunction with major and minor creation. Not to mention, your entire claim is completely and totally unsupported by any rule text in the game. At all. In fact it is mutually exclusive to every rule concerning material components in the game, and mutually exclusive with mirror mephits.

    Mirror Mephit is a WotC sanctioned use of Simulacrum that completely ignores the material component so whatever reasoning you come up with to defy RAW is WRONG.

    Simulacrum's material component is just that. A material component. It is no different than any other irrelevant material component in the game like bat poop for fireball and WotC itself ignored the material component. This is undeniable undisprovable FACT. So DEAL with it. Show me RAW that says simulacrum is a super mega ultra special material component that cannot be ignored by SLAs and epic feats alike or don't say anything at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crake View Post
    You don't swap out anything, the DM does. When you say "I planar bind a succubus", the DM plucks a random succubus from the planes and plonks her in front of you. She may well have the elite array instead of base succubus stats, she may have different feats, she may have flaws to grant her ADDITIONAL feats, hell, she may even be half dead because you just pulled her out of a fight with a vrock.

    When you planar bind a creature, you aren't guaranteed the stock standard, because it doesn't specify that you do (unlike with polymorphing or shapechanging, which specifically says you gain the abilities of a standard member of that race).

    Technically summoning is subject to the same whims of the DM, as nothing in the summoning subschool, nor the summon monster spell says that you get a full hp, all abilities unused, stock standard version of the creature you summon, but I think customizing every summon is beyond the effort that most DMs are willing to put in, so they just default to the standard. There is actually a summoning variant which allows you to have an array of customized summons, though if they die, they can't be summoned again for 24 hours. They can even be equipped with gear by actually planar binding them, or visiting them with plane shift, which seems to me to suggest that it's quite possible to randomly summon a monster who just happens to have a tonne of loot by pure chance, and have an incredibly overpowered summon once in a while.
    I guess planar binding's text is ambiguous enough that you could be right here. Not that I care anymore since my switch to psionics. Simulacrum is literally the only spell I care about now.
    Last edited by RoboEmperor; 2019-05-19 at 09:56 AM.

  17. - Top - End - #77
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2012

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    Q1: Are the MM stats that of a typical creature?
    Q2: Are creatures that don't use MM stats typical as well?
    Q3: Does generic non-unique mean typical or atypical?
    Simulacrum allows the caster to duplicate a particular creature. Whether the creature is typical or not is irrelevant. If you can find a "typical creature" to duplicate and have a piece of it, then it can be duplicated. Then you make the rolls for likeness.

    Simulacrum creates duplicates. The spell is very specific about that. If you were saying that ignore material components could duplicate a specific creature, whether typical or not (that you had seen, for example), that would be one thing. I would still disagree but it is in the realm of plausibility. What you are saying is that you can produce a creature that isn't a duplicate of anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    I am no longer going to respond to anyone saying simulacrum's material component is not ignorable especially since those people keep ignoring mirror mephits, both SLA and eschew material rule texts, and just plain common sense
    I am not ignoring anything. Very early on I said that the modules are contractory on the matter. I even gave an example.


    conjuration
    Each conjuration spell belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations bring manifestations of objects, creatures, or some form of energy to you (the summoning subschool), actually transport creatures from another plane of existence to your plane (calling), heal (healing), transport creatures or objects over great distances (teleportation), or create objects or effects on the spot (creation). Creatures you conjure usually, but not always, obey your commands. A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it. The creature or object must appear within the spell's range, but it does not have to remain within the range.

    Source: PHB
    There's another counter example to your copy/paste about summoning.

    I think I will rewrite a fix for Simulacrum, since it is giving people so much trouble.
    Last edited by redking; 2019-05-19 at 09:35 AM.

  18. - Top - End - #78
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2012

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Lets fix it!

