Thrall of juiblex

[Yklikt]

Does the class have a limit on slime summoning?

[Darrin]

Does the class have a limit on slime summoning?

No. It's at-will, although the duration is equal to your class level in Thrall of Juiblex.

[Uncle Pine]

Once per day. Look ar Dorn in Elder evils.
Sample statted NPCs are often not legal, skipping prerequisites on feats, PrCs or having slightly wrong modifiers on saves, skills and the like. They're hardly a good source of rulings, especially when conflicting with the original source.

Regarding the issue on hand, Thralls of Juiblex have no limits on how slimes they can summon in any given day, although they can only summon demons once per day.

[Yklikt]

Would'nt Elder Evils be like an update though? Since it is published later.

[daremetoidareyo]

Would'nt Elder Evils be like an update though? Since it is published later.

statblocks aren't rules text.

[Keral]

I suppose it would if it had rewritten the whole class.

As it stands I'm not sure it has much weight. I never gave particular attention to sample statted NPC, but looking at Dorn, I'm inclined to agree with Uncle Pine in regards to their reliability.

A 7th level Thrall of Juiblex like Dorn should have alter self at will, for example, but he doesn't. There is polymorph listed in his table, but not in the description, and polymorph is something a Thrall gets at level 8, anyway.
So I'd hardly consider it a source for determining whether those ability are usable at will or 1/day...

[Segev]

Yeah, just to be 100% clear as to why a statblock of an NPC written in a later book isn't an "updated printing" of the class(es) he has, imagine if an NPC had sorcerer levels and were listed as having wizard spell count per day. We'd all agree that was a typo or a mistake, not assume that the entire sorcerer class had been rewritten and updated to use a wizard's progression of spells/day.

[Nikker]

statblocks aren't rules text.

Personally I believe they are, if they appear on official material.
Plus, we have Monte Cook (author of the Book of Vile Darkness) answering about this matter here www . tapatalk.com/groups/okayyourturn/thrall-of-juiblex-and-the-armies-of-ooze-t6318 . html and, most relevant of all, Juiblex HIMSELF has this ability:
"Summon Oozes (Sp): Once per day, Juiblex can automatically summon 1d6 gray oozes, 1d4 ochre jellies, or 1d2 black puddings."
archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20021206

I think it's plain to see: a servant of a god, or a thrall of a demon, should not be able to summon more creatures per day than the entity who granted them that power of summoning creatures in the first place.
It's clearly 1 per day.

[Nifft]

Personally I believe they are, if they appear on official material.
Plus, we have Monte Cook (author of the Book of Vile Darkness) answering about this matter here www . tapatalk.com/groups/okayyourturn/thrall-of-juiblex-and-the-armies-of-ooze-t6318 . html and, most relevant of all, Juiblex HIMSELF has this ability:
"Summon Oozes (Sp): Once per day, Juiblex can automatically summon 1d6 gray oozes, 1d4 ochre jellies, or 1d2 black puddings."
archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20021206

I think it's plain to see: a servant of a god, or a thrall of a demon, should not be able to summon more creatures per day than the entity who granted them that power of summoning creatures in the first place.
It's clearly 1 per day.

Those are "should" arguments, about the intention of the writers.

Unfortunately, what should be true isn't always what is true -- as an example, the rules should be unambiguous, but they're not.

If you have a chance, look up what the game designer guy who wrote the Shadowcaster had to say about how much the editors of the Tome of Magic changed what he'd written.

Whose intention should matter more -- the editor, or the original designer? How do you know that the unlimited slime summoning wasn't the result of rigorous play-testing in a tightly balanced environment where each ability was carefully evaluated and priced?


Note that I don't really think anything in this game was ever rigorously play-tested in a tightly balanced environment where each ability was carefully evaluated and priced. But I do know for a fact that editors have made deliberate, major changes to class mechanics, sometimes for good reasons and sometimes for no apparent reason at all.

It's called RAW, but it's often touched by too many chefs.

[Kelb_Panthera]

NPC statblocks are definitely to be taken with a hefty gain of salt, given that the examples for many PrCs fail to qualify for the class they're supposed to exemplify. I wouldn't take the npc block from entirely another source as proof of anything except the writer knowing that PrC exists, much less presume it intends an update.

[Thurbane]

Thread necromancy aside, I'm going to agree with Kelb: NPC stat blocks are notoriously fraught with errors, and should never be held up as a primary RAW source IMHO.

[Nikker]

Whose intention should matter more -- the editor, or the original designer? How do you know that the unlimited slime summoning wasn't the result of rigorous play-testing in a tightly balanced environment where each ability was carefully evaluated and priced?

Note that I don't really think anything in this game was ever rigorously play-tested in a tightly balanced environment where each ability was carefully evaluated and priced. But I do know for a fact that editors have made deliberate, major changes to class mechanics, sometimes for good reasons and sometimes for no apparent reason at all.


The only reason to do such a nonsense is maybe the "system mastery" thing, "I put bugs in the manuals so "smart players" can find them and come in their pants ehrr I mean be very satisfied of themselves for breaking the game using obvious flaws and bugs", kinda like the cancer mage + festering anger.
I stand on my position anyway that no demon could grant more powers than he himself has.

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Wonder: The Lord of Slimes does not like the undead. HAIL JUIBLEX! PUT DOWN THE UNCLEAN!