Phaerimm? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

magic9mushroom

2010-03-21, 05:21 AM

Free sorc casting? And, are they a player race or monsters?

They're monsters but have an LA, the LA is +2.

What's broken about them is that the Lost Empires of Faerun version gets innate Sorc casting = character level. Which stacks with Sorc levels. So they can either go Crusader 20 and still have 9th level spells or get 9th level spells at ECL 9, or anywhere in between.

The other broken thing about them is that they cast their Sorc spells, all of them, as SLAs, so no XP costs, material components, need for Silent/Still Spell, Spellcraft checks to identify your spells, counterspelling, or Arcane Spell Failure.

Raging Gene Ray

2010-03-21, 05:24 AM

What's broken about them is that the Lost Empires of Faerun version gets innate Sorc casting = character level. Which stacks with Sorc levels. So they can either go Crusader 20 and still have 9th level spells or get 9th level spells at ECL 9, or anywhere in between.

The other broken thing about them is that they cast their Sorc spells, all of them, as SLAs, so no XP costs, material components, need for Silent/Still Spell, Spellcraft checks to identify your spells, counterspelling, or Arcane Spell Failure.

But that's only if you pick some stats from the 3.0 Monsters of Faerun version and other stats from the 3.5 Lost Empires Version, right? And no reasonable DM would allow that, right?

2xMachina

2010-03-21, 05:57 AM

Pretty sure LEoF only is enough.

They do have 2HD +2LA though. HD counts, LA doesn't for sorc casting.

Not sure on ECL 9 though... That's only 5 class lvls without buy-off. With buy-off, 7 class lvls. Only 16 sorc casting.

EDIT: Oh, and free Wishes!

PhoenixRivers

2010-03-21, 06:19 AM

2xMachina

2010-03-21, 06:21 AM

Anyway to make it a True Dragon so that we can go epic by ECL 12? :)

magic9mushroom

2010-03-21, 06:23 AM

But that's only if you pick some stats from the 3.0 Monsters of Faerun version and other stats from the 3.5 Lost Empires Version, right? And no reasonable DM would allow that, right?

No, you just need the LEoF version.

And to not houserule that the PGtF web enhancement version takes precedence.

Note that the LEoF and PGtF versions are completely identical except for that one ability.

Pretty sure LEoF only is enough.

They do have 2HD +2LA though. HD counts, LA doesn't for sorc casting.

Not sure on ECL 9 though... That's only 5 class lvls without buy-off. With buy-off, 7 class lvls. Only 16 sorc casting.

EDIT: Oh, and free Wishes!

Hatchling Phaerimm have 1d8 HD, which goes away when you take class levels.

9 Sorc levels, buy off +2 LA, you're ECL 9 and have 9+9 = 18 effective Sorc casting = 9ths.

Anyway to make it a True Dragon so that we can go epic by ECL 11? :)

All you'd need is some way to make you a Dragon, because they do get more powerful as they age.

Amiel

2010-03-21, 06:23 AM

Their disproportionately low LA makes them eminently unplayable; unfortunately.

The phaerimm tricked a significantly powerful resistance leader into believing that magic was killing off the Netherese and their precious empire. The phaerimm offered to rectify this situation by removing the Netherese leaders from power; this plan was, of course, little matter to them. Their primary objective was to drain the very life from Netherese lands; having discovered that the massive arcane use by the Netherese was destroying their underground homes.
Karsus, however, managed to shatter and destroy the Netherese more thoroughly than any phaerimm attempt.
The evoked magic of the phaerimm was extremely persistent, and to this day, the Anauroch, the desert that was once the fertile Netherse basin, continues to encroach upon other lands.

The phaerimm are also known as thornbacks and magic grubs. They are known to completely dominate mind flayers and beholders for use as their slaves.

2xMachina

2010-03-21, 06:24 AM

LEoF hatchling has 2-3 HD.

magic9mushroom

2010-03-21, 06:26 AM

LEoF hatchling has 2-3 HD.

No, they have 1d8 HD. They can be advanced to 2 or 3 HD (but no more, because then they'd be Juvenile).

2xMachina

2010-03-21, 06:30 AM

Hmm... There seems to be 2 places stating different things.