    Simulacrum
    Illusion (Shadow)
    Level: Sor/Wiz 7
    Components: V, S, M, XP
    Casting Time: 12 hours
    Range: 0 ft.
    Effect: One duplicate creature
    Duration: Instantaneous
    Saving Throw: None
    Spell Resistance: No

    Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature that has existed. 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 one-half of the real creature’s levels or Hit Dice (and the appropriate hit points, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities for a creature of that level or HD, with the most powerful abilities removed first in the case of spellcasting, SLA, and special abilities). You can’t create a simulacrum of a creature whose Hit Dice or levels exceed twice your caster level. You must make a Disguise check when you cast the spell to determine how good the likeness is. A creature familiar with the original might detect the ruse with a successful Spot check (opposed by the caster’s Disguise check) or a DC 20 Sense Motive check.

    A simulacrum is not a construct and does not have the construct type or construct traits. The simulacrum spell creates a duplicate of some creature and the duplicate has the same creature type as the original. If the original creature eats, breathes, and ages, so does the simulacrum, and may take penalties or die from such. A simulacrum does not heal naturally through rest, but magical healing can heal the simulacrum if the original creature could be healed magically. A simulacrum retains regeneration or fast healing, if possessed by the original creature, but is destroyed when reduced to 0 hit points.

    At all times the simulacrum remains under your absolute command. No special telepathic link exists, so command must be exercised in some other manner. A simulacrum has no ability to become more powerful. It cannot increase its level or abilities. If reduced to 0 hit points or otherwise destroyed, it reverts to snow and melts instantly into nothingness. If necessary, 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.

    Focus Component
    A piece of the creature to be duplicated (hair, nail, or the like). As the piece of the original creature to be duplicated, the focus component must be provided even if you are otherwise able to ignore focus components (such as by casting simulacrum as a special ability).

    Material Component
    The spell is cast over the rough snow or ice form, and the focus component must be placed inside the snow or ice. Additionally, the spell requires powdered ruby worth 100 gp per HD of the simulacrum to be created.

    XP Cost
    100 XP per HD of the simulacrum to be created (minimum 1,000 XP).
    Last edited by redking; 2019-05-19 at 10:22 AM.

  19. - Top - End - #79
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    How do you explain shapechange? It turns you into a single nonunique creature. If those stats are not an actual creature to duplicate, then they're also not an actual creature you can assume the form of. Shapechange turns you into an actual creature. Why can't simulacrum duplicate this "actual creature"?

    You need to understand that the "original creature" can be a "single nonunique creature" and all "single nonunique creatures" exist, otherwise a lot of things fail to function. Shapechange, Gate, and Cosmic Descryer are three, and Shapechange doesn't need actual physical creatures to exist. You are duplicating a "single nonunique creature". You are creating a simulacrum of a "single nonunique creature".

    As I mentioned before whether you're right or not relies completely on whether "original creature" is exclusive to unique creatures. If it is not, and "original creature" includes "single nonunique creatures", then you are incorrect.
    Standard creatures (i.e. the regular statblocks) certainly do exist. Advanced ones are dependent on the DM to say "this is in my world" because the rules for advancing are optional and must be invoked by the DM. It would be like saying you want to make a simulacrum of a Red Dragon with Warblade levels - sure they can exist, but if your DM doesn't make one for you to copy, then they don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    Cheers to Psyren the MVP "naysayer".
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  20. - Top - End - #80
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Standard creatures (i.e. the regular statblocks) certainly do exist. Advanced ones are dependent on the DM to say "this is in my world" because the rules for advancing are optional and must be invoked by the DM. It would be like saying you want to make a simulacrum of a Red Dragon with Warblade levels - sure they can exist, but if your DM doesn't make one for you to copy, then they don't.
    As Robo put it, we circle back to Cosmic Descryer where the class feature assumes advanced versions of all summoned creatures exist. I don't know about class levels but advanced hd creatures are stilll generic, non-unique, and exists if the base creature exists just like how Great Wyrms are advanced wyrmlings and they are generic, non-unique, and exists and extraplanar dragons are available for Gate. And don't need to physically exist for Shapechange and Simulacrum.
    Last edited by gogogome; 2019-05-19 at 01:05 PM.

