Simulacrum Shenanigans

[Dalebert]

The simulacrum spell description leaves SO much open to interpretation. Therefore, I'm not sure there's a RAW answer to these. I'm just curious how you folks handle it or have seen it handled in games. I've yet to have it come up since AD&D (and it was different).

How believable is its behavior? Does it act like an automaton? Does it have a reasonable chance of convincing people it's the original? Does it have any motivations other than doing what you say? Like, if you don't command it, does it just sit there staring off into space all the time? Alternatively, is it born with all the motivations of the original except that it must obey you? Like, let's say the original is your arch enemy. Does it go to attack you immediately until you command it otherwise? Does it cry if you tell it to kill someone the original cares about (but then do it, of course)?

Does it need to eat, drink, and pee?

Does it have the memories of the original, and if so, how much? I know it's has fewer class levels. Can you make one of the Captain of the city guard and then ask it details about the plans to protect the Jarl?

Those are just some of the questions I have off the top of my head. It's one of my favorite spells and I haven't ever gotten to use it in a game since AD&D.

[Snowbluff]

1) It's behavior is based on the disguise check? :smalltongue:

2) I'd say it has biological needs. It's a copy of the creature. It IS a creature, just one made of shadow stuff.

3) This is complicated. It would have the ranks in Knowledge, for example. I guess it would retain memories, by some strange voodoo.

4) Simulacrum is the coolest spell. :smallredface:

[Telok]

Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature. 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). 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.
At all times the simulacrum remains under your absolute command. No special telepathic link exists, so command must be exercised in some other manner.

Here's the answers.

It is a partially real illusion. You make a disguise check and others make Spot or Sense Motive checks to catch onto the illusion.

It is your spell effect. It does what you make it do and nothing else. You can command it to act like the original (see the Sense Motive check above) and it will. But only because you told it to.

It is not alive, it is not a creature, it is a spell effect. There are no biological processes, no free will, no spirit or soul.

In order for it to have the same skills and feats (albeit at half the level) it should know at least half of what the original knew.

For fun and games make five or six copies of yourself with this spell and use Polymorph Any Object to shrink them down to about 3 inches tall. Be sure to include important equipment like spellbooks and spell component pouches. Animate a table for them to stand on and have it follow you around. You now have a nice little buffing/dispelling team at your command.

Nothing quite says 'awesome wizard' like using your spells to summon a mai-tai and lounge chair while a dozen Fell Draining Magic Missiles go off whenever you say "Bupkiss."

[icefractal]

It is not alive, it is not a creature, it is a spell effect. There are no biological processes, no free will, no spirit or soul.This one, I disagree with. It has the same type as the original, and no change in stats other than being half the level. Despite starting as a snow statue, it's not of the Construct type. So I would say that odd as it seems, it eats, drinks, sleeps, etc - if the original did, anyway.


The memories thing is interesting. The fact that it has the same skills implies it needs to at least have some degree of the memories. In order for it to be at all convincing as a replacement, it needs even more. Even "half chance of knowing any given thing" is pushing it as far as staying in disguise goes.

However, if it has the full memories (or even a substantial portion of them), it also becomes the ultimate interrogation/spying tool. Mind control? Persuasion? Even having to capture the person in the first place? Forget all that, just get a piece of their hair, make a Simulacrum, and it will tell you everything you want to know, even draw a nice diagram. Unless you guard your biological material like a hawk, you can forget about having any secrets. It's like mind-uploading in D&D!

[Deadline]

There was an adventure in one of the Dungeon magazines that included an illusionist who was quite the socialite. He would create Simulacrums of himself to continue dating whatever woman he was seeing at the time so he didn't have to face the drama of a break up with her and could move on to romance someone else.

[Phelix-Mu]

Previous discussions are relevant. I believe if you search for threads I've started, you will find one or two on this spell.

Point the First: It's not a construct, but a creature of the type copied. This is big, really big. Totally affects its stats, immunities, etc. Big.

Point the Second: Is it "living?" There was discussion once upon a time that suggested that it dies at 0hp, which doesn't happen to living creatures...but that is a bit of a stretch. Basically, it can't be "dying" so it can't be "living." YMMV.

Point the Third: It's a "partially real" copy of the creature. But there is no context for "partially real" beside the spell's very meager alterations. This suggests that, except those exclusions, everything else is per "copy" and nothing about copy suggests inaccurate. So, memories prior to the separation of material component from the creature? Check. Biological functions...yeah, as much as that stuff is covered by the rules, I'd say yes (it's a creature of that type, so inherits need to eat, sleep, breathe).

Point the Fourth: Can it learn? It can't grow stronger, that is clear, and the other strictures of the spell, but what about learning how to do new things? If you tried to teach it to make a souffle, would it be able to learn? What is capable of changing among what it knows? Can you psychic reformation a simulacrum? (WARNING: MAJOR EXPLOIT.)

Point the Fifth: Multiclass simulacra. Suppose you have a monk3/fighter4/wiz3 that you want to make a copy of. What do its class levels look like once copied? The rules are silent, but there are two schools of thought:

- Take away the five most recent class levels earned, effectively scrolling back the creatures timeline to halfway through its advancement. Totally unsupported.

- Assemble any combination of the three classes (or two of them) totaling five levels, not exceeding the levels in any class possessed by the original. Totally unsupported.

[icefractal]

Another question that tends to come up - what about Simulcra of divine characters. Do they still get spells?

Like, if you make a Simulacrum of Pelor's high priest, does it still get spells (because it's a 10th level Cleric), or does it get nothing (because Pelor doesn't grant anything to fakes)? Would a Paladin Simulacrum immediately fall for "being a Simulacrum"? What if it was a setting where the gods are distant (such as Eberron). Or it was a Druid instead?

