Possession as PC

[Oniyoru]

I've been working on a build of a Celadrin Bard for my wife,
One of the ideas was as a physical weak character, with high mental stats, but with 2 cohorts willing to lend their bodies for the missions.
She's very sticky to roleplay, so no need for minmax and meta, I just to find something that actually works.


I did some research here and found two recent threads, but still I dont think I got a solution.
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?657867-Fiend-of-Possession-is-there-something-new-in-2023
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?657789-Magic-Jar-Build


.Fiend of Possession has been hard to enter, specially as a Celadrin.

.Magic Bar seems very frail. Any way to deal with "protect your body" and "out of range" situation for example?

.Fusion is psion.

Actually everything also take a while to start kick in, but maybe thats not something that can be worked around.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Ghost savage progression (http://rpg.nobl.ca/archive.php?x=dnd/sp/20040117a)?

[Nihilarian]

As an outsider, Celadrin should be on the fast track to fiend of possession. You need a ritual to change your alignment, which is available somewhere. Savage Species? Somewhere in 3.0 i think.

[Crake]

Considering that there is a celestial parallel to fiendish possession from the fiendish codex called celestial channeling in BoED, and the possession rules from fiendish codex are basically just an extension of the fiend of possession class features, I don't see why you wouldn't be able make a fiend of possession variant for celestials to use channeling.

[ShurikVch]

To be a Lesser Celadrin, take Ghost template from Ghostwalk, select your feats from the Path of the Dominator (Ghost Ride, Expanded Possession, Corpse Malevolence, Minor Malevolence, Malevolence, Grand Malevolence)?

[Darg]

You need the "evil subtype" not an evil alignment.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

You need the "evil subtype" not an evil alignment.Just become a lawyer.

[rel]

With regards to magic jar, you don't actually need line of sight or line of effect to your body or the receptacle. So you can sequester your body and the jar in a sturdy box and give it to a subordinate to carry while you're jumped into another body.

that leaves you pretty hard to hurt, since a prospective enemy needs to first defeat your bodyguard and then break into the box to get at you. And since said bodyguards only job is keeping you safe, they can build for survivability.

[Crake]

You could in theory create a magic jar locket that, when activated, shrinks your body and sequesters it into the locket, then lets you possess other people from the gem embedded in the pendant, effectively turning it into a pseudo phylactery, and at a cost of 109,450gp for a continuous magic jar, shrink object, and gentle repose, nearly the same price >.> I’d probably add on another 900gp for a continuous nystul’s as well, to make it register as nonmagical

[Fero]

We were discussing in the Magic Jar thread how the spell interacts with outsiders whose souls and bodies are one and the same (like a manifested ghost). One possibility is that the outsider's body physically enters the jar and the host. This seems strange at first but is actually consistent with fiendish/angelic possession elsewhere.

We also discussed how Magic Jar works as an SLA. One option is that it simply lets you directly possess a foe (as you don't need the jar/focus). Putting these together, you could conceivably make an outsider who somehow obtains Magic Jar as an SLA and thereby directly possess people.

[Crake]

We were discussing in the Magic Jar thread how the spell interacts with outsiders whose souls and bodies are one and the same (like a manifested ghost). One possibility is that the outsider's body physically enters the jar and the host. This seems strange at first but is actually consistent with fiendish/angelic possession elsewhere.

We also discussed how Magic Jar works as an SLA. One option is that it simply lets you directly possess a foe (as you don't need the jar/focus). Putting these together, you could conceivably make an outsider who somehow obtains Magic Jar as an SLA and thereby directly possess people.

You could get away without using the focus by using spell to power erudite, and then using a character without a dual nature. Native outsiders dont qualify, but half fiends/celestials can (not always, they are listed as “usually” native), and I believe they have a savage progression, so you can nab that for little to no investment. Remember elementals also qualify as not having a dual nature, and also come with the benefit of being immune to a bunch of stuff

[Darg]

The jar isn't a material component/focus so it's existence for the spell to work is non-negotiable.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

The jar isn't a material component/focus so it's existence for the spell to work is non-negotiable.Err...


Components: V, S, F

...

By casting magic jar, you place your soul in a gem or large crystal (known as the magic jar), leaving your body lifeless.