  21. - Top - End - #81
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    As Robo put it, we circle back to Cosmic Descryer where the class feature assumes advanced versions of all summoned creatures exist. I don't know about class levels but advanced hd creatures are stilll generic, non-unique, and exists if the base creature exists just like how Great Wyrms are advanced wyrmlings and they are generic, non-unique, and exists and extraplanar dragons are available for Gate. And don't need to physically exist for Shapechange and Simulacrum.
    Things that use advanced hd in d&d
    Cosmic Descryer: Superior Planar Summoning
    Planar Ally: Dwarven Ancestor
    Planar Ally: Voor
    Greater Stone Golem
    Greater Shadesteel Golem
    Every single dragon ever printed (their age categories are defined in Advancement section)

    I think it's safe to say this is a mountain of evidence that says all advanced creatures exist in d&d by default.

    So....
    1. You can create simulacra of generic non-unique creatures (because they are creatures)
    2. All generic non-unique creatures exist even though they don't exist physically in your world (Shapechange, ty gogogome)
    3. As long as 36hd pit fiends exist in d&d you can make a simulacrum of a 36hd pit fiend.
    4. All advanced creatures exist in d&d and are generic non-unique (see overwhelming amount of evidence above)
    5. Therefore you can create a simulacrum of a 36hd pit fiend if you can ignore material components 1gp or less regardless of whether one physically exists in your world or not since they exist in d&d.

    Only way this is wrong is if simulacrum can only create simulacra of unique creatures.
    Psyren's claim that advanced creatures don't exist unless DMs go out of their way to say they exist is wrong (see the amount of content that uses advanced creatures above)
    Anyone saying advanced creatures are not generic or unique is wrong (look at planar ally and officially advanced creatures like golems and dragons. All are advanced creatures and all are generic/non-unique)

    So I think this discussion is at its end.
    Last edited by RoboEmperor; 2019-05-19 at 02:40 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #82
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    As Robo put it, we circle back to Cosmic Descryer where the class feature assumes advanced versions of all summoned creatures exist.
    Which I already answered by saying that a specific ability in an epic PrC is not evidence of a general rule.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Quote Originally Posted by gogogome View Post
    Cheers to Psyren the MVP "naysayer".
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  23. - Top - End - #83
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2013

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    Anyone saying advanced creatures are not generic or unique is wrong (look at planar ally and officially advanced creatures like golems and dragons. All are advanced creatures and all are generic/non-unique)
    You have demonstrated five examples where monsters are given advanced forms but you extend it to all in the absence of a general rule. The thing is, nothing even guarantees that pit fiends are in a game. There is no general rule stating that every printed monsters exists at all.

    Also you all are missing the obvious point: in spite of having an advancement line pit fiends cannot be advanced by outsider hit dice. The rule is:

    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    Intelligent creatures that are not humanoid in shape, and nonintelligent monsters, can advance by increasing their Hit Dice. Creatures with increased Hit Dice are usually superior specimens of their race, bigger and more powerful than their run-of-the-mill fellows.
    Note it says shape not type or appearance. Both winged and large sized humanoids exist and pit fiend is simply a hexapod humanoid in shape (like an avoral or a winged dragonborn or anyone with the dragon wings feat or a lesser tiefling/aasimar with the outsider wings feat) so thanks to the dysfunctional rules pit fiend can never advance by hit dice.