A lot of these questions come up with things like the Mirror of Opposition too.

[Vogonjeltz]

1) It's behavior is based on the disguise check? :smalltongue:

2) I'd say it has biological needs. It's a copy of the creature. It IS a creature, just one made of shadow stuff.

3) This is complicated. It would have the ranks in Knowledge, for example. I guess it would retain memories, by some strange voodoo.

4) Simulacrum is the coolest spell. :smallredface:

The disguise check is for its likeness. Behavior is dictated purely by commands given, and only someone who knew how the subject should be acting could make ye sense motive check to determine if commanded behavior was off.

[Dalebert]

It's made out of ice or snow and can be repaired but not healed, so based on context clues we're looking at a construct with all the features/traits therein except as noted by the spell, likely of the cold subtype.

It says it can be repaired in a laboratory but it doesn't say it can't be healed. It's actually better than Ice Assassin in that respect. By RAW, a simulacrum of a troll would regenerate while an Ice Assassin of a troll would not.

It seems like you're reading way too much into it to infer a cold subtype. The whole made-from-ice thing doesn't appear to have any lasting ramifications. Like, they don't melt in hot environments or anything.


That being said, I don't think as a construct it has motivations except as assigned to it by the creator, who has absolute control over it.

It falls under illusion and it has class levels, attributes including mental ones, skill ranks, etc. It's hard to see it as anything like a typical construct if a construct at all. It apparently knows many of the things the original knows. It seems like it has some kind of semblance of a personality. Not saying it has a soul. I'd assume not. I'm just saying it seems like it might behave as if it does, within the restraints of having to obey the commands of its creator.

[Duke of Urrel]

The simulacrum spell description leaves SO much open to interpretation. […]

How believable is its behavior? […] Does it have a reasonable chance of convincing people it's the original?

The Simulacrum that you create uses your Disguise skill to impersonate the creature that it duplicates. In my opinion, a Simulacrum doesn't really have the personality of the creature that it duplicates. It has only your imitation of that personality, but it's a very good imitation.


Does it act like an automaton? […] Does it have any motivations other than doing what you say? Like, if you don't command it, does it just sit there staring off into space all the time? Alternatively, is it born with all the motivations of the original except that it must obey you? Like, let's say the original is your arch enemy. Does it go to attack you immediately until you command it otherwise? Does it cry if you tell it to kill someone the original cares about (but then do it, of course)?

I agree with Telok that a Simulacrum is a shadow effect that in most respects resembles a creature of the type that it duplicates and behaves like this creature in combat. I don't believe it has any will of its own. I don't believe it has a soul of any kind. The quasi-life of a Simulacrum is an extension of your own will and your own soul. It has none of its own. In my opinion, a Simulacrum has no stronger personal connection to the creature that it duplicates than the hair or the piece of fingernail or toenail from which it was made.


Does it need to eat, drink, and pee?

If a Simulacrum duplicates a living creature, I don't believe it needs to do most of the things that a living creature needs to do in order to stay alive, because it is a shadow effect, not a creature. However, if a Simulacrum duplicates a creature that must eat, drink, sleep, and eliminate wastes, it may do all of these things after it is commanded to do so. (The wastes that a Simulacrum eliminates, like the food that it eats, are more real than the Simulacrum itself.) I make an exception for breathing because of its importance in combat. A Simulacrum cannot choose not to behave in combat exactly like a creature of the type that it duplicates. Therefore, if a Simulacrum duplicates a creature of some type that must breathe air, it may drown underwater, or it may be choked to death by strangling, or it may suffocate in an airless space.


Does it have the memories of the original, and if so, how much? I know it's has fewer class levels. Can you make one of the Captain of the city guard and then ask it details about the plans to protect the Jarl?

Since a Simulacrum has only half of a creature's skill points, I think it makes sense to assume that if has only half of a creature's memories as well. I would simply have it make a percent check every time you ask it a question about the creature that it duplicates. It has a 50% chance of answering "I don't know" or "I forgot." It has no more personal connection to its own memories than a corpse that you question using the Speak with Dead spell.

In my opinion, a Simulacrum is not a creature and does not actually belong to any creature type. It is a quasi-real quasi-creature that obeys you without question, because it is actually a shadow effect that works as an extension of your own will. In combat, a Simulacrum behaves exactly according to the spell's description, as if it were a creature of the type that it duplicates. It is also affected by spells as if it were a creature of the type that it duplicates. Outside of combat, a Simulacrum has no more autonomy than the heap of snow from which it was made and may sit as motionless as a snowperson for as long as you let it. In any event, a Simulacrum does only what you command it to do.


Point the Fourth: Can it learn? It can't grow stronger, that is clear, and the other strictures of the spell, but what about learning how to do new things? If you tried to teach it to make a souffle, would it be able to learn?

I think a Simulacrum is capable of learning very simple new things, namely those that don't require any more skill than it already has. I think a Simulacrum can learn anything new that doesn't require more intelligence than it has and doesn't require it to acquire any new skill points. For example, learning to make a soufflé might not be too hard for a Simulacrum that already has five ranks in Profession skill as a cook, but it might be impossible for a Simulacrum that has only two ranks.


Point the Fifth: Multiclass simulacra.

I have no strong opinion about multiclass Simulacra, one way or the other.


For fun and games make five or six copies of yourself with this spell and use Polymorph Any Object to shrink them down to about 3 inches tall. Be sure to include important equipment like spellbooks and spell component pouches.

I think this exceeds the powers of the Polymorph Any Object spell – but that's a topic for another thread.