Advancement: Hatchling 2-3HD
Table: Hatchling Hit Dice 1d8(4)

Yora

2010-03-21, 07:42 AM

What dm would allow players to play a phaerimm anyway? Why not a glabrezu or adult dragon, while we're at it.

Starbuck_II

2010-03-21, 08:11 AM

What dm would allow players to play a phaerimm anyway? Why not a glabrezu or adult dragon, while we're at it.

Because Glabrezu have too much LA (they have LA - meaning you can't play them):

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm

Amiel

2010-03-21, 08:13 AM

Phaerimm really shouldn't have an LA at all.

Thrice Dead Cat

2010-03-21, 08:18 AM

What dm would allow players to play a phaerimm anyway? Why not a glabrezu or adult dragon, while we're at it.

Look, the simplest answer is "Mistakes were made." The important thing, is we all know better know and problems like this won't come again.

By the way, I've got a really kicking idea for an honest to god dragon. Got to give up a feat for it, but I'll have end up with full casting as a Swiftblade.:smalltongue:

Sydonai

2010-03-21, 12:50 PM

They "Dominate Person/Monster" anyone they talk to telepathically, and they can only speak through manipulating wind or.....you guessed it, telepathy.

They also have a large spike/stinger/ovipositer thing on their tails that can either make you have a "Reverse Gravity" effect or fill you up with eggs.

(I'm getting this from the Archmages trilogy novels, not the statbooks)

Shalist

2010-03-21, 01:20 PM

A phaerimm's innate magical ability develops with age. A hatchling (1->3 HD) casts spells as a 1st-level sorcerer, while a centuries-old (19+ HD) revered elder is a 19th-level caster.

Spells: A phaerimm cast arcane spells as a sorcer (caster level equals phaerimm's character level). Phaerimms use their sorcer spells as if they were spell-like abilities, so they require no verbal, somatic, or material components.

Phaerimm characters

A phaerimm's favored class is sorcerer. Its sorcerer levels stack with its base spellcasting ability for the purpose of determining spells known, spells per day, and other effects dependent on caster level. A phaerimm character cannot gain a familiar unless it takes at least one level in a class that grants the ability to summon one, but thereafter its levels in that class stack with its effective racial caster levels to determine the familiar's abilities.

The wording could stand to be clearer, but it seems that a level 18 phaerimm hatchling barbarian would be able to cast level 1 sorcerer spells, with a CL of 18--ie, grease lasting 18 rounds, etc *shrug*.

edit: The '...cast as a SLA...' bit is definitely all kinds of brokenly cool, though anything that cast "as an Xth level X" as part of it's racial hit dice, aside from stacking with class levels, can use that magic without any material components. That being said, 'favorable sacrifice,' pg 89 of the SC, bears a quick reading :P

It does not say anywhere that:
-you can replace that first racial HD with a class level (edit My bad...)

Hit Dice and Class Levels

Creatures with 1 or less HD replace their monster levels with their character levels. The monster loses the attack bonus, saving throw bonuses, skills, and feats granted by its 1 monster HD and gains the attack bonus, save bonuses, skills, feats, and other class abilities of a 1st-level character of the appropriate class.
-being sorcerer 9 => 18th level casting (unless you're an 'adult' phaerimm with 10 racial HD, of course)
-that the "cast as an Xth level sorcerer" just for having class levels. Caster level =/= "cast as an Xth level sorcerer..."
(edit) Clarifying that last point...

For creatures with spell-like abilities, a designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature’s caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature’s Hit Dice.

Starbuck_II

2010-03-21, 01:24 PM

Agreed, you can advance caster but not Spellcaster level unless you take Sorceror levels.

Since we aren't sure they can drop their HD (though most monsters can).

I think a better race is Fey-ri. Sure you are part elf, but you get enervation 1/day at level 1.

2xMachina

2010-03-21, 01:32 PM

Its sorcerer levels stack with its base spellcasting ability for the purpose of determining spells known, spells per day, and other effects dependent on caster level.

However, it does say that you have spells known, spells per day, caster lvl as a sorc of your character lvl. Sorc lvls stack with your innate casting.

