The God

[Elbacone]

Aka 'let the mortals have their fun' was one of my favorite guides in 3.5. I see alot of min maxing on this forum to be the best glass canon. But we all know that you're nowhere without a good wizard to shape the battlefield so you the bsf and gc can be the heroes.

What would it take in dnd next to be the ultimate enabler/buffer. It used to focus mainly on conjuring, buffing and control. But conjuring creatures is mostly done by druids now, except for conjure elementals. Buffing is done by bards (and clerics?). Which leaves the god wizard with mainly control spells, but is that enough to be the god wizard of 3.5?

[Ellington]

Despite what people might think, I don't think there is any class that can come even close to being the godlike casters 3e had. The main reason for this is not that the spells have been nerfed, but the concentration required for most super spells is the biggest issue. Summons, invisibility, flying and even control spells such as black tentacles all require concentration which means you can only have one active at a time. Sure, you can have a bunch of really strong summoned units active but they can be removed instantly by breaking your concentration, and you can't rely on all the usual defensive spells to keep yourself safe from harm if you do.

In a word, the wizard can still turn the battlefield into a playground for his allies with control spells, but he's a lot more susceptible to harm while doing so so I don't think the term "god" applies any more.

[Ralanr]

Personally, I say good riddance to that concept. I get that people like to be stupid powerful at higher levels, but for those of us who like to hit things with weapons it gets annoying when we start to become useless. I'm not saying non casters need to be better than casters, but rather they both need each other equally.

It's not a solo game after all (though it can be played as such)

[Yorrin]

Ellington hit the crux of it- Wizards, and casters in general, aren't able to leverage as many of their options at a time as in 3.5, and therefore will never be anywhere near as godlike. Between Concentration rules and streamlined action economy it's a much "simpler" game from a casters perspective.

[MaxWilson]

Ellington hit the crux of it- Wizards, and casters in general, aren't able to leverage as many of their options at a time as in 3.5, and therefore will never be anywhere near as godlike. Between Concentration rules and streamlined action economy it's a much "simpler" game from a casters perspective.

This is only sort of true. When you look closely at the PHB there are a number of interesting spells that don't require Concentration: Mass Suggestion, Bestow Curse (5th level or higher), Charm Person (using any number of spell slots), Mirror Image. Even Grease is kind of interesting when you're busy maintaining another spell.

So in a way, 5E is even more complex as you try to escape the Concentration economy, at least where cost-effective.

It remains to be seen whether conjured Mud Mephits + Grease spam will be a thing.

[Elbacone]

Personally, I say good riddance to that concept. I get that people like to be stupid powerful at higher levels, but for those of us who like to hit things with weapons it gets annoying when we start to become useless. I'm not saying non casters need to be better than casters, but rather they both need each other equally.

It's not a solo game after all (though it can be played as such)

Being a god like wizard wasn't about owning combat or save or suck spells. It was about controlling the battlefield, buffing friends (enlarge, haste, etc.), summoning creatures to take the brunt of the hits so the cleric needed to heal less. If it was about one thing it was to let the other members of your party shine, but definetely not to be in the spotlight yourself.

[Elbacone]

To quote Treantmonk from his guide:

God. Merriam-Webster's online dictionary gives many possible definitions.
The one that applies most is, "One controlling a particular aspect or part of reality."
How does that sum up Wizards for ya?
More importantly, when I talk about a "god" Wizard, I'm talking about style not power. (like writing that will get me out of trouble.)
What god comes down and finishes off all his mortal enemies personally? No, instead he provides his followers the tools required to do it themselves.
The Greek heroes are all pretty much examples of this principle. That is the role of the wizard in the party. He doesn't win the combat, he instead provides the tools for the rest of the party to win, by "controlling reality". AKA: a god

[Ralanr]

Being a god like wizard wasn't about owning combat or save or suck spells. It was about controlling the battlefield, buffing friends (enlarge, haste, etc.), summoning creatures to take the brunt of the hits so the cleric needed to heal less. If it was about one thing it was to let the other members of your party shine, but definetely not to be in the spotlight yourself.


Then why is it pointed out to be God like? Honestly I just have issues with classes that can seem to do anything without help from others. What's the point of the encounter if the wizard with godlike power can solve it with a few spells? The fact that wizards can also summon creatures to take hits for others also makes me wonder why play in a party? If you can summon something better than the fighter, why bother having the fighter?

Granted it's more of a personal taste really. As a pessimist I tend to always think people are gonna rub my uselessness in my face when I pick a melee character. I just prefer better balance and synergy.

[Elbacone]

Have you read what I have said at all? The god like wizard doesn't kill anything. It makes you the melee or big stupid fighter able to be the hero. By enlarge, enhance ability, whatever it takes so you can win the day, not the wizard. Casting a fireball does rather poor damage compared to a good timed haste. Do you as a wizard be king of the damage, no. But that doesn't matter, your party did, and took all the blows in return for it while you're watching from a distance ;)

A 'god-like' wizard is a team player, not a solo show.