...

Focus: A gem or crystal worth at least 100 gp.Looks like it's the spell's focus to me.

[Darg]

Err...

Looks like it's the spell's focus to me.

The focus isn't stated to actually be the magic jar. The RAW is that it can be the jar because it is a gem, but isn't required to be so.

[Crake]

The focus isn't stated to actually be the magic jar. The RAW is that it can be the jar because it is a gem, but isn't required to be so.

Raw is irrelevant here, as we’re already talking lore based extrapolation of the rules, not raw.

[Darg]

Raw is irrelevant here, as we’re already talking lore based extrapolation of the rules, not raw.

It's not irrelevant unless house ruling is on the table. At which point creating a custom ability is not off the table and probably a better fit for the concept.

[Fero]

The focus isn't stated to actually be the magic jar. The RAW is that it can be the jar because it is a gem, but isn't required to be so.

I see what you mean. However, I would not want to try and convince a DM that the crystal/gem focus and the crystal/gem that is the focus of the spell are different things.

[Crake]

It's not irrelevant unless house ruling is on the table. At which point creating a custom ability is not off the table and probably a better fit for the concept.

House rules and homebrew arent the same thing, and one is much easier than the other.

[Quertus]

House rules and homebrew arent the same thing, and one is much easier than the other.

Out of curiosity, which do you consider easier?

[Fero]

Out of curiosity, which do you consider easier?

House rules, in this context, just refers to asking the DM and players what they think a rule means (applying RaW, RaI, etc.). If the group (especially the DM) agrees with the interpretation that you want, then you are done. Importantly, I recommend explaining why you are asking and what you plan to do. That way, everything is above board and no one feels tricked or burned.

Homebrewing takes more work as you have to build and balance the ability. Unfortunately, I find that many DMs will nerf any home brew ability once it becomes even a little bit good.

[Crake]

House rules, in this context, just refers to asking the DM and players what they think a rule means (applying RaW, RaI, etc.). If the group (especially the DM) agrees with the interpretation that you want, then you are done. Importantly, I recommend explaining why you are asking and what you plan to do. That way, everything is above board and no one feels tricked or burned.

Homebrewing takes more work as you have to build and balance the ability. Unfortunately, I find that many DMs will nerf any home brew ability once it becomes even a little bit good.

Yeah, homebrew is definitely much more work, though in my opinion, far more rewarding as a DM. I dont think I’ve ever nerfed a homebrew I’ve made though, feels like it defeats the point. Usually the homebrew are made in the context of a specific campaign, so them being overpowered is never an issue for the next game anyway

[Darg]

I see what you mean. However, I would not want to try and convince a DM that the crystal/gem focus and the crystal/gem that is the focus of the spell are different things.

I would have thought it harder to convince a DM that you don't need a magic jar for magic jar to work even if you somehow remove the focus component. I mean, the spell specifically tells you that you can't cast the spell unless you have a jar:


To cast the spell, the magic jar must be within spell range and you must know where it is, though you do not need line of sight or line of effect to it.

No jar, no cast.


House rules and homebrew arent the same thing, and one is much easier than the other.

I didn't confuse them, but I didn't realize writing a few lines of text was difficult. In my mind, making a custom spell with a near identical function with one that already exists is as easy as a hand wave. Is it that trying to get a DM to acquiesce to a custom spell/ability seems more difficult than trying to convince a DM to let a spell work in a way that basically rewrites the spell?

[Crake]

I didn't confuse them, but I didn't realize writing a few lines of text was difficult. In my mind, making a custom spell with a near identical function with one that already exists is as easy as a hand wave. Is it that trying to get a DM to acquiesce to a custom spell/ability seems more difficult than trying to convince a DM to let a spell work in a way that basically rewrites the spell?

I come at almost all of these scenarios from the point of view of a DM, so no, it's got nothing to do with convincing the DM of anything, since I AM the DM.

[Fero]

I would have thought it harder to convince a DM that you don't need a magic jar for magic jar to work even if you somehow remove the focus component. I mean, the spell specifically tells you that you can't cast the spell unless you have a jar:



No jar, no cast.