So, RAW, they do get the spells.

Eldan

2010-03-21, 01:38 PM

What dm would allow players to play a phaerimm anyway? Why not a glabrezu or adult dragon, while we're at it.

My question is: why not? If the campaign allows it (mine, being Planescape, usually do) the player can play whatever crazy thing he wants to. Heck, there was that Modron Jade Phoenix mage who was the result of a phoenix mage soul tainting the modron source...

Shalist

2010-03-21, 01:59 PM

However, it does say that you have spells known, spells per day, caster lvl as a sorc of your character lvl. Sorc lvls stack with your innate casting.

So, RAW, they do get the spells.

You see the same entry with any monster that has "Cast as an Xth level X" as part of its racial HD advancement. It just means that "cast as a 10th level sorcerer" (due to 10 racial HD, in this case) stacks with any sorcerer class levels. Same as a dragon, or rakhasha, or drider etc etc.

2xMachina

2010-03-21, 02:03 PM

Do you mean they don't get the high lvl spells because CL only stacks, not spells known?

A 18 Character lvl Phaerimm should cast as a lvl 18 sorc, with lvl 18 sorc spells known/per day, isn't it?

Starbuck_II

2010-03-21, 02:05 PM

Thrice Dead Cat

2010-03-21, 02:07 PM

You see the same entry with any monster that has "Cast as an Xth level X" as part of its racial HD advancement. It just means that "cast as a 10th level sorcerer" (due to 10 racial HD, in this case) stacks with any sorcerer class levels. Same as a dragon, or rakhasha, or drider etc etc.

...and on that note, for those so inclined, why not add the best of both worlds and shoot for the normally shoot for the half-dragon template for more free sorcerer caster levels. Not available in all areas, void where prohibited. Side effects include the smell of limburger lingering on the character sheet, threats to said character sheet, and occasional thrown dice or other gaming paraphernalia.

Shalist

2010-03-21, 02:16 PM

Do you mean they don't get the high lvl spells because CL only stacks, not spells known?

A 18 Character lvl Phaerimm should cast as a lvl 18 sorc, with lvl 18 sorc spells known/per day, isn't it?

For example...a 10HD Adult phaerimm "cast as a 10th level sorcerer." A level 18 phaerimm (10 racial HD, 8 class levels) would cast as a 10th -> 18th level sorcerer, depending on how many sorcerer levels it has. "Casting as a 10th (11th 12th, etc) level sorcerer" is the exact same as a being a 10th (11th 12th etc) level sorcerer in terms of spells known, spells per day, etc.

The main difference is that if the 18 HD phaerimm is 10 racial HD (10th level sorcerer) and 8 barbarian HD, might only cast as a 10th level sorcerer, but it'll do so with a CL of 18, for purposes of determining range/damage/duration/etc, which is kinda cool. That, and ignoring exp, materials, etc.

That, and since its spellcasting is considered a "spell like ability," I'm sure that opens the door to a variety of SLA-enhancing feat cheese on top of everything else :P

magic9mushroom

2010-03-21, 04:03 PM

Hmm... There seems to be 2 places stating different things.

Advancement: Hatchling 2-3HD
Table: Hatchling Hit Dice 1d8(4)

No, they don't state different things. The "Advancement" listing is how many hit dice they can have if you're advancing them by HD. There's similar listings for all other monsters that advance by HD. In this case, Hatchling Phaerimm (normally 1 HD) can be advanced to 2 or 3 HD, but not to 4 or more, because they'd have become Juvenile by that point.

A bog standard Hatchling Phaerimm has 1d8 aberration HD.

It does not say anywhere that:
-you can replace that first racial HD with a class level (edit My bad...)

-being sorcerer 9 => 18th level casting (unless you're an 'adult' phaerimm with 10 racial HD, of course)
-that the "cast as an Xth level sorcerer" just for having class levels. Caster level =/= "cast as an Xth level sorcerer..."
(edit) Clarifying that last point...

We have:

A passage in the flavour text which pertains rather obviously to the standard instance in the book, and only defines things for two of the age categories (Hatchling and Revered Elder).

A passage under "Spells" saying "A phaerimm casts arcane spells as a sorcerer (caster level = phaerimm's character level)."