But that wasnt the question. What is there left of the spell list for a wizard to be that god again? Or do we need to multiclass to get the selection of spells we need? One bonus of using spells that don't interact with baddies is that you don't really need a high stat. So just pump one attack stat for your back up cantrip is all you need, so you could multiclass to get some more usefull spells without really gimping or going MAD.

[charcoalninja]

Then why is it pointed out to be God like? Honestly I just have issues with classes that can seem to do anything without help from others. What's the point of the encounter if the wizard with godlike power can solve it with a few spells? The fact that wizards can also summon creatures to take hits for others also makes me wonder why play in a party? If you can summon something better than the fighter, why bother having the fighter?

Granted it's more of a personal taste really. As a pessimist I tend to always think people are gonna rub my uselessness in my face when I pick a melee character. I just prefer better balance and synergy.

Yeah I agree, if the game was better balanced this wouldn't be an issue.
It always bothers me that D&D works well enough at the "Sweet spot" but the developers never seem to put enough effort into making the high levels work.

[Ralanr]

Have you read what I have said at all? The god like wizard doesn't kill anything. It makes you the melee or big stupid fighter able to be the hero. By enlarge, enhance ability, whatever it takes so you can win the day, not the wizard. Casting a fireball does rather poor damage compared to a good timed haste. Do you as a wizard be king of the damage, no. But that doesn't matter, your party did, and took all the blows in return for it while you're watching from a distance ;)

A 'god-like' wizard is a team player, not a solo show.

But that wasnt the question. What is there left of the spell list for a wizard to be that god again? Or do we need to multiclass to get the selection of spells we need? One bonus of using spells that don't interact with baddies is that you don't really need a high stat. So just pump one attack stat for your back up cantrip is all you need, so you could multiclass to get some more usefull spells without really gimping or going MAD.

I apologize. Honestly it might be the term "god-like" that seems to set me off against the concept.

Whenever I hear it I read, "You'll die without me but I'm fine without you" and I start feeling like melee is just being babysat. Granted I'm sure casters felt this early game also, where melee shines. Honestly I'd just prefer it where no one needs to babysit anyone based on class, or if the babysitting was mutual.

As for your earlier question, I am sorry but I am unable to give a proper answer to what spells can make you a battle field controller.

[MaxWilson]

But that wasnt the question. What is there left of the spell list for a wizard to be that god again? Or do we need to multiclass to get the selection of spells we need? One bonus of using spells that don't interact with baddies is that you don't really need a high stat. So just pump one attack stat for your back up cantrip is all you need, so you could multiclass to get some more usefull spells without really gimping or going MAD.

Party buffs are mostly gone from this edition, especially for wizards. Enemy control spells like Web can still be awesome in the right situation (narrow tunnels for example), and Slow/Darkness can interfere a bit too, but the only buff spells I can think of that a wizard can cast are Enlarge Person (advantage on Str checks like grappling, and +1d4 to damage) and Haste (1 extra attack, double speed, advantage on Dex saves) and Longstrider (+10' movement for one hour, no Concentration required).

So basically, this is one playstyle that was deliberately removed from the game. 5E is more about blasting and direct attacks. Unfortunate in some ways, but that's how it is. The best way to help your party now is to be a bard or a paladin and cast spells like Bless/Beacon of Hope/Beacon of Vitality/etc. while providing bonus dice from Inspiration and a 10' or 30' saving throw bonus aura.

Oh, I guess the one thing wizards can still do is summon minor elementals like Mud Mephits. Do that, a lot.

[Ralanr]

Wouldn't clerics have a lot of buffing spells?

[pwykersotz]

Party buffs are mostly gone from this edition, especially for wizards. Enemy control spells like Web can still be awesome in the right situation (narrow tunnels for example), and Slow/Darkness can interfere a bit too, but the only buff spells I can think of that a wizard can cast are Enlarge Person (advantage on Str checks like grappling, and +1d4 to damage) and Haste (1 extra attack, double speed, advantage on Dex saves) and Longstrider (+10' movement for one hour, no Concentration required).

So basically, this is one playstyle that was deliberately removed from the game. 5E is more about blasting and direct attacks. Unfortunate in some ways, but that's how it is. The best way to help your party now is to be a bard or a paladin and cast spells like Bless/Beacon of Hope/Beacon of Vitality/etc. while providing bonus dice from Inspiration and a 10' or 30' saving throw bonus aura.

Oh, I guess the one thing wizards can still do is summon minor elementals like Mud Mephits. Do that, a lot.

Greater Invisibility is pretty awesome too.

[Yagyujubei]

this is impossible to accomplish in 5E since almost every buff requires concentration now, making it so that you can only have one buff active at a time. That said, sorc with twinspell could dual cast a buff...but still you'll never reach what you could in 3.5 with the current rules.

EDIT: for the most optimum buffer you would want a lore bard with a dip into sorc for metamagic. bard will get you access to every single buff/control spell you want through magical secrets, and metamagic will lets you make the most of those spells.