[Telok]

I think this exceeds the powers of the Polymorph Any Object spell – but that's a topic for another thread.

Well there's always the Better Than Mirror Image For The Paranoid Wizard method. Make tham all wear what you wear and do exactly what you do. This means that instead of casting Summon Mixed Drink you have to cast the combat spells yourself, but then they'll all do the same thing.

It still works, but it isn't as classy.

[Phelix-Mu]

In the past I have mainly used the simulacra as force multipliers for research, scouting, and build specialization via psychic reformation (favorable DM ruling). On a multiclass character that clones himself/herself, this can be really useful, especially as I was playing a skillmonkey type that had tons of skill points in a wide variety of skills.

[Raven777]

Here's the answers.

[...]

It is not alive, it is not a creature, it is a spell effect. There are no biological processes, no free will, no spirit or soul.

[...]



Simulacrums (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ljov?Simulacrum#10) are actually a partially real creature of the same type and even alignment as the original, not a spell effect. Same as something brought in through Shadow Conjuration.

[Segev]

Breaking this into two spoiler blocks for organizational purposes.

My first ever use of the spell was definitely exploitative. I was playing a 17th-level halfling wizard (who, incidentally, flew around on a specially-enchanted enormous spellbook) named Max, and we'd just beaten and released a BBEG, thanks to the samurai who was de facto party leader deciding that surrender meant we couldn't kill her even though we knew we couldn't hold her and that she would kill us if we tried despite her surrendering. We even expended our own resources healing her, first, and all we extracted from her was a promise to stop being evil. Which my character knew she'd break.

My character, not trusting this evil creature (she was some sort of templated half-dragon humanoid who was also a chosen cleric of Tiamat despite being CE), dabbed some of the blood the samurai had splattered when he cut her off of a wall, and stored it.

A short adventure later, we return home and find she'd attacked with an army, burned much of our hometown down, slaughtered hundreds, and left hundreds more severely wounded before leaving again. My wizard's "I told you so" was obviously not appreciated, but the real irritation was how the rest of the party acted like it was the halfling's fault for not having been a team player and agreeing that letting her go was the right thing. Somehow, that made HIM the one who deserved to be treated like he was at fault for causing this mess.

So, Max used the blood he'd collected to make a simulacrum. He then told it how fed up he was with the way his party treated him and their stupidity in letting the original of her go. Handing her a packet of documents, he explained that therein was contained a contract, including information to be shared about the things the party planned. He wanted to join the winning side, because this side was lame and would ultimately cost him too much for no reward. She was ordered to burn it without looking at it if the deal was refused or she was going to be compromised in a way that would reveal this to his party, though, because he wasn't so stupid as to want evidence of his betrayal out there should he find the party is still his best option.

He then sent her to find her original, relying on her knowledge of the original to know where to go to do so.

What he didn't tell the Simulacrum, so that it wouldn't have to make any Bluff checks, was that the documents within actually contained the trigger-rune for a Trap the Soul spell keyed to the BBEG. He'd spent two Wish spells creating a 50,000 gp diamond that would turn blue as soon as the half-dragon's soul was trapped within, so he'd know if and when his plan had worked.

In the same game, I later built a new character, a sorcerer this time. My first had been killed by the party samurai through means that are more OOC than IC and thus aren't relevant to this tale; knowing the samurai's player was still making threats about killing my next character for...well, he expressed "reasons," but they amounted to "I don't like the player," I set out to make this one unkillable, and came pretty darned close.

He had three simulacra that travelled with him. Two persistant-ghostform (it was actually the spell from LoM that lets you be incorporeal for 1 round, but I forget its name at the moment) copies of himself which overlaid on his own body but cast spells with their own actions (thus letting him appear to cast 3x as much as he should in a round), and one "bronze dragon wyrmling" he called Tenixtla that he allowed people to assume was his familiar.

It was actually a simulacrum of an ally of his, a Formian Queen. She (the simulacrum) used her own magic to polymorph into the bronze wyrmling to be more portable.

Interesting factoid: Formian Queens' effective sorcerer levels are unlinked to their hit dice. Thus, she was a full 17th level sorceress.

The crowning moment of awesome was a sacrifice of one of his self-duplicate simulacra: we were facing something so far above us that we really didn't have a chance, despite the unoptimal levels of classes that went into some of its build. It could and would teleport to each of us in turn and lay most of us out in one round of attacks, and that's its WEAK options.

Using shenanigans involving Celerity, my sorcerer Forcecaged the creature (solid-wall version) and had his simulacrum teleport inside and use a Quickened Anti-Magic Field. (Or was it a quickened Dim.Door? I don't recall, but it was a lot of act-now shenanigans.) We coudn't fight it and win, but we could keep it in place by denying it its ability to come after us. Between the AMF and the Forcecage, it couldn't magic its way out and it couldn't escape. Unfortunately, AMF means the Simulacrum's own magic ended, so it collapsed into a pile of slush, but it was still a pile of slush radiating an AMF. (Thinking about it later, since the spell is Instantaneous, AMF shouldn't have done this, but the creature would have slaughtered the simulacrum anyway so it doesn't make a difference.)

We managed to use the time that this thing was trapped to make our escape.

Obviously, this is my own interpretation, but I think it a good one and solid according to the RAW.

First, let's just quote the spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/simulacrum.htm):


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. 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). 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.

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. 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.
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.
XP Cost

100 XP per HD of the simulacrum to be created (minimum 1,000 XP).

The Effect line reads, "one duplicate creature." That tells us that this is a duplicate creature, not an illusion that just looks like one. Even if it's an illusory duplicate, the shadow-substance and the fact that it's a creature makes it, well, a creature, so absent other rules, it behaves like one.


Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature. The duplicate creature is partially real and formed from ice or snow. So we know how it's made, and that it's "partially real." There is no universal rule for what that means, so all we have is what the rest of the spell tells us that means.


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).This tells us: its appearance (that of the original creature)
its level/HD (half that of the original creature)
That it has HD/levels, implied to be as appropriate to the creature.

That last bullet point is key: nowhere do we get any rules saying WHAT those HD/levels are, other than the overriding detail that this is a "partially real duplicate" of the creature. So bullet point two gives us at least some of the definition of "partially real:" It is half as puissant as the original.

More importantly, this is the sticking point on people asking "what does it know?" I think this is pretty straightforward, though: It knows anything the original would know without having to make a skill check or use a feat or class feature it lacks. It is a duplicate of the creature other than the exceptions listed.

For anything that would require a check - such as many Knowledge rolls on esoterica or Survival checks to know territory and what can and cannot be eaten and the like - it has half the ranks of the original. It knows whatever it knows based on the results of checks made with those statistics.

Interestingly, I have changed my mind while doing this analysis. Previously, I would have said that a simulacrum's "half levels/HD" are achieved by rolling the character/creature back to half its current level, so order of acquisition of levels matters. However, reading it closely, it says the partially-real duplicate creature has half the levels or HD of the original; it does not say half the exp.

Therefore, half of a wizard 5/fighter 5/gargoyle 4 (for example) would be wizard 2/fighter 2/gargoyle 2. Arguably, it should have 1 more level of fighter or wizard, but the rules on rounding work against the simulacrum, here. But it literally has half the levels and HD of the original. If it were a gargoyle 4/fighter 3, achieved by rolling its levels back (assuming it got all its levels of fighter first, then switched to wizard for some silly reason), would be half the NUMBER of HD, but it would not be half the levels and HD that the original actually had.

This means you're not getting a "younger" version of the original, just a weaker one. So a simulacrum of a lich who made the simulacrum a week after becoming a lich would still be a lich, just with half the wizard levels of the original. It's not a humanoid creature, but an undead one, and it has the lich template. This makes sense, really; the simulacrum's fluff purpose is to be a copy that resembles the original as closely as possible. If it was a "younger" version, rolled-back rather than halved-for-each-kind-of-HD, it would be a far less accurate copy. Our gargoyle 4/fighter 3 would be a very different character than the gargoyle 2/fighter 2/wizard 2, and recognizing that the strange gish gargoyle was no longer gishing it up might be a bit of a tell-tale sign that no disguise check could hide.

Heck, if the original was just a gargoyle 4/wizard 4, that's a pretty recognizable beastie; you don't see it often. If the simulacrum was just a gargoyle 4, it would be a run-of-the-mill gargoyle, which is definitely not acting like a duplicate of the original.


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. Now we also know just how much it resembles the original: as good as your disguise check can make it. One can read the implication that this is just appearance, but Disguise covers pretty much all of the mannerisms et al, and we know how it is detected as a fake by those who know the original. Mechanics cover this pretty clearly, here; if you need to fool somebody who is just trying to study it for imperfections (or who isn't, but you need to know if he notices something off anyway), you use the opposed disguise/perception-type checks.

This is, perhaps, another component of "partially-real," or it could just be its own thing to represent that you did have to shape it in the first place.


At all times the simulacrum remains under your absolute command. No special telepathic link exists, so command must be exercised in some other manner.We knew this already, but it bears repeating: the simulacrum, regardless of whatever desires it might have, must obey you. The command is "absolute," so it can't deliberately misinterpret your meaning, either.


A simulacrum has no ability to become more powerful. It cannot increase its level or abilities.The second sentence clarifies the first. You can likely cause it to learn new facts, but not anything that would be mechanically represented by feats, skills, levels, etc. It otherwise can learn anything the original could. It also can be targeted by effects which do something other than cause it to increase its level or abilities. It can be polymorphed, buffed, Psychically Reformed, etc., though it may lack the exp to expend on that last.


If reduced to 0 hit points or otherwise destroyed, it reverts to snow and melts instantly into nothingness. 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. Here we have another aspect of "partially real:" It is destroyed at 0 hp rather than acting as a normal creature of its type does. This is also the clearest example of "didn't think it all the way through" in this spell: by including the rules for how to repair it, it implies that this is required to restore hp. However, the rules about it being a creature mean, absent specific rules to the contrary, that it can be healed (and heals naturally) in the same manner as any other creature of its type (and thus just like the original).

So I can't imagine anybody USING the expensive repair process, since the RAW support more mundane means (even natural healing). MAYBE if you don't have Repair spells and made a simulacrum of a construct?

So that's about it. I think it actually spells out pretty clearly what it does and does not get: it has half the HD and levels (specifically, each pool is halved, because otherwise it has only half the number of the sum, which isn't what the rules say), it has half the skill ranks, etc. It has a disguise check you made as its DC against which those who know the original must roll a spot or sense motive to recognize the difference. It is destroyed at 0 hp, technically can be repaired in an expensive process (but generally doesn't need to be), and cannot grow more powerful by gaining levels. It is otherwise going to use the statistics of the original creature, including type, and the rules make no exceptions for need to breathe, eat, sleep, etc. Nor do they exclude knowledge and the like other than what would need a skill check to make (and even then only if the simulacrum fails the check).

It is truly a powerful spell, and folds in massive divination potential due to the knowledge the critter can convey. And that's just one of the things it can do.

[Phelix-Mu]

@Segev:

A clear and well-argued analysis. I may quibble slightly about the math on the half-HD/levels issue, but otherwise you seem to think much as I do.