A table which gives only caster levels.

Assuming your interpretation, as what level sorcerer does a Juvenile Phaerimm cast?

For example...a 10HD Adult phaerimm "cast as a 10th level sorcerer." A level 18 phaerimm (10 racial HD, 8 class levels) would cast as a 10th -> 18th level sorcerer, depending on how many sorcerer levels it has. "Casting as a 10th (11th 12th, etc) level sorcerer" is the exact same as a being a 10th (11th 12th etc) level sorcerer in terms of spells known, spells per day, etc.

The main difference is that if the 18 HD phaerimm is 10 racial HD (10th level sorcerer) and 8 barbarian HD, might only cast as a 10th level sorcerer, but it'll do so with a CL of 18, for purposes of determining range/damage/duration/etc, which is kinda cool. That, and ignoring exp, materials, etc.

That, and since its spellcasting is considered a "spell like ability," I'm sure that opens the door to a variety of SLA-enhancing feat cheese on top of everything else :P

See above.

magic9mushroom

2010-03-21, 04:53 PM

You do realize that everything that has spellcasting as part of its racial HD has a 'Caster Level' column in their table, and that it doesn't refer to the actual CL, right? Hence it being specifically mentioned in the flavor text as referring to the effective sorcerer level...

Well, then, doesn't the text "not refer to the actual CL", then?

For cases like the sylph, you'd be right, because the sylph has explicitly stated Spells Known and Spells per Day. But not the Phaerimm.

I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing anything even remotely confusing or ambiguous about this. In answer to your question, the juvenile would cast as a 4th level sorcerer (barring additional sorcerer class levels), with a CL equal to its HD.

From where are you getting that?

All you've got to go by is a table saying their caster level is 4th and an entry saying their caster level = their character level.

Thing is, the table (and the flavour text) is for the standard versions. For nonstandard phaerimm (including PCs) we go by the text, which says it goes by character level.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn

2010-03-21, 10:54 PM

I should keep a count of the times I have said this (5th time) Phaerimm don't work like zomgbbqborked.

Shalin is right.

PhoenixRivers

2010-03-21, 11:57 PM

It is notable that the table does outline the sorceror level that Phaerimm have, by age category.

Further text states that caster level is based on total character level (with sorceror levels stacking with this caster level increase).

These do not contradict one another.

A hatchling Phaerimm (1 hd) casts spells as a level 1 sorceror, with a Caster level of 1.

A hatchling Phaerimm (1 hd) with one level of sorceror casts spells as a level 2 sorceror (1 for class level, 1 for hatchling sorceror casting ability), with a caster level of 2.

A hatchling phaerimm (1 hd) with one level of cleric casts spells as a level 1 sorceror (hatchling ability) and a level 1 cleric (class level), with a sorceror caster level of 2 and a cleric caster level of 1.

A hatchling Phaerimm (1hd) with 11 levels of sorceror casts spells as a level 12 sorceror (1 for hatchling sorceror casting ability, and 11 for sorceror class levels) with a caster level 22 (11 for character level, +11 for sorceror levels).

A hatchling Phaerimm with the following build:Sorceror 10/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8casts arcane spells as a level 18 sorceror and divine spells as a level 10 Ur Priest, with an Arcane Caster level of 38 (10 from sorceror, 8 from Mystic Theurge, and 20 from hatchling Phaerimm ability) and a divine caster level of 48 (Caster level in other arcane casting classes stacks with ur priest caster level, so sorceror CL 38+10 for ur priest).

This means that, with the above build, at level 15 or so, when you have the Dictum/Blasphemy spells, you have CL of 28 for arcane, and CL 33 for divine spells. Which means your Blasphemy spell will essentially decimate pretty much everything.

A hatchling Phaerimm with the following build: Phaerimm LA 1/ Half Dragon LA 4 /Sorceror 15
Will cast spells as a level 18 sorceror (with loredrake) with a CL of 33, and qualifies for epic spellcasting. Use embrace/shun or some other method to get the feat, and you're good.