[Geoff]

It always bothers me that D&D works well enough at the "Sweet spot" but the developers never seem to put enough effort into making the high levels work.The 'sweet spot' has been bigger in some eds than others. In 1e, I'd have said it was pretty small, maybe as small as 3rd level to 6th, maybe 4 to 8 or something. In 3.5 I'd be pretty confident saying 1 through 10, and I could be happy playing a good fighter build for a level or few beyond that, though there are those who'd insist 1-6 (to avoid Polymorph shenanigans), thus E6. 4e was fine at 1st level, and I never played a character to such a high level that I bumped up against the upper limit, if there was one - by the same token, a game at much higher level needed the DM to set up the right kind of challenges to make it feel different from one at 1st. (4e and 3e both let you just level up a monster or NPC, and a DM who succumbed to that temptation too much left you fighting 20th level 'town guards,' at Epic, albeit in Sigil or something, which ultimately doesn't seem like a lot of progress from fighting 1st level town guards at 1st.)

So, far with 5e, 1st level is definitively OUT of the sweet-spot, IMX. 1st is just terrible for everyone. Once you all have your sub-classes and other goodies it perks up. So 2nd or 3rd for the low end, much like old-school. For the upper end of the sweet spot, well, I'll let you know when (if) I get there... ;)



On Concentration: I don't put a lot of stock in it. I've seen DMs forget to enforce it. There are good spells that don't require it. It's not a panacea, it just addresses one way casters used to abuse spells. Honestly, it's almost redundant with how few slots casters have now: if you did have more of a temptation to stack spells, you might be more likely to hoard them for a final boss fight that never comes, or blow them all and have to get by on cantrips - or force the party into a 15-minute workday.

[Gnomes2169]

Party buffs are mostly gone from this edition, especially for wizards. Enemy control spells like Web can still be awesome in the right situation (narrow tunnels for example), and Slow/Darkness can interfere a bit too, but the only buff spells I can think of that a wizard can cast are Enlarge Person (advantage on Str checks like grappling, and +1d4 to damage) and Haste (1 extra attack, double speed, advantage on Dex saves) and Longstrider (+10' movement for one hour, no Concentration required).

So basically, this is one playstyle that was deliberately removed from the game. 5E is more about blasting and direct attacks. Unfortunate in some ways, but that's how it is. The best way to help your party now is to be a bard or a paladin and cast spells like Bless/Beacon of Hope/Beacon of Vitality/etc. while providing bonus dice from Inspiration and a 10' or 30' saving throw bonus aura.

Oh, I guess the one thing wizards can still do is summon minor elementals like Mud Mephits. Do that, a lot.

Would be true, except fly, stone skin, foresight, magic weapon, elemental weapon, etc, etc all can target other creatures, and fly specifically calls out targeting multiple creatures, so party-wide buff right there. Oh, and abjuration specialists. That's all I need to say there...

So what is it that prevents wizards from buffing anyone else and makes it unviable? Honestly, while a cleric is better at some things (and bard/ paladin is really, really good) a wizard can still buff in ways they can't, and they can still do it well.

[Elbacone]

Yeah true but it looks that if you really want to play the support class it's better to find something in multiclassing some other classes to get the support spells and/or abilities needed. Thinking of Paladin 8 (oath of the ancients)/Lore Bard 6 myself and go from there. Gives some rather juicy spells/buffs and aura's.

[Eslin]

Animate dead and finger of death mean large armies of loyal undead, simulacrum means large armies of clones, wish means efficient large armies of clones, shapechange means you can turn into something meant to be equal to your entire party,

Wizards still get at least partial divinity.

[EugeneVoid]

Wizards are still campaign-breaking, but much much harder. The idea of God in 3.5e was prevalent only because being a one-man party as a wizard was extremely easy somewhere between level 1 and 9 (depends on level on optimization), rendering entire parties obsolete and useless.

The ability to play God is shaken by the much improved blasting in 5e, the lack of ability to large-scale buff your teammates, and the seemingly impossible prospect of locking down a battlefield. That said its still possible, but requires planning, overspecialization, cheese, and/or a lot of research.

Animate Dead is a fantastic place to start though; Its only downside is some vulnerability to AoE which I'm sure is fixable (somehow... counterspell traps?). In return, you get game-breaking damage, huge quantities of expendable minions, vast stacks of health to play with, and the ability to be a g*dd*mn necromancer.

Edit: Concentration spells, man. Concentration spells.

[MaxWilson]

Would be true, except fly, stone skin, foresight, magic weapon, elemental weapon, etc, etc all can target other creatures, and fly specifically calls out targeting multiple creatures, so party-wide buff right there. Oh, and abjuration specialists. That's all I need to say there...

So what is it that prevents wizards from buffing anyone else and makes it unviable? Honestly, while a cleric is better at some things (and bard/ paladin is really, really good) a wizard can still buff in ways they can't, and they can still do it well.

Good points there. That's what I get for posting AFB in a new edition which I'm still learning. :)

Due to the Concentration economy you have to (mostly) pick just one of these buffs (foresight is he exception), but they are still decent options for a wizard to cast for other party members.