To the levels bit, halving each pool seems problematic. Suppose fighter 3/wizard 3/rogue 1. Total seven levels. Half of that should be three levels. But, if it's half each class/creature HD, then it comes to just two.

Most of all, this makes almost no sense in the event of 1HD creatures that take a couple class levels. Their creature HD disappears. I'm not sure my method clears that up, but if you had an aberration 1/wizard 3, your method suggests wizard 1 simulacrum, while my method at least means there is flexibility to retain the creature HD, resulting in aberration 1/wizard 1.

My argument is that it's half of the levels, not half of class levels. The latter might suggest breaking it down class by class. But the lingo used by the books usually conflates "level" with "character level," calling out "class level" specifically more often (though it is very inconsistent with the first part of this as well).

The deep and profound question, however, is how they wrote such a hugely versatile spell with such a short description. If I had designed it, it would have at least had a couple examples, and maybe a restriction on the otherwise horribly borked result of wizard copies himself, resulting in mini-wizard. In what world is casting a spell to get a virtually unlimited amounts of lower level spells balanced?

To make it worse, I believe there is an item in frostburn that lets anyone make a simulacrum, without any casting or UMD involved.

[Duke of Urrel]

The two schools of thought concerning the realness or unrealness of Simulacra seem to be guided by two separate concepts, both of which are general rules casting their long shadows over the specific case that is the Simulacrum spell.

1. The school of thought that I prefer is the one that feels loyal to the notion that anything called an illusion must be fake, or at least not fully real. It can't really be a creature, even if that's what it's called; it can only be a spell effect that mimics a creature.

2. The other school of thought is the one that feels loyal to the notion that anything called a creature must be a creature, with its own type, its own soul, its own opinions, et cetera. It cannot really be just a spell effect, even if the spell used to create it belongs to the Illusion school.

3. Some people may try to mediate between these two schools, but it's hard to split the difference in a way that seems fair rather than arbitrary and avoids too much complexity.

The description of the Simulacrum spell doesn't provide enough detail to solve this conflict between clashing concepts. It doesn't provide enough specific rules to dispel the effect of the general rules that we rely upon to guide us. So some of us fill in the blanks using the "illusion" concept, others fill in the blanks using the "creature" concept, and still others look for some balance between the two.

We can't solve the problem by insisting on a literal interpretation of every word, either, because there are words in the description of the Simulacrum spell that literally clash with each other. Yes, the effect of this spell is called a "creature," and we may choose to interpret this word literally, but it's also called a "simulacrum" (without italics or capitalization), and we may choose to interpret this word literally, too. If we do this, we arrive at an impasse.

(Very few interpretive problems can be solved by taking every single word in a text literally and ascribing equal importance to every single word. When we read, we need to read more than once, and then we need to refer each word to the whole text. In the end, we cannot avoid making judgement calls about what each word should mean and how important it should be.)

Other spells notoriously create places where general concepts clash. The Polymorph Any Object spell is a good example, because it bridges the gap between creatures and objects. These are two very big general concepts that are usually separate, but get all mixed up when you change a creature into an object, or vice versa.

[Snowbluff]

I'll point out that the duration is instantaneous. Since no magic is in effect, it's no longer a spell effect. The result is a creature that is a simulacrum (literally a copy) of the base creature.

[Segev]

There is no general D&D rule that says "anything the Illusion school does must be inherently fake and not really what it claims to be." That's its general theme, but none of them are in place in Simulacrum except for the fact that the appearance and mannerisms depend in no small part on your Disguise check when you make it.

The RAW covering this are pretty explicit, with some admitted exceptions: it creates a creature that is a duplicate of another, but only "partially real." It defines "partially real" in terms of mechanics via several exceptions to it being an exact duplicate. Included amongst these differences is the halving of hit dice and levels, of skill ranks, etc., and the fact that it is not a perfect replica, and a few other things. Anything not spelled out as different is covered by it being a creature (which is a game-defined term) and a duplicate of another creature (providing us with all the statistics not already covered or modified by the other rules of the spell).

Even if you lean heavily on the school of magic and its fluff themes, the only subtype it has is (Shadow), which invariably creates partially-real things by drawing substance from a demiplane and shaping it to fit an illusory form. Shadow Evocation/Conjuration/etc. produce effects which ARE partially real, with definition of what that means (percentages of the effect that actually exist even if you save vs. the illusion). Simulacrum pulls genuine material from the shadow demiplane and forms it into something that is a copy of the creature in question, with the exceptions spelled out in the spell description.

That's really all you can take away from it. The school of thought that says "anything an Illusion spell does must be fake, so it can't be a creature even though the spell says it is" is not adhering to the RAW. It is house ruling to conform mechanics with their preferred fluff. This is not necessarily bad, but it is not correct by the RAW.


As for HD/level halving and doing it by rolling back vs. by halving each kind of HD/level, I agree that it can lead to some oddities (not the least of which being stacking odd class levels creating something significantly weaker than half the total levels+HD of the original). I don't see the "lose the 1 RHD" issue as that big of a deal, because most races are not defined by their HD. ...actually, I now wonder what happens if you make a simulacrum of a 1st level gnome commoner.

Perhaps this is a place to house-rule the halving to randomly choose when there are odd numbers of dice/levels to halve which ones take the hit, soas to keep it within 1 HD of "half" overall.

I'd probably hand-tune it a bit, as my personal house rule, so the Gargoyle 4/Fighter 5/Wizard 5 would be a Gargoyle 2/Fighter 2/Wizard 3, just because that's where the break-points of the classes are going to keep the most faithful representation of the original possible. (Retaining 2nd level spells only at the expense of a dead fighter level, while still getting both of the fighter bonus feats it could possibly have by anything resembling an even halving.) But that's "how I'd rule." The RAW are not entirely clear, but I still think the most faithful interpretation would result in those losses of more than intended HD and levels if there are multiple odd levels in the build. The RAW do say "half HD or levels," not "half level" or "half HD."