(reasoning: You're a dragon type creature, with age categories, that gains power as you age, which qualifies you as a true dragon. This means that you qualify for both loredrake and the Draconomicon text that allows you to take epic feats, regardless of HD. There are more elegant ways to gain the dragon type, I'm sure. A couple PaO spells could do it rather handily, which would qualify you as early as level 13-15, with the right build (hint, use ur priest to get to 9th level spells as fast as possible)

PhoenixRivers

2010-03-22, 02:08 AM

It doesn't say that the CL and sorcerer levels stack...it says that sorcerer levels and more sorcerer levels stack. You see that 'innate spellcasting' line in a buncha different monster entries, and it always refers to the class-based spellcasting *grumble*It does not say that sorceror levels and more sorceror levels stack. It states that the creature's casting ability stacks with sorceror levels. Caster level is reasonably assumed to be part of this, as it explicitly calls out that Sorceror levels stack with the creature's casting ability for effects that are dependent on caster level. Yes, it explicitly says that.

It's just a reiteration of the "the CL of a SLA equals the HD, unless otherwise specified" line of in the general description of SLAs.

Spell-like ability (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spellLikeAbilities)

Associated class levels, SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#associatedClassLevels)

edit: I will concede that a phaerimm might make for a really good 40+ HD ubermount, though.

A phaerimm's favored class is sorcerer. Its sorcerer levels stack with its base spellcasting ability for the purpose of determining spells known, spells per day, and other effects dependent on caster level.
So, let's look a a phaerimm's base casting ability.

Hatchling: Sorceror level 1, CL = Character Level (1 for a plain hatchling)
Now, add sorceror levels to that. Say, 5.

Sorceror level 6 (1+5 for spells per day, spells known)
CL = 10 (Base spellcasting ability = CL (5 for Character Level 5) + Sorceror level (5 for 5 levels of sorceror) for all effects dependent on caster level)

Now, let's say we do a scorching ray. The number of rays is an effect based on caster level. For the purpose of the number of rays that a scorching ray has, your levels in sorceror stack with your caster level in phaerimm. Thus, for that purpose, you're CL 10.

Let's say I cast a Magic Missile. The number of missiles and range are effects dependent on caster level. For those purposes, the 5 levels of sorceror stack with the phaerimm's caster ability. So it casts Magic missile as a level 10 caster.

Let's say I cast Haste. The number of people affected and duration are effects that are dependent on caster level. For those purposes, the 5 levels of sorceror stack with the phaerimm's caster ability. So it casts Haste as a level 10 caster.

While yes, it's technically a CL 5 character, for any effect that actually depends on caster level, the sorceror levels stack in.

PhoenixRivers

2010-03-22, 02:40 AM

I get what you're saying, and I'm just disagreeing over what "base spellcasting ability" refers to. The phrase is used to describe the RHD class-based spellcasting, ie sorcerer levels, and not the Caster Level. That is, the passage doesn't refer to the "CL=HD" thing stacking with other sources of CL, just RHD sorcerer levels stacking with class sorcerer levels.

ie, MM pg 212:

There is a problem with this line of thinking. In this instance, a Rakshasa is a 7th level Sorceror, with a CL of 7. They are married together. It's not a perfect parallel, as a Phaerimm has caster level that is seperate from class level, but still tied to the casting ability for that class.

If a Rakshasa takes a level of sorceror, then the benefits of a level of sorceror (spells per day, spells known, caster level) stack with the creature's spellcasting ability (7th level sorceror, CL 7).

"effects dependent on caster level" is really what kills your argument. The level of sorceror explicitly adds caster level for all effects dependent on caster level."

A character's casting ability is, simply put, the character's ability to cast. Spells known, spells per day, special abilities related to casting, caster level... All are facets of the character's ability to cast spells.

You are welcome to argue that you think that caster ability should refer only to effective levels of classes that grant casting, but that has absolutely no support.

You're right that a phaerimm doesn't get to double up effective sorceror level. However, by a pure and strict reading of RAW, sorceror levels stack with the creature for effects dependent on caster level.

Is this unbalanced? Yes.
Should it be houseruled away? Yes.
Is there anything wrong with houserules? No.
Is there anything wrong with claiming that you're not using them when you are? Yes.

PhoenixRivers

2010-03-22, 03:37 AM

This statement isn't supported by any rules. The phrase "for spells known, spells per day, and other effects dependent on caster level. " is a generic line used frequently in various books for things and always references the the actual spellcaster level.
Incorrect. Or rather, you have NO support for what you claim, because this is the only example where a character's effective level in a spellcasting class is different from a character's caster level. In all other examples, the caster level is part of the class, and it stacks.

There is nothing that says spellcasting levels affect a creatures SLAs--in this case, increasing HD is the method given for that.Wrong.

Spells: A phaerimm cast arcane spells as a sorceror (caster level equals phaerimm's character level). Phaerimms use their sorceror spells as if they were spell-like abilities, so they require no verbal, somatic, or material components.
Yes. A phaerimm casts sorceror spells as if they were SLA's. Note: It's still casting spells. They just follow rules for SLA's.

Note also: For a Phaerim's casting ability (noted above), their caster level equals their character level.

And if the "base spellcasting ability" referred to the CL separately from the spellcaster level, a 10 RHD phaerimm would have a CL of 20 (10 HD + 10 sorcerer levels). The text specifically states that the CL of their SLA would be 10 in this case though, directly contradicting this.
No, it wouldn't.

Racial HD are not sorceror levels. A 10 HD Phaerimm would have a caster level equal to its character level, without additional sorceror levels.

See the above bolded section? Please show me where a 10 RHD Phaerimm has a single level of sorceror. It doesn't. It's base ability let it cast spells as a 10th level sorceror, with a CL= its HD.

A phaerimm's favored class is sorcerer. Its sorcerer levels stack with its base spellcasting ability for the purpose of determining spells known, spells per day, and other effects dependent on caster level.
The "casts as a level 10 sorceror" is PART of its base spellcasting ability.

However, the effect doesn't stack. Why? Because only ACTUAL sorceror levels stack, per the explicit text. Not "casts as" casting ability from the creature's base race. Sorry, no strawmanning a logical fallacy over to me.

PhoenixRivers

2010-03-22, 04:43 AM

Special ability: Spells (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spells)

The RAW do not distinguish between racial and class sorcerer levels, nor does the phaerimm entry.Odd, I'm reading that different than you.

Such creatures are subject to the same spellcasting rules that characters are, except as follows.[b] {{here's a difference!}}

[b]A spellcasting creature is not actually a member of a class unless its entry says so, and it does not gain any class abilities. A creature with access to cleric spells must prepare them in the normal manner and receives domain spells if noted, but it does not receive domain granted powers unless it has at least one level in the cleric class. <<Emphasis mine. They're not ACTUALLY a member of the sorceror class}}
By this reading, if it states that sorceror levels stack, then "casts as" does NOT. Why? Because they are NOT actuall class levels. They follow the same spellcasting rules (i.e. rules for casting spells). They are not functionally identical.

So by your reading, a 10 RHD phaerimm's base spellcasting ability includes having a CL of 10 because of its HD, not because of sorcerer levels (*agree*). Correct.

After you stack the 10 levels of racial sorcerer on top of that, it would become a 10th level sorcerer with a CL of 20 (*disagree*). INCORRECT. They are not ACTUALLY a member of their class. They are not "racial sorceror levels". This is something, made up by you, and actually contradicts the rules that I've bolded above.

And really, we're both throwing way, way too many words at this. It does not say, "unless the phaerimm takes levels in its favored class," or any other qualifier. Separating the CL from the spellcasting level for stacking purposes is only an interpretation, not something explicitly stated, and not RAW. The CL equaling their HD is, however, explicitly stated, and not really worth arguing over*Yes, we are. So let me make it simple.

"Casting Ability" - the ability to cast spells, which incorporates maximum spell level, caster level, spells known, and spells per day, along with other various other casting-related things, such as specialization. In short, that which is required to cast, or to define what you can and cannot cast.

"Stacks" - adds to.

*I love how often people (myself included) on the internet fail to let that stop us...if I put half this much effort into my college work, I'd probably have PhD by now :P
Depends. If your logical reasoning for that was this flawed, I doubt it, though you certainly phrase your points well enough for public speaking.