Anyway, thanks for the correction/expansion.


Animate Dead is a fantastic place to start though; Its only downside is some vulnerability to AoE which I'm sure is fixable (somehow... counterspell traps?). In return, you get game-breaking damage, huge quantities of expendable minions, vast stacks of health to play with, and the ability to be a g*dd*mn necromancer.

I wrote a moderately-long response to this about how skeletons are a hassle and how I'd rather have 1368 HP worth of Mud Mephits from an 8th level slot without having to cast Animate Dead dozens of times a day... and then I thought about what you actually wrote here. And you have a really good point. Skeletons are a logistic hassle if you create dozens of them in a day, but if you're a 20th level character with at least Necromancer 6 among your various class levels, you're getting 11.5 points of damage per round out of every skeleton you equip with a short bow. Keeping a dozen skeletons with shortbows on retainer doesn't really stress you logistically (3 3rd level spell slots), while also giving you 200 to 600 HP worth of meat shields that also do 138 HP of damage per turn without an action from you--almost as good as a 20th level Sharpshooter Fighter with an Action Surge[1]. If you happen to be a Fighter 1/Warlock 2/Necromancer 17 you can even add 56 HP worth of force damage per round to the party.

So yeah, I think I need to make some Necromancers. That damage bonus really is kind of killer, logistically speaking. And I also need a spell to strip the flesh off bones, because zombies are lame.

[1] It is true that the Sharpshooter will perform far better against high-AC targets and/or targets with cover. It doesn't obsolete the Sharpshooter, I'm just trying to put in perspective what the RoI is for my three spell slots per day.

Edit: BTW, if you order your skeletons to kill each other, you still have a pile of bones, don't you? So you could reconstitute them later.

[JoeJ]

Animate dead and finger of death mean large armies of loyal undead, simulacrum means large armies of clones, wish means efficient large armies of clones, shapechange means you can turn into something meant to be equal to your entire party,

Wizards still get at least partial divinity.

How do you get large armies of clones out of simulacrum? You can only have one of them at a time.

[Talakeal]

How do you get large armies of clones out of simulacrum? You can only have one of them at a time.

You have the simulacrums make simulacrums of their own. And also Wish up enough components to pay for the process indefinitely iirc.

[Eslin]

You have the simulacrums make simulacrums of their own. And also Wish up enough components to pay for the process indefinitely iirc.

You also have them use wish to speed the process up, 12 hours is now 6 seconds.

[JoeJ]

You have the simulacrums make simulacrums of their own. And also Wish up enough components to pay for the process indefinitely iirc.

Do you actually know a DM who would allow that, or is this purely hypothetical?

[Eslin]

Do you actually know a DM who would allow that, or is this purely hypothetical?

Well, 'allow' is an odd way of putting it. It's how the spells work, is your DM in the habit of just going 'no you can't do that' with no in game explanation of why not?

There have been several large discussions, the wish/simulacrum thing is kind of a problem - wish has far too steep a penalty on its own, and the obvious way of circumventing it is too strong. There's no balanced middle ground.

[JoeJ]

Well, 'allow' is an odd way of putting it. It's how the spells work, is your DM in the habit of just going 'no you can't do that' with no in game explanation of why not?

There have been several large discussions, the wish/simulacrum thing is kind of a problem - wish has far too steep a penalty on its own, and the obvious way of circumventing it is too strong. There's no balanced middle ground.

Most DMs I've played with are not that naive, nor am I when I DM. Until the devs release something indicating that the spell really is intended to let the caster make infinite copies of themselves, and explain why that doesn't break the game, I am very skeptical that you'll find any DM who will let you do this. I certainly wouldn't.

As for in game explanations, that's easy: for the purposes of this spell, any simulacra created by your simulacra are considered to be yours. Therefore the first one is instantly destroyed when the second one is completed. This information is available to anybody who does the research, or it's a DC 20 Intelligence (Arcana) check to already know it.

As for Wish, if you want to expend a 9th level spell slot to cast a 7th level spell faster and cheaper, have at it. That's what the spell is for. Modifying Simulacrum to let you have more of them at a time is not a standard use of Wish, however, so that gives you a 1 in 3 chance of losing the ability to ever cast Wish again.

[pwykersotz]

Well, 'allow' is an odd way of putting it. It's how the spells work, is your DM in the habit of just going 'no you can't do that' with no in game explanation of why not?

There have been several large discussions, the wish/simulacrum thing is kind of a problem - wish has far too steep a penalty on its own, and the obvious way of circumventing it is too strong. There's no balanced middle ground.

I think allow is fairly accurate. The DM is a game designer. He can rest on the framework of D&D or he can make it his own. Most DM's customize at least some of the game, though of course there are a few legendary examples of strict RAW play. The general assumption is a combo which renders a campaign trivial is not allowed. If you're playing a sandbox type game and the more power the better? Sure, you're probably golden. If you're trying to prevent war with Arcadia in a mystery/spy adventure, infinite clones are unlikely to be allowed.