  24. - Top - End - #84
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Which I already answered by saying that a specific ability in an epic PrC is not evidence of a general rule.
    Which Robo repeatedly pointed out that Cosmic Descryer does not advance the hd of creatures but instead summons an already advanced creature. And this:
    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    Things that use advanced hd in d&d
    Cosmic Descryer: Superior Planar Summoning
    Planar Ally: Dwarven Ancestor
    Planar Ally: Voor
    Greater Stone Golem
    Greater Shadesteel Golem
    Every single dragon ever printed (their age categories are defined in Advancement section).
    I think you're the one being irrational here.
    You dismissed Cosmic Descryer because it's an Epic PrC when it has absolutely nothing to do with advancing creatures' hd. The Epic PrC lets you summon advanced creatures, not create or advance the hd of creatures.
    You dismissed Dwarven Ancestor because the monster text repeated redundant information about calling advanced creatures with higher levels of planar ally
    You dismissed Voor because the monster text repeated redundant information about calling advanced creautres with higher levels of planar ally
    You also dismissed Voor because the MMIV gave stats for one advanced Voor
    You dismissed Greater Stone Golem claiming that the advancement rules can be ignored and Stone Golems have no hd cap, which doesn't have anything to do with the fact that advanced Stone Golem exists and is generic.
    You ignored my point about every single dragon being an advanced creature.

    I agree with Robo that this is a mountain of evidence of a general rule. If this is not even to convince you then I'm afraid there is nothing that can convince you so I must conclude you are irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by ZamielVanWeber View Post
    You have demonstrated five examples where monsters are given advanced forms but you extend it to all in the absence of a general rule. The thing is, nothing even guarantees that pit fiends are in a game. There is no general rule stating that every printed monsters exists at all.
    Cosmic Descryer summons advanced creatures of every monster in Summon Monster line of spells. So that alone is 246 monsters. I don't know how many dragons there are but there's at least 59 in draconomicon and core so that's 305 monsters where advanced versions exist by RAW. I think it's safe to say this is a general rule.

    If you and psyren claim the existence of 305+ advanced creatures is not a mountain of evidence then there's nothing more to discuss.

    I mean it. Even putting aside all of this, advancement section of a creature's stat block is RAW. Not optional, not variant, but RAW so all advanced versions of the creature exist in d&d.

    Psyren, instead of Robo and me bending over backwards to satsify your whims, I ask that you show me RAW that says the advancement entry of the monster stat block is an optional variant rule for DMs only. And I reject all the quotes you gave us earlier in this thread because none of it directly says only DMs may use those rules and we have players using those rules for golems. Come up with more RAW that explicity show only DMs may use advanced creatures and that Golems were a specific exception to this general rule you claim that exist.

    I will repeat for emphasis. Please show me the general rule that says only DMs may use advancement entries of monsters and that they don't exist in normal d&d.

    As a DM who has no interest in simulacrum, Robo's Planar Ally example was enough to convince me that he is right back when he made his Planar Binding is Slavery thread. If this and dragons and golems and Cosmic Descryer and the fact that the advancement entry is not an optional or variant rule is not enough to convince you then I must put you on the same boat as redking.

    Show us an example in d&d where a player is denied advancement rules instead of Robo and me digging through more books for more examples on top of the 305+ monsters we've already provided.

    The burden of proof is no longer on us. We have shown 305 instances of advanced monsters being used in d&d. All you did was quote a rule about advancement which does not exclude players from using it. It is now on you to show us without a doubt that these examples were exceptions to this general rule you claim exists.
    Last edited by gogogome; 2019-05-19 at 05:50 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #85
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    I'm gonna call it quits for real this time. You made a great point gogogome, about how everyone here is sitting on their asses dismissing every single thing I say without providing any evidence of their own. Where is the general rule that says advanced creatures don't exist by default? Why the **** do I have to keep providing evidence after I've given so, so, so many?

    Screw this, I don't need to convince any of you stubborn people who are clearly in denial because god knows why. We have literally a metric **** ton of evidence saying we're right, you guys have literally nothing and have been doing nothing except sitting on your asses screaming "not good enough" when you have absolutely nothing on your side of the argument, so I'm done.

    I have given a ton of examples where d&d assumes advanced creatures exist by default. You guys have done NOTHING. LITERALLY NOTHING. So go ahead sit on your asses screaming "not good enough", I don't give a **** anymore. All I know is that I'm right, you guys are crying because god knows why, and the only thing that matters is that I know that I'm right.

    Demanding evidence for a general rule when you've given none. Honestly holy crap.