...actually...

They say "half HD or level," which technically means you have a choice. And since every level comes with an HD... Just pick half the levels to keep, I suppose. That interpretation makes the choice part of the RAW and still keeps it even-handed. It even allows the spellcaster to choose what it was he wanted his illusory shadow-clone to be able to mimic the original target doing.

Not that the spell NEEDS more flexibility, but it does neatly solve the problem without needing explicit house ruling.

[Duke of Urrel]

I'll point out that the duration is instantaneous. Since no magic is in effect, it's no longer a spell effect. The result is a creature that is a simulacrum (literally a copy) of the base creature.

I read what you wrote, Snowbluff, and then I read it again.

What you said about the word "simulacrum" doesn't move me, because a simulacrum really is a fake, at least according to my dictionary…


simulacrum |ˌsimyəˈlākrəm; -ˈlak-|

noun ( pl. -lacra |-ˈlākrə; -ˈlakrə| or -lacrums)

an image or representation of someone or something.

an unsatisfactory imitation or substitute.

ORIGIN late 16th cent.: from Latin, from simulare (see simulate).

However…!

Your first point, that a thing without magic can no longer be an illusion, makes solid sense. Congratulations are in order. You have convinced me that the effect of the Simulacrum spell is in fact a creature. And I would rather switch sides than fight.

Now, I believe I must look more favorably upon the interpretations of thoughtful members of the Creature party, starting with Segev, I think.

And this … is why I read these forum discussions!

[Vogonjeltz]

It says it can be repaired in a laboratory but it doesn't say it can't be healed. It's actually better than Ice Assassin in that respect. By RAW, a simulacrum of a troll would regenerate while an Ice Assassin of a troll would not.

It seems like you're reading way too much into it to infer a cold subtype. The whole made-from-ice thing doesn't appear to have any lasting ramifications. Like, they don't melt in hot environments or anything.

Healing spells work on living creatures ("when laying your hand upon a living creature") neither an illusion nor a construct are living, hence we know it can't be healed except through repair. We could also glean this from context reading in which we see that it's saying there's the ability to repair it with the complex, expensive, process, and realize this implies normal healing isn't possible (even if we didn't know that healing spells weren't usable on illusions).

Plausibly they would melt in hot environments, because they are made of ice. The spell doesn't need to go into this because the rules for environments are in the DMG or the various splatbooks (Sandscape comes to mind). This is all up to the DM to implement however.


It falls under illusion and it has class levels, attributes including mental ones, skill ranks, etc. It's hard to see it as anything like a typical construct if a construct at all. It apparently knows many of the things the original knows. It seems like it has some kind of semblance of a personality. Not saying it has a soul. I'd assume not. I'm just saying it seems like it might behave as if it does, within the restraints of having to obey the commands of its creator.

It has 1/2 class levels or HD and the appropriate hp, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities to go with it. Nothing there at all about mental attributes. The idea of mental attributes is belied by the simulacrum being under the casters mental control at all times. That implies the simulacrum doesn't think at all.

As you said, it's an illusion or a construct, so it definitively has no soul.


Simulacrums are actually a partially real creature of the same type and even alignment as the original, not a spell effect. Same as something brought in through Shadow Conjuration.

That's Pathfinder, which differs from the SRD20 and 3.5 PHB descriptions. YMMV depending on system used eh?

[Segev]

Healing spells work on living creatures ("when laying your hand upon a living creature") neither an illusion nor a construct are living, hence we know it can't be healed except through repair.While you're perfectly free to house rule it this way, that is not supported by the RAW. It may or may not be an illusion, but there are no rules saying illusions can't be healed. Most just also lack any valid type for being targeted with healing. This one is not necessarily a construct (though it can be, as you could make a simulacrum of a construct if you chose). It is whatever creature type the original was, since it explicitly is a duplicate creature.


We could also glean this from context reading in which we see that it's saying there's the ability to repair it with the complex, expensive, process, and realize this implies normal healing isn't possible (even if we didn't know that healing spells weren't usable on illusions).Again, nowhere in the rules does it say healing spells cannot be used on illusions; there just aren't usually rules permitting it, either. However, you're right; it's pretty clear that the RAI are for this expensive repair process to be the only way to fix them. That is not, however, what the RAW say. You are, of course, free to house rule the RAI of "and you can't use healing magic on it, even if it's a duplicate of a living creature" into it, but that is a house rule.


Plausibly they would melt in hot environments, because they are made of ice. The spell doesn't need to go into this because the rules for environments are in the DMG or the various splatbooks (Sandscape comes to mind). This is all up to the DM to implement however.The spell would need to go into this, actually, because as written, the simulacrum uses all the rules for the original creature except where the spell says otherwise. The spell never specifies that it melts in hot environments. Unless the creature it has become would do so, therefore, it does not.




It has 1/2 class levels or HD and the appropriate hp, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities to go with it.True.
Nothing there at all about mental attributes.False. It specifies that it is a duplicate of the creature which provided the material component. The spell details the exceptions to this, which includes the aforementioned half HD/levels/skill ranks, etc. Since, as you noted, nothing explicitly calls out mental ability scores, they fall under the blanket of being a duplicate of the creature. Therefore, it has the original creature's mental scores.



The idea of mental attributes is belied by the simulacrum being under the casters mental control at all times. That implies the simulacrum doesn't think at all.Also false; Dominate Person and Dominate Monster also place the target under the absolute control of the spellcaster, but do not stop the creature from thinking nor from having mental ability scores. Nothing about being controlled by another's will implies by precedent that it is mindless.