It's also worth noting that the GM needs to be able to challenge the player in some way. It's not a game without some sort of goal. Loopholes that trivialize large swaths of the game might be too much for some. However, that's not to say that armies of infinite simulacrum's of the BBEG might be a fun campaign, or your copies might be to try to take on a deific bastion, or some such thing.

But yeah, in my opinion no player should assume a loophole which breaks the typical bounds of the game is automatically allowed. Heck, I'm playing a paladin soon for HotDQ, and I'm not even assuming my GM will let me use GWF on smite damage, and that's fairly tame. If he does allow it, cool, I'll use it. But I tend to assume the least permissive interpretation by default.

Just my 2cp

[MaxWilson]

I think allow is fairly accurate. The DM is a game designer. He can rest on the framework of D&D or he can make it his own. Most DM's customize at least some of the game, though of course there are a few legendary examples of strict RAW play. The general assumption is a combo which renders a campaign trivial is not allowed. If you're playing a sandbox type game and the more power the better? Sure, you're probably golden. If you're trying to prevent war with Arcadia in a mystery/spy adventure, infinite clones are unlikely to be allowed.

I don't see a problem per se with Simulacrum + Wish trivializing a campaign--you could have a player whose whole mission in life is to get to level 17 ASAP and start casting this broken combo. In fact, he'll probably have a tougher time than everyone else in the short run because he won't be level-dipping in Fighter or Warlock or anything in order to not compromise his long-term goal.

No, the problem with Simulacrum + Wish is that if this combo exists it's impossible to build a consistent and interesting world that isn't dominated by a Wizard-King or at least the fear of Wizard-Kings. (Or Bard-Kings.) It's the fantasy version of the Fermi Paradox: "if this is possible, where is everybody who should have done it already?" If you're not into consistency then maybe this doesn't bother you. Another way to play it would be that you are the first wizard, ever... but that has obvious implications for magic item availability and spellcasting monsters. No Drow mages, for example, and no magic items.

[JoeJ]

Actually, now that I've had a little more time to think about it, I'd probably allow the infinite Simulacrum because by RAW only the first one obeys the caster's orders. To control any of the others you have to pass orders down the chain, and it will very quickly get to the point where it would have been better just to hire a bunch of reasonably intelligent underlings.

Also, if any of the simulacra get killed, the chain is broken at that point. The next simulacrum in line below that point becomes free, and might very well resent having been controlled like a puppet. <veg>

[MaxWilson]

I haven't seen this discussed anywhere, but Simulacrum is not the only way to duplicate spells and abilities in the D&D-verse and is not the only way to Wish without risk. The Intellect Devourer's Body Thief ability is a little bit vague on what "knowing" spells from the original creature means, but assuming that the Intellect Devourer actually gets spell slots as well, you could get an Intellect Devourer to devour your brain and make wishes until it fails a roll (2 wishes on average), then pop out of your body and have somebody Resurrect you. You haven't cast non-standard Wish at that point, only the intellect devourer has, and only the intellect devourer has lost the ability to cast Wish again... which it can't now anyway now that it is no longer in your body.

[Gnomes2169]

I haven't seen this discussed anywhere, but Simulacrum is not the only way to duplicate spells and abilities in the D&D-verse and is not the only way to Wish without risk. The Intellect Devourer's Body Thief ability is a little bit vague on what "knowing" spells from the original creature means, but assuming that the Intellect Devourer actually gets spell slots as well, you could get an Intellect Devourer to devour your brain and make wishes until it fails a roll (2 wishes on average), then pop out of your body and have somebody Resurrect you. You haven't cast non-standard Wish at that point, only the intellect devourer has, and only the intellect devourer has lost the ability to cast Wish again... which it can't now anyway now that it is no longer in your body.

Unfortunately, since the ID sort of kills you, you cannot control the ID and it can wish for whatever it wants. Not exactly a good plan to let a DM controlled monster murder and mind control you.

[Kornaki]

Unfortunately, since the ID sort of kills you, you cannot control the ID and it can wish for whatever it wants. Not exactly a good plan to let a DM controlled monster murder and mind control you.

A mind flayer merchant travels the world letting people use ID wishes as they please. He charges a hefty fee, but his reputation is impeccable.

Might make a good campaign hook actually.

[MaxWilson]

Unfortunately, since the ID sort of kills you, you cannot control the ID and it can wish for whatever it wants. Not exactly a good plan to let a DM controlled monster murder and mind control you.

I wasn't proposing it as a plan per se, just noting the quirk, mostly for the sake of anyone trying to "fix" the issue by altering Simulacrum and/or Wish.

If you wanted to make an actual plan out of this the intellect devourer would need to be controlled by someone friendly to you, and you'd need to have someone available to Resurrect you afterward.

Obviously you can mix and match these approaches, e.g. create a simulacrum of a mind flayer, have it create a bunch of intellect devourers and order them to obey you, then create a simulacrum of yourself and have one of the intellect devourers possess it. Since the intellect devourer "knows" all spells the simulacrum knows but isn't a simulacrum itself, it shouldn't have the simulacrum's inability to regain spell slots. Probably. It's really not very well-defined in RAW.