I didn't confuse them, but I didn't realize writing a few lines of text was difficult. In my mind, making a custom spell with a near identical function with one that already exists is as easy as a hand wave. Is it that trying to get a DM to acquiesce to a custom spell/ability seems more difficult than trying to convince a DM to let a spell work in a way that basically rewrites the spell?

I think we are talking about two questions.

1- Is the focus crystal/gem of the spell the magic jar? I believe it would be difficult to convince most DMs that you can use any crystal/gem in range as the jar so long as you possess a qualifying focus.

2- Given that the jar/focus are one and the same, what happens if you cast the spell as an SLA such that you don't need the focus? I believe one possible answer to this is that you can simply possess directly. I believe another (probably better) is that you still need a gem/crystal for the jar, but not necessarily one worth 100 gp. Another option is that the spell just doesn't work.

[Darg]

I come at almost all of these scenarios from the point of view of a DM, so no, it's got nothing to do with convincing the DM of anything, since I AM the DM.

Same here. It's really just basically the same thing to me.


I think we are talking about two questions.

1- Is the focus crystal/gem of the spell the magic jar? I believe it would be difficult to convince most DMs that you can use any crystal/gem in range as the jar so long as you possess a qualifying focus.

2- Given that the jar/focus are one and the same, what happens if you cast the spell as an SLA such that you don't need the focus? I believe one possible answer to this is that you can simply possess directly. I believe another (probably better) is that you still need a gem/crystal for the jar, but not necessarily one worth 100 gp. Another option is that the spell just doesn't work.

1) the spell doesn't say it is. Why would it be difficult? It is what the spell says and makes more sense than #2. It makes sense to use the focus as the magic jar as it is what is described being capable of being a magic jar, but so can any other gem or crystal within the spell's range. Unlike a spell like scrying, magic jar actually requires a magic jar to function directly in the spell description text.

2) this relies on #1 being what you want it to be for #2 to end as you say it does. However, it does not negate the very text in the description. If you could imagine a world where the spell was designed without a focus but everything else was the exact same, would you really believe that the spell still doesn't require an actual gem/crystal? Again bringing up scrying, it is a spell that would work the way you say magic jar should without a focus as it doesn't mention using a material object in the description.

[Feantar]

While I understand this isn't pathfinder, this body/soul duality thing is specifically addressed in PFs possession (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/p/possession) spell. You might want to read it, either as an option to backport, or just inspiration.

[Oniyoru]

Sry Real Life happened and I couldnt keep track of it for a few days...but lets go

Yea I've avoiding homebrewing, and been trying to stick as much as possible to RAW. (I know some house rules are necessary here and there)
Even though its her solo now, it may not be forever as we tend to crossover a lot.


Ghost savage progression (http://rpg.nobl.ca/archive.php?x=dnd/sp/20040117a)?
I really didnt remember Ghost did anything but Telekinesis :p
I dun think she'll buy this one, but maybe its an option.


Considering that there is a celestial parallel to fiendish possession from the fiendish codex called celestial channeling in BoED, and the possession rules from fiendish codex are basically just an extension of the fiend of possession class features, I don't see why you wouldn't be able make a fiend of possession variant for celestials to use channeling.
A bit on homebrewing, but indeed this sounds very interesting...
However is Celadrin outsider (native)? I dun find anything, checked the SRD and just looks like another elf on rules.


To be a Lesser Celadrin, take Ghost template from Ghostwalk, select your feats from the Path of the Dominator (Ghost Ride, Expanded Possession, Corpse Malevolence, Minor Malevolence, Malevolence, Grand Malevolence)?
Ok I dun know this one, is it 3.0?


While I understand this isn't pathfinder, this body/soul duality thing is specifically addressed in PFs possession (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/p/possession) spell. You might want to read it, either as an option to backport, or just inspiration.
Far better than Magic Jar for this.

[ShurikVch]

Ok I dun know this one, is it 3.0?
Yes, but with 3.5 update (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/Ghostwalkv35Conversion.zip)
There is the Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostwalk) and WotC Product Spotlight (https://web.archive.org/web/20160415051239/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd%2Fps%2F20030601a) articles for it

[Oniyoru]

Thanks, gonna check it.