As you said, it's an illusion or a construct, so it definitively has no soul.It may be an illusion; it is not a construct unless that's what it's mimicking. Whether it has a soul is an interesting question not addressed by the RAW.




That's Pathfinder, which differs from the SRD20 and 3.5 PHB descriptions. YMMV depending on system used eh?3.5e still specifies that it's a duplicate of a creature, and spells out the exceptions to that.

If I made a spell that simply said, "This spell creates a duplicate of a creature," with no caveats or exceptions, you wouldn't quibble that I haven't mentioned that the duplicate is the same type as the original, nor that it has the same stats, levels, etc. That's all covered under "duplicate."

Similarly, Simulacrum creates a duplicate with certain specified differences. Where no difference is specified, "duplicate" means "use the original creature's mechanics."

[Duke of Urrel]

In regard to Simulacra and the healing of damage, I would like to share a question-and-answer exchange between me and Curmudgeon that took place last night and that is immediately relevant.

It's the exchange Q 325 and A 325, and you can read it all here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?367727-Simple-Raw-Thread-for-3-5-28/page25).

I found Curmudgeon's answer reasonable and still do. I think it is another specific difference between Simulacra and normal creatures of any creature type.

Sorry to muddy the waters, but we should be aware of other interpretations that exist. I will testify to the fact that they can sometimes change minds.

[Snowbluff]

I subsribe to the idea that ability doesn't refer to HP.

I read what you wrote, Snowbluff, and then I read it again.

What you said about the word "simulacrum" doesn't move me, because a simulacrum really is a fake, at least according to my dictionary…
My point is that if you copy a Caravaggio, it being a fake does not keep it from being a painting. :smallcool:

[Vogonjeltz]

While you're perfectly free to house rule it this way, that is not supported by the RAW. It may or may not be an illusion, but there are no rules saying illusions can't be healed. Most just also lack any valid type for being targeted with healing. This one is not necessarily a construct (though it can be, as you could make a simulacrum of a construct if you chose). It is whatever creature type the original was, since it explicitly is a duplicate creature.

Although Urrel helped resolve this, for posterity it must be noted that only living creatures can be healed by the traditional means of the cure spells, and the spell is an illusion, which precludes it being living, although as a shadow effect it can have real impacts. Again, not a house rule. I was simply surmising that because it can be repaired it is necessarily a construct, as to my knowledge only constructs use the term repair.

Compare: cure light wounds, repair minor damage, and inflict light wounds.


The spell would need to go into this, actually, because as written, the simulacrum uses all the rules for the original creature except where the spell says otherwise. The spell never specifies that it melts in hot environments. Unless the creature it has become would do so, therefore, it does not.

The spell does mention this: "Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature. The duplicate creature is partially real and formed from ice or snow."

In the first line no less. It's not really a duplicate, it just appears to be, and it's really just ice or snow. So it most definitely can melt in a hot environment.


False. It specifies that it is a duplicate of the creature which provided the material component.

Illusory duplicate, it just appears the same.


Also false; Dominate Person and Dominate Monster also place the target under the absolute control of the spellcaster, but do not stop the creature from thinking nor from having mental ability scores.

Those spells are compulsions of thinking creatures. This is control of a construct under the illusion of duplication. Not equivalent.


My point is that if you copy a Caravaggio, it being a fake does not keep it from being a painting.

Yeah but this is an illusion of a painting. At that point it's not even a painting, it just looks like one.

[Snowbluff]

Yeah but this is an illusion of a painting. At that point it's not even a painting, it just looks like one.
He painted his in oil, you did it in watercolor.

Shadow matter.

[Sith_Happens]

Although Urrel helped resolve this, for posterity it must be noted that only living creatures can be healed by the traditional means of the cure spells, and the spell is an illusion, which precludes it being living, although as a shadow effect it can have real impacts. Again, not a house rule. I was simply surmising that because it can be repaired it is necessarily a construct, as to my knowledge only constructs use the term repair.

If the original has a CON score then so does the simulacrum, and anything with a CON score is living.

[Segev]

In regard to Simulacra and the healing of damage, I would like to share a question-and-answer exchange between me and Curmudgeon that took place last night and that is immediately relevant.

It's the exchange Q 325 and A 325, and you can read it all here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?367727-Simple-Raw-Thread-for-3-5-28/page25).

I found Curmudgeon's answer reasonable and still do. I think it is another specific difference between Simulacra and normal creatures of any creature type.

Sorry to muddy the waters, but we should be aware of other interpretations that exist. I will testify to the fact that they can sometimes change minds.That is, at most, an argument against the Simulacrum healing naturally, and in no way prevents somebody else from casting Cure Light Wounds on the Simulacrum of our hypothetical gargoyle gish (as an example). It remains a creature of the monstrous humanoid type.


Although Urrel helped resolve this, for posterity it must be noted that only living creatures can be healed by the traditional means of the cure spells, and the spell is an illusion, which precludes it being living, although as a shadow effect it can have real impacts. Again, not a house rule. I was simply surmising that because it can be repaired it is necessarily a construct, as to my knowledge only constructs use the term repair.

Compare: cure light wounds, repair minor damage, and inflict light wounds.Except that it is a creature. It says so in the spell description. "Illusory" is not a word that has the mechanical meaning of "invalidates targeting based on other mechanical descriptors."




The spell does mention this: "Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature. The duplicate creature is partially real and formed from ice or snow."