[Geoff]

Well, 'allow' is an odd way of putting it. It's how the spells work, is your DM in the habit of just going 'no you can't do that' with no in game explanation of why not? A lot of DMs were in that habit in the 20th century, and the game encouraged it. 5e harkens back to that style, openly encouraging "Rulings not rules." So, yeah, I think there's some expectation that DMs will ban, nerf, tweak, or otherwise deal with problematic spells, monsters, items, and other elements of the rules as a matter of course. Thus the game is free to present a spell like Simulacrum or Wish or whatever, that does something potentially game-breaking, since DMs can always just arbitrarily block any uses that they, personally, would find game-breaking, at their table. Before the fact with a house rule, as it comes up with a snap ruling, or after the fact with arbitrary in-game consequences.

[JoeJ]

I wasn't proposing it as a plan per se, just noting the quirk, mostly for the sake of anyone trying to "fix" the issue by altering Simulacrum and/or Wish.

If you wanted to make an actual plan out of this the intellect devourer would need to be controlled by someone friendly to you, and you'd need to have someone available to Resurrect you afterward.

Obviously you can mix and match these approaches, e.g. create a simulacrum of a mind flayer, have it create a bunch of intellect devourers and order them to obey you, then create a simulacrum of yourself and have one of the intellect devourers possess it. Since the intellect devourer "knows" all spells the simulacrum knows but isn't a simulacrum itself, it shouldn't have the simulacrum's inability to regain spell slots. Probably. It's really not very well-defined in RAW.

There's also the interesting quirk that the only types of wishes that you'd need to do this for are the ones that the spell description explicitly says the DM might twist and cause to be fulfilled in a way you didn't want. That remains true regardless of who or what is actually casting the spell.

[Eslin]

Actually, now that I've had a little more time to think about it, I'd probably allow the infinite Simulacrum because by RAW only the first one obeys the caster's orders. To control any of the others you have to pass orders down the chain, and it will very quickly get to the point where it would have been better just to hire a bunch of reasonably intelligent underlings.

Also, if any of the simulacra get killed, the chain is broken at that point. The next simulacrum in line below that point becomes free, and might very well resent having been controlled like a puppet. <veg>

Doesn't work as a solution - the simulacra are you, so they want the same thing you do. The only order you need give them is 'choose whether you want to obey any future orders' and you're golden. No need to control them, if you want world peace then so do they.

[Tvtyrant]

Don't forget that Magic Jar is a thing, so the Wizard can technically still be better then everyone in the party at everything. One of the major villains in my campaign is a level 20 wizard who has possessed the Tarrasque.

[Eslin]

Don't forget that Magic Jar is a thing, so the Wizard can technically still be better then everyone in the party at everything. One of the major villains in my campaign is a level 20 wizard who has possessed the Tarrasque.

I'm a huge fan of that, but it works best with a Find Steed mount. Have the horse possess the BBEG, no risk to yourself, (note that it's humanoid only, so the Tarrasque is an invalid target), win campaign. Especially since unless the npc has class levels, your mount gets to use all their abilities.

[JoeJ]

Doesn't work as a solution - the simulacra are you, so they want the same thing you do. The only order you need give them is 'choose whether you want to obey any future orders' and you're golden. No need to control them, if you want world peace then so do they.

If they're you, then any of them that casts Simulacrum will instantly disappear because you can only have one of those active at a time.

But the spell description doesn't say that a simulacrum is you, it says that it's an illusory duplicate of you. You have to give it spoken orders, so it clearly doesn't know what you're thinking. Even if it starts out with all your memories, it is a different entity and its experiences after creation are different than yours. And if it starts out with your memories, it will also know what it is, which almost has to have some impact on its thought processes. At any given moment it might or might not have the same idea that you do about how to achieve a particular goal, or even what goals are worth pursuing. And the older it gets, the more its differences from you will increase.

I can totally see having a BBEG trying to create a massive chain of clones, and giving the PCs clues that they can win by killing one of the simulacra, which will result in a revolt by all the others below that point in the chain. Afterward, well I strongly doubt that any PC wizard is going to invest very much in pursuing a strategy that they themselves helped defeat.

[Eslin]

If they're you, then any of them that casts Simulacrum will instantly disappear because you can only have one of those active at a time.

But the spell description doesn't say that a simulacrum is you, it says that it's an illusory duplicate of you. You have to give it spoken orders, so it clearly doesn't know what you're thinking. Even if it starts out with all your memories, it is a different entity and its experiences after creation are different than yours. And if it starts out with your memories, it will also know what it is, which almost has to have some impact on its thought processes. At any given moment it might or might not have the same idea that you do about how to achieve a particular goal, or even what goals are worth pursuing. And the older it gets, the more its differences from you will increase.