    Heres two:
    1. As gogogome said advancement entries in monster statblocks are not option variant rules but strict RAW. Psyren's claim that the advancement entry of the monster's stat block is for DMs only is completely utterly and totally baseless, completely unsupported by any RAW, and the MM itself makes no differentiation whatsoever about which stat is for DMs and which stat is for players. And I have given tons of examples (EVERY SINGLE CONSTRUCT-ABLE CONSTRUCT IN EXISTENCE, Dwarven Ancestor, and Voor) of PLAYERS using the mother ****ing advancement entry of the monster stat block, NOT DM.
    2. I have given a mountain of cases where d&d assumes advanced creatures exist.
    Not good enough? Show me your proof of your general rule that says advanced creatures don't exist or **** off instead of passing your baseless unsupported **** as fact.

    7hd red dragon exists because it has a statblock, 10hd red dragon exists because it has a stat block, but 8 and 9 hd red dragons don't exist because advancement entry of the stat block is only usable by DMs? Yeah, I'm done.

    This is the last time I expect this forum to have people capable of having an objective debate.

    @Psyren
    Explain to me why 8 and 9hd red dragons don't exist. And give me evidence of your so called general rule where advanced monsters are a variant optional rule and d&d denies players from using it. Actually give me 10 so I can say not good enough to you 10 times.
    Last edited by RoboEmperor; 2019-05-19 at 06:28 PM.

  26. - Top - End - #86
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Crake's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    So how do Mirror Mephits create simulacrums? Stop ignoring the fact that 100% of spells, even Fabricate, can have their material component ignored. We've had this argument before in another thread too. I'll repeat it here too.

    Major and Minor Creation lets me create any vegetable matter, but its material component requires a tiny piece of the material to be created. So if I want to create grass i need a small amount of grass in my hand. Are you going to stand there and say that Major Creation fails when you use Eschew Materials to ignore the grass component because the spell wouldn't know what kind of material it's creating? And that I'm not deciding what material I create with major creation but my grass component is? And that every single creature with Minor or Major Creation as an SLA like Djinni can't ignore that material component?

    If no then how the **** is Simulacrum any different? What the **** is so special about simulacrum's goddamn material component? How is deciding to create Iron without a piece of Iron any different than creating a Pit Fiend without a piece of Pit Fiend?

    I am no longer going to respond to anyone saying simulacrum's material component is not ignorable especially since those people keep ignoring mirror mephits, both SLA and eschew material rule texts, and just plain common sense. Stop trying to make up whatever BS reason you can to try to defy RAW because whatever reason you come up with is gonna cause dysfunction elsewhere just like your reasoning caused a dysfunction with major and minor creation. Not to mention, your entire claim is completely and totally unsupported by any rule text in the game. At all. In fact it is mutually exclusive to every rule concerning material components in the game, and mutually exclusive with mirror mephits.

    Mirror Mephit is a WotC sanctioned use of Simulacrum that completely ignores the material component so whatever reasoning you come up with to defy RAW is WRONG.

    Simulacrum's material component is just that. A material component. It is no different than any other irrelevant material component in the game like bat poop for fireball and WotC itself ignored the material component. This is undeniable undisprovable FACT. So DEAL with it. Show me RAW that says simulacrum is a super mega ultra special material component that cannot be ignored by SLAs and epic feats alike or don't say anything at all.
    I never said you couldn't ignore the material component, I said that without it the spell wouldn't know what to duplicate and you'd just have a clump of snow leftover at the end. When a material component actually determines the effect of a spell, it is required, even for SLAs, for example, trap the soul requires a gem worth 1000gp per HD. This gem sets the HD limit of the spell. You could cast the spell without the gem, but then the HD limit would be 0. This is demonstrated by the fact that brachina, who have trap the soul as an SLA, still require a gem for their trap the soul ability, fiendish codex II, page 135, last line of Typical Treasure, "When a pleasure devil is on a mission, it carries a gem of the appropriate value to cast trap the soul on a victim.". There is no specific mention in the SLA section, just that one quick line under treasure, which implies this is not something specific to the brachnia, it applies to anyone trying to use trap the soul. This then further implies that SLAs can optionally have material components, and in fact, must do so for spells whose effects are actively determined by their material components.
    World of Madius wiki - My personal campaign setting, including my homebrew Optional Gestalt/LA rules.
    The new Quick Vestige List