In the first line no less. It's not really a duplicate, it just appears to be, and it's really just ice or snow. So it most definitely can melt in a hot environment.It being illusory does not preclude it being a creature; there is no rule that says it does. We have precedent in Shadow Conjuration for creatures created by illusion spells having the full suite of stats except where noted otherwise. The same is the case here. You do have an interesting point about the fact that it says, "The duplicate creature is...formed from ice or snow," indicating that it can melt. Given that most games don't take place in sub-freezing environments, this would imply, if we interpret it as being true and the shadow-stuff not compensating, that it's basically useless in most campaigns. Since "is partially real" comes before "and formed of ice or snow," and the spell goes on to specify what the illusion shapes the shadow-stuff to do differently based on being partially real, I am inclined to accept that the partial reality includes lack-of-being-melted. Also includes not being cold to the touch.

This is, admittedly, interpretation based on the partial reality and how it does not specify anything in the rules creating exception to the "duplicate" that render it cold to the touch or susceptible to heat more than the creature it duplicates would be. But it's interpretation within the RAW, according to strict reading. It is, indeed, formed of ice or snow, but since the creature it is duplicating would not melt, and nothing in the spell says that melting is something this duplicate of the creature does, that just tells us what physical matter went into making it before it was magically imbued as a partially-real illusory duplicate.




Illusory duplicate, it just appears the same.Then it actually doesn't have physical stats, either, and can't move. You can't be consistent and interpret in a lack of mental stats but leave out a lack of physical stats when neither are mentioned specifically.




Those spells are compulsions of thinking creatures. This is control of a construct under the illusion of duplication. Not equivalent.Completely equivalent; you're using the compulsion-like effect to state that this creature cannot have a mental ability score or the ability to think. There is no precedent in the game for this being causally linked.

Mindless undead are mindless whether they're controlled or not.
Controlled undead (as per the Command power of clerics or the Control Undead spell) that have minds are controlled without it being a compulsion effect (as they'd be immune to compulsion effects, anyway).

The Simulacrum is stated to be an illusory duplicate of the creature. It has, if you like, an illusory mind, just as it has an illusory body, and it has mental ability scores just as real as its physical ones. Since the partial reality granted by the spell enables this, there's no conflict. Since nothing in the spell specifies that the partial reality causes it to have diminished or absent ability scores, you use the ability scores of the creature of which it's an illusory duplicate.

[Telok]

I've got something. If a Simulacrum is a creature...

We can breed it.
We can energy drain it and turn it into a wight.
We can sacrifice it for crafting purposes.
We can have it gain xp and spend it crafting.

I'm sure there are other things but I've been derailed by the ability to crossbreed simracula of the Tarrasque and a dragon, and a fiend, and a celestial, and a elemental, and a spider, and a fey, and a ogre, and a troll. Sure the originals only have half the HD, but the children won't.

Cocaine wizard prestige class, here I come!

[Duke of Urrel]

Not only does the spell specify the only way in which someone else can heal damage to a Simulacrum, the spell's description notes that it cannot increase its own abilities. From Player's Handbook on page 145:

"What Hit Points Represent: Hit points mean two things in the game world: the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one."

Unless the term "abilities" unambiguously denotes ability scores, the word must be interpreted in the normal English language sense as used throughout the RAW. Natural healing — a creature increasing its ability to take physical punishment and keep going/ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one, through rest — is not permitted to a Simulacrum.


That is, at most, an argument against the Simulacrum healing naturally, and in no way prevents somebody else from casting Cure Light Wounds on the Simulacrum of our hypothetical gargoyle gish (as an example). It remains a creature of the monstrous humanoid type.


I subscribe to the idea that ability doesn't refer to HP.

I still favor Curmudgeon's argument, though I'll admit that it is not unassailable. I asked the question on the RAW thread even though I already had an argument of my own in support of the affirmative answer. Curmudgeon's argument is deduced from a general interpretive principle, namely "assume common English unless the rule specifies otherwise," applied to a specific text, namely a description of "What Hit Points Represent." Although he does not mention it, the principle that "specific trumps general" also applies here.

In contrast, my argument is simply commonsensical. I find it implausible that the rulebook writers should have bothered to describe such a slow and costly repair process unless it were in fact the only way to restore lost Hit-Points to a Simulacrum, regardless of the type of creature it otherwise duplicates. Although my argument is not derived purely from the RAW, I still find it persuasive.

As I've indicated above, I now agree that a Simulacrum is a creature and not an illusory effect. However, even if a Simulacrum duplicates a creature that can heal its Hit-Points naturally or by means of healing magic, I maintain that the Simulacrum cannot heal itself or be healed in either one of these ways. It can regain lost Hit-Points only by the slow and costly process mentioned in the Simulacrum spell's description.

(And what about this: A Simulacrum may seem to heal its Hit-Points naturally or by means of healing magic, just as the creature it duplicates would, but this healing may be illusory until you give the creature what it really needs: a new infusion of fresh shadowstuff, which, as it happens, takes 24 hours of lab work and costs you 100 gold pieces per Hit-Point restored.)


My point is that if you copy a Caravaggio, it being a fake does not keep it from being a painting. :smallcool:

A fake Caravaggio may indeed be a real painting; you are right about that.

However, it is also possible to make a Caravaggio so fake that it is not even a real painting. Take a photograph of a painting by Caravaggio and frame it. The resulting replica is not only not a real Caravaggio; it is also not a real painting.

POSTSCRIPT: I should point out that Curmudgeon never applied his argument to the claim that a Simulacrum can't be healed by Cure Light Wounds and the like. I made that claim, using my own argument in defense of it, not Curmudgeon's. The responsibility is all mine!

[Raven777]

Are there examples of Simulacra in lore / fluff / the books acting like their own person?