I can totally see having a BBEG trying to create a massive chain of clones, and giving the PCs clues that they can win by killing one of the simulacra, which will result in a revolt by all the others below that point in the chain. Afterward, well I strongly doubt that any PC wizard is going to invest very much in pursuing a strategy that they themselves helped defeat.

Its differences won't increase, it can't learn and change. It stays an exact mental copy of you at that point, forever - it'll stay good even if you go evil.

And you usually have to give spoken orders because the spell presumes you've copied a dragon or something with a different alignment - if you copy yourself you don't really need to give orders, since it wants the same thing you do.

[JoeJ]

Its differences won't increase, it can't learn and change. It stays an exact mental copy of you at that point, forever - it'll stay good even if you go evil.

And you usually have to give spoken orders because the spell presumes you've copied a dragon or something with a different alignment - if you copy yourself you don't really need to give orders, since it wants the same thing you do.

By that argument, though, it doesn't want what you want now, only what you wanted at the moment it was created. So if you take your simulacrum into the dungeon it has no idea what spells you want to cast on which targets. You yourself didn't know that until you got there and found out what the situation was.

Nothing in the spell description indicates any kind of presumption about what was duplicated, much less specifies that a duplicate of the caster - which might plausibly be the most common use, after all - is an exception to the way it works.

[Eslin]

By that argument, though, it doesn't want what you want now, only what you wanted at the moment it was created. So if you take your simulacrum into the dungeon it has no idea what spells you want to cast on which targets. You yourself didn't know that until you got there and found out what the situation was.

Nothing in the spell description indicates any kind of presumption about what was duplicated, much less specifies that a duplicate of the caster - which might plausibly be the most common use, after all - is an exception to the way it works.

I never said it was an exception. I said it gives you the ability to order your simulacra around, but that if it's a clone of yourself you don't need to as long as you're a good person. You want to create world peace, it wants to create world peace. And considering you're producing another 15000 duplicates a day at least, I'm not sure it matters if their goals become outdated as long as they're generally good goals, you'll have another hundred thousand of them with fresh goals by week's end.

[JoeJ]

I never said it was an exception. I said it gives you the ability to order your simulacra around, but that if it's a clone of yourself you don't need to as long as you're a good person. You want to create world peace, it wants to create world peace. And considering you're producing another 15000 duplicates a day at least, I'm not sure it matters if their goals become outdated as long as they're generally good goals, you'll have another hundred thousand of them with fresh goals by week's end.

You can house rule it that way if you like. It's not RAW (not that RAW is necessarily a thing in 5e). But 15,000 a day is quite a lot, considering that there are only 14,400 rounds in a day. How do you get world peace out of thousands of endlessly replicating Von Neumann simulacra? That sounds more like a Treehouse of Horror episode.

[pwykersotz]

I never said it was an exception. I said it gives you the ability to order your simulacra around, but that if it's a clone of yourself you don't need to as long as you're a good person. You want to create world peace, it wants to create world peace. And considering you're producing another 15000 duplicates a day at least, I'm not sure it matters if their goals become outdated as long as they're generally good goals, you'll have another hundred thousand of them with fresh goals by week's end.

Wizard: "You guys won't turn against me, will you?"
Clone: "Of course not, I'm you. We all want what's best."

http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8maikJ7kq1rafdwyo2_500.gif

Don't get me wrong, the spell as written does what you say, but I've never played with a DM who wouldn't turn that on its head. And I'm not a DM who wouldn't turn it on its head. Not all the time, mind you. After all, it's not fun for anyone if the player doesn't feel like they can use their power most of the time.

[Eslin]

You can house rule it that way if you like. It's not RAW (not that RAW is necessarily a thing in 5e). But 15,000 a day is quite a lot, considering that there are only 14,400 rounds in a day. How do you get world peace out of thousands of endlessly replicating Von Neumann simulacra? That sounds more like a Treehouse of Horror episode.

That's not a house rule. The simulacrum is a copy of the original creature, so it has the same personality (except it also has a 'friendly to you and those you designate' clause)

[MaxWilson]

I never said it was an exception. I said it gives you the ability to order your simulacra around, but that if it's a clone of yourself you don't need to as long as you're a good person. You want to create world peace, it wants to create world peace. And considering you're producing another 15000 duplicates a day at least, I'm not sure it matters if their goals become outdated as long as they're generally good goals, you'll have another hundred thousand of them with fresh goals by week's end.

Where in the spell does it say that the simulacrum wants what you want? I see where it says it has your statistics, but I see no indication that it possesses your desires and goals, or indeed any goals at all. It's an illusion, a snow-based reflection which obeys your spoken commands; what makes you think it's a clone?

[Eslin]

Where in the spell does it say that the simulacrum wants what you want? I see where it says it has your statistics, but I see no indication that it possesses your desires and goals, or indeed any goals at all. It's an illusion, a snow-based reflection which obeys your spoken commands; what makes you think it's a clone?

'Otherwise, the illusion uses all the statistics of the creature it duplicates'. Other spells such as true polymorph (and all other spells which create/change/copy statistics but keep personality/alignment intact) specifically say your statistics change but alignment and personality remain the same - which means that unless they're excluded, alignment and personality are part of your statistics.

[MaxWilson]

'Otherwise, the illusion uses all the statistics of the creature it duplicates'. Other spells such as true polymorph (and all other spells which create/change/copy statistics but keep personality/alignment intact) specifically say your statistics change but alignment and personality remain the same - which means that unless they're excluded, alignment and personality are part of your statistics.

That doesn't follow. In fact, if other spells specifically distinguish between statistics and personality/alignment, that's an indication that RAW considers personality separate from statistics, not part and parcel.

[Eslin]

That doesn't follow. In fact, if other spells specifically distinguish between statistics and personality/alignment, that's an indication that RAW considers personality separate from statistics, not part and parcel.

And if your DM rules that, order them with 'Obey me and anyone further up the simulacrum chain and do your best to further the greater good, ignoring all orders that you have reason to suspect do not serve the cause of good. This order takes precedence over any future order, even an order that claims to take precedence over this.'

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Eslin what damn relevance did this have to God-wizard gameplay anyway?

you dont have to argue simulacrum in all of the threads!

[Eslin]

Well, simulacrum's a useful tool for the god wizard, but all I did is mention it, they started arguing.

[Ralanr]

Well, simulacrum's a useful tool for the god wizard, but all I did is mention it, they started arguing.

A common occurrence among forums.

[Elbacone]

Right, so back on topic, what spells, besides simulacrum ;), will put the wizard back on the throne to shape the battlefield aka universe as a god like being?

[TheDeadlyShoe]

I think Sleet Storm is a good candidate (Concentration up to 1 minute).

An 80-foot diameter is huge, and on top of the obscured vision, difficult terrain, and the dex-checks to fall over every turn it forces concentration checks against your spell DC every turn. Brutal against pretty much every target.

Wall of Stone also has a lot of potential, since you can shape it as you please. Make yourself a battlement, giving the party excellent cover and restricting the ability of the enemy to reach them at the same time. It's also a great answer to many possible terrain problems, chasms, etc.

[Tvtyrant]

(note that it's humanoid only, so the Tarrasque is an invalid target)

Well that sucks. Whatever, going to have to make an Epic level spell for it I guess. I already have like 60, one more shouldn't hurt...

[MaxWilson]

Well that sucks. Whatever, going to have to make an Epic level spell for it I guess. I already have like 60, one more shouldn't hurt...

Or you could just Polymorph the Tarrasque into a humanoid, Magic Jar it, and then Dispel the Polymorph. I think that should work.

[JoeJ]

Or you could just Polymorph the Tarrasque into a humanoid, Magic Jar it, and then Dispel the Polymorph. I think that should work.

And if you can somehow pull that off against the tarrasque (+9 WIS and CHA saves, advantage on all saves vs. magic, and legendary resistance that lets it auto-save 3x per day) you deserve to have it work.

[MaxWilson]

And if you can somehow pull that off against the tarrasque (+9 WIS and CHA saves, advantage on all saves vs. magic, and legendary resistance that lets it auto-save 3x per day) you deserve to have it work.

In the original post I think it was an enemy NPC, so I think it's safe to assume that whatever he did, he got lucky or otherwise had the resources to make it work. Contagion may have been a factor, for all we know. The important point is that RAW it's possible without even any custom spells.

Quoting:


Don't forget that Magic Jar is a thing, so the Wizard can technically still be better then everyone in the party at everything. One of the major villains in my campaign is a level 20 wizard who has possessed the Tarrasque.

So TVTyrant's players can't claim he is breaking any rules.

P.S. Note that Magic Jar comes with a built-in Achilles Heel, which is good for villains.

[Eslin]

And if you can somehow pull that off against the tarrasque (+9 WIS and CHA saves, advantage on all saves vs. magic, and legendary resistance that lets it auto-save 3x per day) you deserve to have it work.

Oh, that's easy. Just contagion it to get rid of the legendaries (and keep it stunned while you set stuff up), then contagion it again with disadvantage on the relevant save.


In the original post I think it was an enemy NPC, so I think it's safe to assume that whatever he did, he got lucky or otherwise had the resources to make it work. Contagion may have been a factor, for all we know. The important point is that RAW it's possible without even any custom spells.

Quoting:



So TVTyrant's players can't claim he is breaking any rules.

P.S. Note that Magic Jar comes with a built-in Achilles Heel, which is good for villains.

Someone beat me to the contagion thing! And the downsides to Magic Jar are pretty much circumventable with find steed, but that's a bard trick =/

[Tvtyrant]

Or you could just Polymorph the Tarrasque into a humanoid, Magic Jar it, and then Dispel the Polymorph. I think that should work.

Thanks! That will work just fine >:D

For those interested in how she pulled it off: Elven ruler of a major empire. Before I knew it wasn't a target for magic jar I had already set them up riding griffons and hitting it with hundreds of spells over several weeks until it worked. The empire stockpiled a lot of super weapons like Tarrasque casters because they feared another inter-dimensional invasion.