    Quote Originally Posted by Kazyan View Post
    Playing a wizard the way GitP says wizards should be played requires the equivalent time and effort investment of a university minor. Do you really want to go down this rabbit hole, or are you comfortable with just throwing a souped-up Orb of Fire at the thing?
    Quote Originally Posted by atemu1234 View Post
    Humans are rarely truly irrational, just wrong.

  27. - Top - End - #87
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboEmperor View Post
    I'm gonna call it quits for real this time. You made a great point gogogome, about how everyone here is sitting on their asses dismissing every single thing I say without providing any evidence of their own. Where is the general rule that says advanced creatures don't exist by default? Why the **** do I have to keep providing evidence after I've given so, so, so many?

    Screw this, I don't need to convince any of you stubborn people who are clearly in denial because god knows why. We have literally a metric **** ton of evidence saying we're right, you guys have literally nothing and have been doing nothing except sitting on your asses screaming "not good enough" when you have absolutely nothing on your side of the argument, so I'm done.

    I have given a ton of examples where d&d assumes advanced creatures exist by default. You guys have done NOTHING. LITERALLY NOTHING. So go ahead sit on your asses screaming "not good enough", I don't give a **** anymore. All I know is that I'm right, you guys are crying because god knows why, and the only thing that matters is that I know that I'm right.

    Demanding evidence for a general rule when you've given none. Honestly holy crap.

    Heres two:
    1. As gogogome said advancement entries in monster statblocks are not option variant rules but strict RAW. Psyren's claim that the advancement entry of the monster's stat block is for DMs only is completely utterly and totally baseless, completely unsupported by any RAW, and the MM itself makes no differentiation whatsoever about which stat is for DMs and which stat is for players. And I have given tons of examples (EVERY SINGLE CONSTRUCT-ABLE CONSTRUCT IN EXISTENCE, Dwarven Ancestor, and Voor) of PLAYERS using the mother ****ing advancement entry of the monster stat block, NOT DM.
    2. I have given a mountain of cases where d&d assumes advanced creatures exist.
    Not good enough? Show me your proof of your general rule that says advanced creatures don't exist or **** off instead of passing your baseless unsupported **** as fact.

    7hd red dragon exists because it has a statblock, 10hd red dragon exists because it has a stat block, but 8 and 9 hd red dragons don't exist because advancement entry of the stat block is only usable by DMs? Yeah, I'm done.

    This is the last time I expect this forum to have people capable of having an objective debate.

    @Psyren
    Explain to me why 8 and 9hd red dragons don't exist. And give me evidence of your so called general rule where advanced monsters are a variant optional rule and d&d denies players from using it. Actually give me 10 so I can say not good enough to you 10 times.
    You backing out would be a good idea as it seems you've reached your tantrum threshold.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crake View Post
    I never said you couldn't ignore the material component, I said that without it the spell wouldn't know what to duplicate and you'd just have a clump of snow leftover at the end. When a material component actually determines the effect of a spell, it is required, even for SLAs, for example, trap the soul requires a gem worth 1000gp per HD. This gem sets the HD limit of the spell. You could cast the spell without the gem, but then the HD limit would be 0. This is demonstrated by the fact that brachina, who have trap the soul as an SLA, still require a gem for their trap the soul ability, fiendish codex II, page 135, last line of Typical Treasure, "When a pleasure devil is on a mission, it carries a gem of the appropriate value to cast trap the soul on a victim.". There is no specific mention in the SLA section, just that one quick line under treasure, which implies this is not something specific to the brachnia, it applies to anyone trying to use trap the soul. This then further implies that SLAs can optionally have material components, and in fact, must do so for spells whose effects are actively determined by their material components.
    So you are saying creatures cannot ignore the material component of minor and major creation even when cast as an SLA?

    And Ak’Chazars also has Trap the Soul as an SLA and makes no mention of material components. So Brachina is the exception to the norm, and is in no way suitable for extrapolation of rules.

    And we have the mirror mephit ignoring the material component and creating Simulacra of PCs. You have once again ignored the mirror mephit. Please stop ignoring the mirror mephit. The mirror mephit proves you are completely incorrect and nothing you can say or do will change this fact so stop ignoring the mirror mephit and accept that you are incorrect.

    I will repeat what I said in the Planar Binding is Slavery thread where you claim a straw bridging over the circle without touching it is disturbing it, defying the english language in the process. Your reasonings are not rule text, they are house rules you came up by yourself. Simulacrum's spell text makes 0 reference to the material component and Robo's analogy with minor creation is apt. Both spells don't reference their material components. Both spells require the material component to be different for each effect. So please use rule text instead of your rationalizations as your rationalizations are often completely opposite of the rule text.
    Last edited by gogogome; 2019-05-19 at 07:37 PM.

  28. - Top - End - #88
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    @RoboEmperor
    For what it's worth I asked both my DMs about this and they said you were right. It wasn't even a hard decision.

    They said Psyren saying advancement rules are for DM only were one of the dumbest things they've ever heard. And that advanced creatures not existing is also really dumb and pointed out dragons even before gogogome did, and how if colossal dragons exist because of increase in hd, why wouldn't huge pit fiends because of the same reason? Which is increased hit dice.

    They said anyone trying to make the planar ally stuff sound like it's specific to the creature instead of an example of what you already can do are try hards like Psyren and redking.

    And they said anyone who tried to make the material component sound like it was essential to the spell when the spell text makes absolutely no reference to the material component also try hards.

    Having said that they told me they wouldn't let me do it because it was too powerful for the table, but one said he might next campaign when he wants to run a high op campaign but he would house rule a limit of 1 simulacrum at a time only.

    So don't worry about trying to convince everyone. Anyone who isn't a tryhard can see that you're right.

  29. - Top - End - #89
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Fighting Demons!

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by ZamielVanWeber View Post
    You have demonstrated five examples where monsters are given advanced forms but you extend it to all in the absence of a general rule. The thing is, nothing even guarantees that pit fiends are in a game. There is no general rule stating that every printed monsters exists at all.

    Also you all are missing the obvious point: in spite of having an advancement line pit fiends cannot be advanced by outsider hit dice. The rule is:

    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    Intelligent creatures that are not humanoid in shape, and nonintelligent monsters, can advance by increasing their Hit Dice. Creatures with increased Hit Dice are usually superior specimens of their race, bigger and more powerful than their run-of-the-mill fellows.
    Note it says shape not type or appearance. Both winged and large sized humanoids exist and pit fiend is simply a hexapod humanoid in shape (like an avoral or a winged dragonborn or anyone with the dragon wings feat or a lesser tiefling/aasimar with the outsider wings feat) so thanks to the dysfunctional rules pit fiend can never advance by hit dice.
    There's an explicit rule saying that you cannot advance creatures like Pit Fiends, since they're humanoid in shape and intelligent.

    So, how do you resolve that?
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Current Avatar by Elder Tsofu, who is awesome!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Professor Gnoll!
    Show


    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Cdr. Fallout!
    Show

  30. - Top - End - #90
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Question about simulacrum

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    There's an explicit rule saying that you cannot advance creatures like Pit Fiends, since they're humanoid in shape and intelligent.

    So, how do you resolve that?
    This is another example of a try hard. You should ignore it instead of bending over backwards as you call it to accommodate them. Because things with wings and tail are humanoid right? No? Then lets put in non humanoid shaped creatures who have the humanoid type as a gateway to link creatures with wings and tails to the humanoid shape.

    And this has nothing to do with whether simulacra can create advanced creatures or not. Nope. Just throw all the random **** you can hoping one will stick.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •