> 5e is well-balanced and made by people who know what

> martial fag lost an argument in /5eg/
> create new thread just to cry

My simulacrum will cast Wish for more simulacrum, and you can't stop me.

>>51004527
That spell is only abusable if you're a Shit GM who allows Simulacrum to cast Simulacrum. The spell itself takes so much time and resources that you're almost better off hiring an NPC Wizard.

>>51004545
Your DM will, though.

so, simulcra of simulcra of simulcra of....?

>>51004568
No, the wizard makes a simulacrum of himself at level 17+ with none of his slots expended except the 7th level slot used to make a simulacrum. The simulacrum uses Wish to instantly make a simulacrum of the original wizard. Each simulacrum is a copy of the original wizard to keep gaining access to the 9th level slot the original wizard has not expended.

>>51004568
Even if a GM foolishly allows this, they can still fuck with their Players by turning it into a game of telephone. You can only issue orders to a single simulacrum, who then issues orders to their simulacrum, and so on.

Also, again, 1,500 GP and 12 hours to cast the spell.

>>51004608
> "Okay, I'm repeating this process for days until I have a simulacrum army."

>>51004601
Another possibility might be cutting it in two and then repairing each half to full HP.

>>51004630
>"Not if you want to keep playing in this group."

>>51004646
"Are you sure about that...?"
*moving your hand over your DM's jean*

>>51004637
Unless it's a simulacrum of a gelatinous cube that reproduces by budding, I don't see how that could possibly work. Cutting a creature in half kills it, and when the simulacrum drops to 0 hitpoints it disappears.

And no, you can't cut something in half using "nonlethal damage".

>>51004527
Literally all you've ever had to do is tell the player they can't just BUY that much powdered ruby. They'll have to go on a multiple-session-spanning adventure to acquire it.

Also, NPCs casters should never not prepare dispel magic. They're supposed to be smart, DM them as smart.

>>51004637
The way I described is completely by the rules instead of your way that's of questionable validity.

>>51004630
>DM turns you into the BBEG
>Rumors of a crazy wizard amassing a clone army
>Young adventurers arrive hoping to stop him before he can execute order 66

Sounds pretty fun desu

>>51004637
How do you intend to repair two puddles of molten snow?

>>51004658
>"Hands off, or I'll make sure you never play as much as a game of Snakes and Ladders in this town ever again."

>>51004666
Wish?
Fabricate?

Wizard has no sense of right and wrong.

Dispel magic can be counterspell.

>>51004706
And then they'll just counterspell your counterspell.

>>51004687
> he failed his seduction check agianst a virgin neckbeard DM

>>51004718
>I'm gay, so everyone else is gay too!
Fuck off, faggot.

>>51004716
Then the simulacrum counterspell your counterspell counterspell.

>>51004550
>That spell is only abusable if you don't stop the player from doing something that he can do both RAW and RAI
Sure, but that doesn't turn the spell less broken and the idiots who made it less fags.

>>51004727
Anything can happen with a natural 20

>>51004731
And then the DM hits you over the head with a baseball bat for being so full of shit.

>>51004745
Not in 5e

>>51004745
False, skills rolls don't crit.

>>51004745
Even in 3.5 that wasn't true.

>>51004665
>Cutting a creature in half kills
If it's a creature made of flesh and bones, it will. This one is a snowman in shape of human being, you can cut snowman in half without destroying it. Besides, one smooth slice with two handed blade is what? 2d10 damage maximum?

File: 200_s.gif (58KB, 333x200px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 333x200px

>>51004727
Goddamn /pol/ needs to go.

You all quickly forget that you need significant amounts of ice or snow, and somewhere to keep it for 12 hours where it wont melt in the process of you casting it.

That and a single interruption fucks you up.

Does your character have the luxury of 12 uninterrupted hours of sub-zero temperatures?

>>51004776
>NUUUUHHHHH WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE EMBRACE MY GAYNESS
Fuck off.

>>51004775
Didn't someone in /tg/ once spam spare the dying cantrip while slowly cutting off a creature head?

>>51004775
>it can take actions and be affected as a normal creature
You cut it in half, it drops to 0 HP and reverts to ordinary snow.

>>51004762
2E fag here, as far as I know skill checks have always been at or below for sucess. So if anything the best possible roll would be a 1.

>>51004784
1. Subzero temperatures are fucking nothing, there're low as fuck levels spells to resist that for long periods of time
2. At the level you can cast simulacrum you can also teleport to a plane of Ice if you want or to the coldest place in your plane
3. Same for a place in where nobody will interrupt you

We're talking 17th+ levels here

>>51004775
>can otherwise be affected as a normal creature.
>Uses all the statistics of the creature it duplicates.

You might as well argue "it's made of snow so it shouldn't take damage from poison!" or "it's made of snow and doesn't have a real mind so it should be immune to mind-affecting magic."

At which point, the GM says "it's made of snow, so it is actually just a snowman and you were just hallucinating when you thought that it could move and talk and cast spells".

>>51004827
>plane of Ice if you want or to the coldest place in your plane
You mean where all the monsters are?

>>51004793
/tg/ had done that and much worse. Another memorable one was keeping alive via spamming Iron Heart Surge because death is "condition lasting more than 1 round"

>>51004812
Hmm, fair point. We need to copy something that can live through being cut in half. Troll maybe?

>>51004790
Have you forgotten what website you're on? We're all faggots here, fella.

>>51004893
Yes, but sometimes there are awesome faggots, like Freddy Mercury.

>>51004893
>everyone else is gay
>no really, they are
Way to project, cocksucker.

> Complaining about balance with late game spells.

If you're worried about balance at those levels, you're playing the wrong game.

File: Evil_genius.jpg (83KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 1024x576px

>>51004790
Oh man you are misunderstanding me.
I don't give an actual fuck if you brace it or not, but you are just going to have to accept that gay folks exist. I don't know how it effects you so negatively, but I don't give a shit if it does. Your kind just slows down threads and makes shit uncomfortable for a respected demographic here. So basically, I'm not mad that you don't like gays. I'm mad that you are shitposting and making my favorite board sound like /pol/
I don't want /tg/ to be /pol/, and with the amount of inteligent conversation and thinly veiled fetish discussion that happens here I'm sure you don't want /pol/ to become /tg/
Go back to your home board or lurk.

Also you are probably offended by gays because you are a little gay yourself. It's OK, I know that's hard for you. But you don't need to take it out on people anonymously on the internet.

>>51005155
>I don't give an actual fuck if you brace it or not
Oh, sure you don't. That's why you don't throw a bitchfit every time someone calls out a scenario where homosexuality is treated as the norm as the bullshit that it is, right?

>>51005188

You sure do care a lot about men fucking each other in their boy pussies. That's pretty gay dude.

>>51005217
Anon, if you get upset and scream /pol/ every time you see someone demonstrating casual bigotry, you really shouldn't be on 4chan.

>>51005188
Hey man, I've said my peace. But
>I don't care if you embrace gay folks
>I care that you are shit posting

Since your reading comprehension seems to be lacking I made a tl:dr version of my message. Just for you. :^)

>>51005236

If you get upset whenever some demonstrates casual faggotry, you really shouldn't be on 4chan.

>>51005254
Fair point.

>>51004827
Well do those, and see how well it goes

>>51005266
As well as a martial trying to make some arrows in his room in the inn if you go with the "entirely subjective of GM's asspulls". If you prefer I can create a cold plane in where there're zero monsters because I created it for myself and cast simulacrum in there.

>>51004847
>At which point, the GM says "it's made of snow, so it is actually just a snowman and you were just hallucinating when you thought that it could move and talk and cast spells".
The moral of the story is, don't snort crushed ruby while casting Suggestion on yourself. Drugs are bad.

>>51005448
>Instead of drugs, the aristocracy have started hiring "party wizards" to cast mind-affecting magic on them.
Just try not to have a bad trip...

>>51004527
>Casting Time: 12 hours

>>51004527
By RAW, since "a piece of the creature's body" has no listed monetary value, wouldn't it be included in a spell component pouch? For every creature in the multiverse? What kind of mega-wizard makes these pouches?

Also, what happens if you make a Simulacrum out of one of the several artifacts that are literally pieces of a god's body?

Outside of using Wish to cast Simulacrum, a wizard at 20th level with 20 Constitution can make 7 clones:
>91 HP
>45 HP
>22 HP
>11 HP
>5 HP
>2 HP
>1 HP
This is still pretty useful, but they are idiots who can barely cast spells.

With Wish they are basically telling the DM "fuck me, fuck me horribly" and should be using Clone and patience anyways.

>>51004551
Witnessed

>>51005741
Given that the needed component requires interaction with those no-cost elements; and how the spell description is pretty clear about all the parts being central to the spell; and the fact that you have to do the spell over 12 hours with the creature in question within an arms length away for the entire process--I don't think you would be able to use a focus or that it'll ever really come up. If they're that close and that accessible you could just cut off a hair or swab up some saliva, right?

>Also, what happens if you make a Simulacrum out of one of the several artifacts that are literally pieces of a god's body?
A much more interesting question, but I don't think you would be able to successfully argue that tacit omnipresence counts as being within Touch distance.

>>51004527
This could all be avoided by not using retarded systems and/or getting better players.

>>51004550
> that spell is only abusable if you're a GM who doesn't pull Rule Zero out of his ass constantly instead of switching to a system that isn't broken

fixed that for you.

>>51006060
And that costs 10,5k gp and come to life naked. The last 3 will die from a light breeze since they dont even save if they reach 0 HP. And it takes round 6 days with 1 hour for the 3 meals of the day, 1 hour to prepare spells, and sleeping immediately after. At a normal pace it should take 7 days, making a clone per day.

>>51006831
>if the DM use something his legitimate entitled to use in order to prevent me from exploiting something in the game system, his a bad DM.

>>51006831
Nice try, this level of "abuse" is on the same level as Pun-Pun or Old Man Henderson. It's only possible if the GM is a retard who lets anything fly at the table even when it flies in the face of common sense.

Which is probably why it offends you so much.

>"D&D was a mistake."
-Gary Gygax

>>51004527

>each simulacrum gets weaker because they have half the max HP of whatever made it

>Each new simulacrum only obeys the simulacrum that made it forcing the wizard to send the order down the line

>Each simulacrum requires 12 hours of casting time and 1,500gp worth of components

>all in an effort to cast Wish a bunch of times.

>A DM's wet dream is to have a wizard cast wish and fuck up the wording.

Doesn't seem worth it to me.

>>51005558

I'm stealing that idea. thanks senpai

>>51004855
but does the troll have enough wizard levels to cast simulcrum?

Where is the problem here?

>the only retorts to a broken rule is arbitrarily punishing or limiting the player instead of admitting that the rule is broken

>>51007066
And what if that's the idea? given >>51006060, we can play telephone through 7 clones. If we have the original wizard send the wording for the wish down to the last wizard, that's seven successive fucking ups of the wording by the time it gets cast.

>>51007141
Basically the idea is that you can cast Wish to create and instant free simulacrum, which in turn casts Wish to make yet another instant free simulacrum of you, ad infitum.

There's nothing stopping you aside from your conscience and the inevitable slap across the face from the DM.

>>51007264
>Player exploits one of the few game breaking loop holes
>DM says no
>"F-FUCKING NAZI DM WON'T LET ME RUIN THE GAME FOR EVERYONE ELSE!"

There's no doubt it's completely broken, but what do you expect the DM to do? Just shrug and let you achieve apotheosis?

>>51004527
If you think it'll be exploited, just ban it. There are like three spells in 5e that are even worth banning (Wish, Simulacrum, and Clone) and not having them doesn't kneecap high-level casters in the slightest.

>>51007388
>There's no doubt it's completely broken, but what do you expect the DM to do?
Ban it completely.

>>51007020
I know this is just playing off of a meme, but that's more or less what his opinion was in the end of AD&D and its progeny (so 2e, 3.X, etc.).

The original intention was that AD&D was supposed to be this immutable thing, a set of universal convention and tournament rules like standardized rules for sports, and if you were playing a home game you'd play Basic and borrow AD&D rules when appropriate and as your group learned more of how the Basic game fit together. This is the period where people would ask about houserules in AD&D and he would get upset, before turning around and encouraging people to sideload group-chosen AD&D rules if they wanted a more complex game; it was a big miscommunication snafu in part because he couldn't see the bigger picture of how it all actually related, which was kind of a recurring theme whenever anyone would disagree with him about RPG stuff.

In the years before he died he was a big advocate of narrative-first systems (which isn't to say rules-lite). The impression I got was that he'd be a fan of stuff like Fantasy Flight's Star Wars system that has more of a structure around back-and-forth narrative momentum mechanics (while for example Fate just sort of throws the toolbox of Aspects and Fate points at players to fail or succeed with on their own).

>>51007402
That's what I'm saying. The DM has every right to say no to an exploit if it's going to ruin everyone else's time. The other guy was implying that that would constitute "arbitrarily punishing or limiting the player".

>>51007388
>cast Wish to create and instant free simulacrum, which in turn casts Wish to make yet another instant free simulacrum of you
If you cast Wish your Simulacrum won't have a 9th level spell slot and wouldn't be able to regain it. The idea is, do it normally and your Simulacrum would have a 9th level slot and the Simulacrum would be of you, not itself, and thus still have its own 9th level slot.

An easy RAW argument to circumvent this: Gaining control of a simulacrum counts as becoming more powerful, so the Wish spell fizzles and the slot is wasted.

>>51004608
1,500 gp isn't very much by the time you get 7th level spells
>>51004671
My DM did exactly this. We thought we were just seeing illusions of the BBEG until they all cast spells on us. It was complete bullshit

>>51007291
It's also worth mentioning that the DM gets to determine how effect the clone is at communicating and being a human in general.

By snowman illusion #7 it would be a dangerous waterhead.

>>51007540
No one in the D&D staff has confirmed if a simulacrum loses its spell slot to cast the spell that created it, but it is a valid interpretation of the RAW and RAI.

>>51008030
>It's also worth mentioning that the DM gets to determine how effect the clone is at communicating and being a human in general.
No, he doesn't.

>>51004601
If the first simulacrum (whom I'll call Sim) uses the Simulacrum spell, the next simulacrum (Sim') would be a copy of its creator--which would be Sim. Sim' would therefore not have a 9th level spell slot, since Sim had spent it. Sim' could create Sim'' by using an 8th-level slot to cast Simulacrum, but it can't use Wish, since it has the statistics of its creator, which means its 9th-level slot is spent. Finally, if the wizard is at 20th level, Sim'' can create Sim''' by using its last 7th-level spell slot to cast Simulacrum.

Of course, this is assuming your DM doesn't rule (quite justly) that ordering a creature which is an extension of yourself to cast Simulacrum counts as a use of Simulacrum, dispelling the first use.

There's also the issue that a 20th level wizard with +1 Con would have roughly 102 hit points. Sim' would have 51, Sim'' would have 25, Sim''' would have 12. If 20th-level characters are doing 20th-level things, Sim'' and Sim''' are fucked.

>>51004527

Anything the PCs can do their enemies can do, too.

This is what my favorite GM does. He's an exceptional powergamer and cheesemonger, but he only pulls it out if a player starts doing it first. Since he's better at it than we are, we just avoid it.

>>51006994
I wish it were on that level. Pun-Pun was actually impossible for a player to do, because he used a template that only NPCs in the Forgotten Realms settings g could use. This simulacrum bullshit is actually following the rules, both as written, and as interpreted by the creators.

Now you can always just do as I did when I still played D&D and just say "that's retarded, I'm changing that" but that can make spergs lose their shit, and as others have said already, homebrewing a problem away doesn't mean the system doesn't have that problem. Many GMs, especially new ones lack the confidence or willpower needed to tell their resident wizard powergamer "no".

>>51008565
Wish has it specifically written into its text that the GM should attempt to mess with it. "Casting Simulacrum via Wish or having your simulacrum do so counts as casting Simulacrum" is a pretty mild case.

>>51008266
And there we have it, why it doesn't work the way the abusers want it to.

Which is still not to say that it isn't abusive, just not as bad.

Also it isn't even an option until 17th level.

>>51008565
>Pun-Pun was actually impossible for a player to do, because he used a template that only NPCs in the Forgotten Realms settings g could use.

I don't think it's ever called out as being NPC-only, actually. Even if it were, the original creator only intended it to be a thought exercise, not an actual character, and fully expected DMs to throw physical objects at players who actually tried to play Pun-Pun.

>>51008266
five 7th lvl casting minimum wizards can fuck up a party before it realizes what's going on. Unless they're also a party of full casters of course

>>51008266
Sala
bim?

>>51008815
Each simulacrum would also have fewer spell slots than the previous. The first would have 1 fewer 7th-level slots, from its creator casting Simulacrum. The second would be missing a 7th-level slot and a 9th-level slot (from Sim casting Wish or 9th-level Simulacrum); the third would be missing a 7th-level slot, a 9th-level slot, and an 8th-level slot; and finally the fourth would have no spell slots above 6th level.

Not to disagree with you entirely, mind you. That's still a lot of extra spells. But I'm still in the camp that a simulacrum casting Simulacrum would necessitate the destruction of the first.

"You can cast any spell of 8th level or lower" is general. "If you cast this spell again, any currently active duplicates you created with this spell are instantly destroyed" is specific. As I interpret it, at least.

>>51004527
Hardly anybody is claiming that 5e is well-balanced. They ARE claiming that it was made by people who knoe what they're doing, but what they are doing is recreating the feel of 3e but with enough differences to justify buying new books.

>>51008925
The simulacrums create copies of the original.

>>51009201
Ah, I missed the "touch" range.

Still, I stand by my "it would destroy the initial simulacrum" stance.

File: T W I C E.png (338KB, 856x1250px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 856x1250px

>>51004545

As the DM, why would I want to? You've walked right into my trap.

Note: everything is a trap.

>>51009752

That's not even DM fiat either. The spell says the Simulacrum starts out friendly to you. It doesn't say jack shit about it --staying-- friendly.

>>51009777
>The spell says the Simulacrum starts out friendly
It says it "is" friendly. Even if it wasn't, it obeys commands, so it doesn't matter.

>>51004527
If this is really the best you can do, then they seem to have done a pretty good job with that edition.

>>51006193
You can only copy humanoids and beasts anyway. Deities are not going to be humanoid or beast type.
>>51007066
>each simulacrum gets weaker because they have half the max HP of whatever made it
Each one has the original wizard stand around so they make multiple copies of the original, so the HP doesn't continually decrease.

>Each new simulacrum only obeys the simulacrum that made it forcing the wizard to send the order down the line
This is where a major breakdown occurs. You see, each simulacrum acts on "your turn" in combat. Their creator's turn. None of the simulacrums roll initiative. They do not take a turn. So only the one you personally created can act in combat.

Out of combat, even one copy of a full spellcaster frees up a whole lot of bullshit you can do with the extra spells. What if it's a bard and you get infinite healing? The infinite loop is crazy even without directly participating in combat.

>>51008076
We don't technically know if the simulacrum comes into being with spell slots ready at all, but we kinda assume it does since previous versions could do that.

>>51008120
The DM kinda does. It's questionable whether the Sim can even pretend to be human, since it is actually a snowman with no ability to learn. How well does a simulacrum of the king pretend to be the king? I don't fucking know. The spell doesn't say shit about that, and most illusions talk about that kind of thing. I'm still split over whether it can act independently of receiving orders or not.

>>51008565
>This simulacrum bullshit is actually following the rules, both as written, and as interpreted by the creators.
I haven't really seen interpretation answers from JC about simulacrum much. It's still pretty fuzzy on that front. See above for RAW problems.

>>51009777
>>51009859
It also has your memories. If your Wizard is crazy enough to think up this scheme, any Simulacrum of him is probably going to teleport away before it can be given any commands so that it can do the same thing instead.

>>51007388
>"F-FUCKING NAZI DM WON'T LET ME RUIN THE GAME FOR EVERYONE ELSE!"


I shit myself laughing.

>>51010161
>It also has your memories.
It has the same appearance, half the HP, no equipment, and otherwise the same statistics. No mention of its personality, and thus no hint as to whether it has the original's memories. It also cannot learn.

If it doesn't have memories, it's less useful but more obedient. If it does have memories, you know what you do with your simulacrums.

>>51005155
Go away, redditor.

>>51004527
>We're gonna spend 1.5k gold for each of these fucking things
>Which have very limited spell use for that investment
>Because that's smart/reasonable

And then there's also this >>51008266, that by the 2nd one it'll have enough hp to maybe survive 1 round of combat. OP try explaining how this shit is even broken.

>>51009951
>Out of combat, even one copy of a full spellcaster frees up a whole lot of bullshit you can do with the extra spells. What if it's a bard and you get infinite healing? The infinite loop is crazy even without directly participating in combat.

But how practical is this in an actual game, to make this happen? It sounds like a lot of theory crafting to me that isn't really feasible in most games.

I sort of think that games should be designed around what actually happens in play and not what people can imagine on a forum.

>The DM kinda does. It's questionable whether the Sim can even pretend to be human, since it is actually a snowman with no ability to learn. How well does a simulacrum of the king pretend to be the king? I don't fucking know. The spell doesn't say shit about that, and most illusions talk about that kind of thing. I'm still split over whether it can act independently of receiving orders or not.

This is a spell that actually strikes me as more of an 'npc' spell than one that is intended for players. An evil wizard creating a simulacrum of the king (princess, whatever) and the players trying to figure it out and deal with it sounds like a pretty standard adventure.

>>51004736
Actually RAI the Simulacrum IS you (or whoever you Simulacred).
This stops the vast majority of abuses.

>>51005188
>a scenario where homosexuality is treated as the norm
You mean "every single human civilization since the dawn of time except those dictated by Abrahamic religions"?

Samurai, Spartans, and Vikings were playin' dick-hockey centuries before your dad squeezed you out of his withered dick.

>>51008565
>This simulacrum bullshit is actually following the rules, both as written, and as interpreted by the creators.
It really isn't.

For one, the exploit assumes that you'll be able to create an infinite amount of Sims w/ 9th level spell slots, assumes that you'll be able to control each Sim independently rather than down the lane, assumes that each one has the intelligence to cast Wish in a way that wouldn't fuck you over (which, btw, the PHB explicitly tells GMs is kosher), and assumes that everyone just forgets about the part where you're casting for 12 hours.

It's on the same level as the peasant railgun or horse-casting; it only works if you're stupid enough to manipulate the wording of things to your favor and are dealing with a GM who never puts his foot down.

>>51010281
You're an epic level adventurer. You carry astral diamonds in your back pocket. Wealth is not an issue

>>51010286
Oh, and for the Wish
>Simulacrum Wishes to cast Simulacrum
is the same as
>You cast Simulacrum
since the simulacrum is you, and casting a spell by referencing it with Wish is casting that spell.

In short, magic follows the magical rules of affinities and anaogies, where the same thing under different names is always the same thing, not cs coding rules.

>>51004922
I think he means more that everyone here is a fag. IE drawfags, tripfags, etc.

>>51010346
Not every epic level adventurer goes to other planes where the elves shit priceless rocks, or finds surplus stores stocked with astral diamonds. At that, loot is controlled by GM discretion, if he want's to keep your gold count down, then by all means he can. Or just, you know, make every combat encounter have 1-3 high dex glass-cannon enemies who target the simulacrums small hp pool, rendering their casting potential (only benefit) useless. You can do what you want, but doesn't stop the DM from using his infinite toolkit to make it not work.

>>51008120
He's the DM. Yes he does.

>>51010482
>hurr durr gm can ignore rules even when it would be retarded to do so and thats my whole argument

>>51010508
And you don't even have a counterargument other than "REFUSING TO LET ME BREAK THE GAME OVER MY KNEE IS RETARDED1!!!11!!!"

>>51010508
There is no rule about how effectively the simulacrum communicates or plays at being human. The DM has to rule on it. Whatever the DM rules on it can't break the rules, since there is no rule.

>>51004527
>Finally, there is a 33 percent chance that you are unable to ever cast Wish again if you suffer this stress
>Simulacrum casts Wish
>Fails roll
>Creates EXACT COPY of self
>Can somehow use Wish again
But that's not how it works, you retard.

>>51010508
The entire thread is about how a rules exploit can lead to the wizard potentially having dozens of spellcasting clones.

How would it be "retarded to do so" for the DM to rule against that? It seems like there's a very good reason to do so. Do you define "retarded" as "making exceptions to semi-rigid rules to serve the greater purpose and function of the game system"?

>>51010550
That only happens if you use Wish for something other than recreating a spell.

>>51010569
I define retarded as "trying to fuck the player over for trying to gain an advantage through the use of rules instead of outright banning the problematic rule".

>>51010478
The DM can just change how the spell works in the first place and avoid this entire dilemma. Arguing about how the DM can make the game atypical is a moot point; we can only use the game played as the books' suggest as a basis for debating anything, otherwise there's no point in discussing any of this shit.

>>51010586
Ah. I misread. Still, shouldn't be allowed to use it to create a simulacrum army, though.

>>51010608
>Fuck the baby, that bathwater has got to go!

>>51010608
>trust player not to abuse rule
>player abuses rule
>fuck the player over
>somehow you're the bad guy now

>>51004527
Here's one line that'll fix Simulacrum forever
>If the Simulacrum kills it's creator, it becomes it's creator.

>>51010645
>purposefully leave broken rules in
For what purpose?

>>51010713
Because you trust your players and want to show it. Clearly a mistake in this case, though.

>>51004527
The wording of the spells mentions of creatures and creature stats, but not class levels. If a simulacrum of an owlbear is a generic owlbear, by the same logic a simulacrum of a human would be just a generic human, even if the orginial had class levels.

>>51010713
To weed out THAT GUYS who feel as though your existence as a GM only goes about as far as to serve their purposes and enjoyment, even at the cost of everyone else's.

Using this method, my group managed to drop at least half a dozen shitheads who never came back.

>>51006953
>>if the DM use something his legitimate entitled to use in order to prevent me from exploiting something in the game system, his a bad DM.
It's not about the DM being a bad DM, it's about the system requiring the DM to do so makes the system a bad system.

File: 77876ff8046b75dea9153dd02f91b345.jpg (32KB, 564x433px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 564x433px

>>51011124
Can you name a system that requires no dm intervention and has no exploits?
I'm genuinely interested

>>51011124
This entire thread is based around theory-crafting that only works if the GM agrees with your lunacy and doesn't do anything that would exploit the obvious holes in your logic.

In an ideal situation where the GM signs off on it, sure, it could work that way. However, that literally applies to anything and everything the group does because the GM is a human, not a machine, and is given the authority to bend the rules if not bending them would cause the campaign to suffer.

>>51011401
Not him but off the top of my head.
>Call of Cthulhu
>Paranoia

>>51011427
Paranoia is a party game where everyone is automatically doomed.
>Call of Cthulhu
No.

File: goalposts.jpg (29KB, 300x240px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 300x240px

>>51011455
>Paranoia is a party game where everyone is automatically doomed.
Pic related
>Call of Cthulhu
>No.
What exploits exist within CoC?

>>51008266
>the next simulacrum (Sim') would be a copy of its creator--which would be Sim.
This is where you messed up. Sim' would be another copy of the original wizard. Which still has its 9th level spell slot.

>>51011659
Yeah, someone already pointed that out.

>>51009201
>>51009301

File: chillcover.jpg (144KB, 620x798px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 620x798px

>>51011496
Paranoia and games with overwhelmingly powerful evil forces that can only be beaten through plot-device or story elements, can't be compared to games where you are expected to mechanically defeat all your enemies with your class abilities.

You can't compare those sorts of games to systems like Dungeons and Dragons or even WoD.

>>51011830
You asked for games that required no DM/GM intervention and had no exploits.

I gave you two.

Either you can accept this and move on or you can continue moving the goalposts, at which point I'm going to have to end this discussion as you'll just continue to come up with more and more excuses to prove your point until the thread reaches bump limit.

So which is it going to be?

>Point out a problem in the rules of the game
>People bend over backwards to make excuses for it, call it an exploit, and insult anyone who implies that an obvious problem is, in fact, a problem.

And people wonder why RPGs universally have shitty rules. The community is so used to being abused that any attempt to better the situation is met with outright hostility. Anyone who argues against this with anything other than an explanation of why OP is mistaken about the way the rules work is just as big a problem as someone who would try to actually use this at the table.

>>51012043
>And people wonder why RPGs universally have shitty rules.
Listen, just because D&D has vague, shitty rules doesn't mean that other games suffer from the same problems.

File: 5V7LgSK.jpg (40KB, 600x770px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 600x770px

You guys are asking the wrong question.

What if we made a snowwoman waifu?

Here's a novel concept. How about *not* writing retarded rules and let both players and GMs focus on playing the damn game. Players get to use every tool put at their disposal, without fear of breaking everything and ruining everyone else's fun because the fucking rules were built with these tools in mind. The GM gets the freedom to craft a fucking story enjoyed by all involved and isn't roped into fixing the stupidity of incompetents.

>Players look at an interesting rule or magic spell
>They should think 'woah cool I could use this in our awesome fantasy adventure!
>Instead they think 'hehe how can I break this so fucking cool to mess up the game'

You people who do this? You're pathetic. There's a reason the Munchkin is an insult.

>Dude there's no rule stating that objects can't speed up from being passed as a prepared action
>LOL PEASENT RAILGUN XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

Fucking kill yourselves.

>>51012233
Double dubs demand I answer, and the sad fact is that the golden cow of Vancian spellcasting and do-anything magic is so ingrained into D&Disms that it would take a world-shaking revelation to change things.
>>51012376
I literally know someone who enjoys playing 3.5 for the very reason that you can break the rules over your knee.
I really don't understand why some people enjoy the pretense of abusing bullshit rules instead of just playing freeform.

>>51004527
I find 5e really enjoyable, but I don't know it to be balanced, and that spell is ridiculous

>>51012376
>GMs look at a rule or magic spell
>They should think "wow this looks pretty broken, I better tell my group that we're not using this because it might have an undesirable impact on the game"
>Instead they think "hehe lets see which one of those chucklefucks tries to use this so I can throw them out of the group"

>>51012404
Because freeform is actually limited by whatever the GM allows you to get away with while D&D allows you to do broken shit with the bonus of being able to point to whatever rule you want to say "SEE SEE IT'S RIGHT THERE I CAN DO IT!"

It's actually ironic, D&Dfags detest freeform for being easily exploitable where nothing bad actually happens to your character while playing a game that's easily exploitable where nothing bad actually happens to your character.

>>51012494
To be fair, if this thread is any indication, a lot of these munchkins deserve to get bounced for being idiots who exploit the rules in a way that only benefits them.

>>51008120
He literally does by RAW, and back up by JC tweets.

>>51012716

Mind doing our work for us?

>>51009951
>we don't know that they get any spell slots, we assume because of previous editions
Yep, the staff has purposely made it fuzzy for DMs to play as they please. I read it as the spell caster casts the spell and gets a copy with the slot used up, allowing for 0 other Wish copies and 3 simulacrums at a time. Not against RAW or RAI, and makes it crazy cheese and still not retarded.

>>51012759
Anon, you've been corrected on this twice now.

>>51010242

Well, it has your spells. I would rule that to mean it has your memories and personality too. Otherwise, it isn't really a true simulacrum as the name implies.

>>51009859

It doesn't say that it has to remain friendly though. You could easily have a situation where it obeys your commands out of compulsion, but loathes you and wants to kill/sabotage you because it is a sentient creature and you are abusing it as part of a selfish scheme to gain power.

That being said, as a DM I would allow it because you're a 20th level character and breaking the fucking universe isn't exactly out of the realm of possibility for you. Just don't expect it to necessarily go well.

>>51012747
https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/652558972898013189

Sorry on a phone. He went back and forth with a new DM that has a that guy trying to break simulacrum over a lot of tweets.

If it is in the spell text as a benefit or limitation, then the DM is out of bounds saying it doesn't work that way. Everything else is up to the DM.

>>51012782
*I've* not been corrected on this at all, there is a conversation that sprung up afterwards that claims I am wrong with no evidence whatsoever but that's it.

>Remove all race ASIs
>All characters get array of 16/16/14/12/10/8

Yay or nay?

>>51012957
Not really important, they can only ever get to 17.

It would better to give a level 0 ASI and say they cannot use it on a stat over 15, and give the option for a feat just knowing they will be a little more capable.

>>51012902
There are two posts replying to >>51008266 explaining that you misunderstood how the combo works. There is no limit on the amount of clones you can make, and the amount of spell slots do not decrease with the number of clones because all clones are of the original wizard, not of other clones.

The only way it doesn't work is by RAI if you take this anon's >>51010286 >>51010393 interpretation.

>>51012957
Fuck, wrong thread

>>51012226
That's what True Polymorph is for.

>>51012996
Makes sense I take it back, but since the DM gets to set the personality your Chinese telephone game of orders would be hilarious.

>>51012957

Roll 3d6 in order.

>>51010318
And now all three of those are gone. Notice the lesson here?

>>51013215
1d20 in order.

>>51013402
homosexuals exist despite lacking a breeding population, they are god's chosen people.

>>51013402
The Spartans were eventually conquered by the Persians and then the Romans, both of whom were avid practitioners of meat-jousting themselves.

Vikings spread their seed all across Scandinavia, in countries that now report among the highest standards of living in the world.

>>51013427
Which is why every civilization with open homosexuality died out for one reason or another.

>>51013547
Name me one civilization that has existed for as long as or longer than the Vikings and has not died out/experienced major reformations.

>>51013547

*Which is why every civilization ever died out for one reason or another

Fixed that for you.

>>51013609
Muslims?

>>51013609
Jews?

>>51013609
Hm. I wonder what those isolated jungle and island tribes think of homosexuality?

File: Mission Creep.png (109KB, 1068x580px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1068x580px

Never change, /tg/.

I think the right response to this situation is to have the Wizard's first simulacrum have an existential crisis, cut off its ears and turn against him.

>>51013808
The correct response is to have the simulacrum count as "you" for the purpose of casting Simulacrum and destroy itself halfway through the spell.

>>51004527
>every simulacrum has 1500 gp of powdered ruby at hand somehow
>not including the powdered diamond for wishes
Uh huh. This is totally plausible.

a thread by faggots, for faggots

>>51013891
Very perceptive. Welcome to 4chan.

>I need the frozen northlands is the world's largest ruby mine, and the wizard who built his citadel above it has monopolized the world's ruby
>Attempts to siege the frozen citadel have all been rebuffed by an army of shamefaced snow constructs
>All fear the Ruby Sorcerer and the unknown magics he weaves at the top of the world, but people only sweat a little at the prospect of trading the rate beast parts and artifacts yo the wizard for shipments of the rare ruby

I'm digging this plot hook.

>hurr durr infinite cycle
3.5 had an infinite cycle available for anyone who had a mere 8400 GP.

>>51014119
>but people only sweat a little at the prospect of trading the rate beast parts and artifacts yo the wizard for shipments of the rare ruby
lolwut

>anyone ITT seriously caring about balance at level 17

If we're giving them arbitrary economy, then a Champion Fighter armed with the legendary weapon Wave has an excellent chance to instagib any single target in the multiverse in one round. Tarrasque, Tiamat, Asmodeus, you name it.

File: 551809_219203621532264_115904751862152_366964_266597242_n.jpg (22KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 320x320px

>>51004527
"You shape an illusionary duplicate of one beast or humanoid..."

A simulacrum is neither a beast nor a humanoid. It's a fucking illusion.

But nice try at the bullshit.

>>51007136
It would not need to, it would multiply by repeated cutting and reconstruction instead of recursive casting.
On the other hand Troll Wizard that can do both...

>>51014575
>I don't know what I'm talking about, but I am going to act incredibly condescending anyway.

>>51004527
Guess we should all just play 4e, since it's the most balanced system out there.

Who gives a shit if you can go all rules-lawyer and break the game, a normal group that just want to have fun doesn't do that. They don't build optimal characters. They don't go for a maul over a greatsword every time, even if a lot more things are weak to bludgeoning than slashing.

It doesn't take a genius to know that you're abusing the rules if you're dealing 3d6 elemental damage 3 times a round at level 1 (I'm looking at you 4e rebreather). If you have a group that enjoys just playing the game, then these things aren't a problem. If someone makes it a problem, then its their fault.

>>51014575
>The duplicate is a creature, partially real and formed from ice or snow, and it can take actions and otherwise be affected as a normal creature. It appears to be the same as the original, but it has half the creature's hit point maximum and is formed without any equipment. Otherwise, the illusion uses all the statistics of the creature it duplicates.
Last sentence is important. Unless you're going to rule that creature type isn't considered part of a creature's statistics, yes it is.

>>51014394

I'll level with you. I was writing that on my phone in a restaurant, and my french toast had just hit the table. I was in a frenzy to finish so I could eat.

>>51014701
>It doesn't matter if the rules are shit, you can just fix them! Why would I want something I paid money for to actually work as intended without my constant intercession?

>>51014772
fair enough.

>>51004527
The whole point of this is to clone your waifu

>>51014790
>Paying money for books when torrents exist
Hah!

>>51014802
Again, we have true polymorph for that. The simulacrum probably feels really cold.

>>51014790
>implying the entire system is totally and irrepairibly broken and useless because of a couple spells you can homebrew out if you want
Naw, you're totally right. If there's even a minor flaw anywhere in any official book in any system, the whole system is garbage. ESPECIALLY if it's not a rule, but rather a very specific spell that you can easily make unusuable without breaking the game at all.
Yeah. 5e is shit.
Also
>[current year]
>paying for rulebooks

>>51012376
I just get enjoyment from coming up with absurd, crazy bullshit that works by the rules of the game, but shouldn't be allowed to exist. It's fun. USING it, on the other hand, is neither fun nor acceptable.

File: Cagliostro.jpg (361KB, 1017x720px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 1017x720px

>>51014802
>clone waifu
>do all sorts of nasty, mean and harmful stuff with the clone
>lust status: sated
>waifu status: pure

>>51014997
>>implying the entire system is totally and irrepairibly broken and useless because of a couple spells you can homebrew out if you want
No, but that doesn't mean you should make excuses for the parts that do need fixing. This is the one thing I will never understand about /tg/, why the fuck do they defend this shit? Why do YOU defend this shit? When there's a problem you admit it's a problem, or that the spell has unintentional consequences, or that the designers messed up. What you don't do is attack anyone who dares to do any of the above. Because that shit is exactly why D&D always has these problems.

>>51015083
we recognize that the problem isnt likely to be solved IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FUCKING EDITION, so we come up with solutions. Solutions like "no dm is going to let you be that big of a dickbag anyways so stop worrying about it."

>>51004665
>And no, you can't cut something in half using "nonlethal damage".
Reminds me of when the DM introduced a ceremonial blade used by one evil cult that would reduce it's victim down to, but not below, 1hp no matter how much you wounded them "as long as the heart survives".
The DM didn't really think we'd do much with it when we took it other then maybe using it to suspend wounded party members in a fight.
One big fight later, our fighter is down to her negatives and the Gnoll that did this grabs the knife off her dying body to carve out her heart, mostly to give us a chance to get to her in time to save her.
We rescue her, but her still beating heart is seperate from her still living body and our Cleric starts using healing spells before we had first placed the heart back in her chest.

And that is how our party's Fighter met her twin sister.

>>51004527
I don't really see a problem.

You create friendly copy of a creature that has half it's max HP, no equipment, can't prepare new spells and can't normally regain HP.

It take 12 hours to cast, requires 1,500gp of a component that's rarity is decided by the DM, the creature you're making a copy of has to be within touching range and you can only have one at a time.

Seems like it has a lot of fail safes to get out of hand.

>>51015083
I'm not making excuses. The spell is broken. What I'm saying is that the entire system isn't utter trash because one spell is broken, as OP suggests. Just don't use the spell, or just make it so the creature can't cast that spell as well.
Hell, I HATE how they handle weapons in 5e, but that doesn't mean the system is trash. I use the parts I like, which is most of it, and edit the parts I dislike.

>>51015201
The only way it can go really wrong is if the person has a fuck-ton of gold and a fuckton of time on his hands. You could, as the rule is written, make infinite copies of yourself.
That said, you can just make it so copies can't cast this spell.

>>51015243
Yeah, I personally despise some things, like
>Heat Metal
just makes me mad as fuck because it's obviously a tankbuster and making the save gives you an outright trivial benefit.

>>51015119
>we recognize that the problem isnt likely to be solved IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FUCKING EDITION,
>Not expecting FAQs or Erratta in the internet age.
Fuck off, it would be easy as piss for Wizards to fix this shit, but they don't because people like you would rather attack anyone who tries to raise legitimate concerns than ask a company to not half-ass a commercial product.

>>51015243
Then you're not one of the people I was complaining about.

>>51015320
>Heat Metal
This shit right here is what we should all be really angry about.

>>51015340
i didn't say it would be difficult, i said they arent likely to fix it in the same edition, you'll find most companies wont drop everything they are doing to fix a problem that most simply ignore anyways.

Hell, it was nothing short of a god damn miracle that they came out with a Ranger UA fix.

>>51015078
Being unable to learn would make the clone rather boring in bed.

>>51015435
While I can see your point, there's a whole range of activities for which that isn't really a demerit.

>>51015290
>The only way it can go really wrong is if the person has a fuck-ton of gold and a fuckton of time on his hands.
The spell calls for powered ruby not gold. You got to get and find those rubies.
> You could, as the rule is written, make infinite copies of yourself.
Yeah in world filled with infinite rubies.

>>51015560
>Yeah in world filled with infinite rubies.
You mean the elemental plane of Rubies? Yeah, it's a pretty cool place.

>>51015320
Oh, and Polymorph->Sleep->Disintegrate.
Mike Mearls said that Polymorph into Disintegrate kills if it drops the target below 0.
>Polymorph target into quipper
>Target cannot cast spells or move
>Cast Sleep next round
>Target is unconsious and fails all Dex saves
>Disintegrate
>Dead because you failed one save
Mearls even ruled that you can do it with Immolate in place of Disintegrate, a 3rd level spell.
Of course, this only works if you agree with his rulings, which I have elected to ignore because they're retarded.

>>51015663
Correction, I was thinking of the wrong spell, Immolate is level 5.

>>51010318
>You mean "every single human civilization since the dawn of time except those dictated by Abrahamic religions"?

You're full of shit. Gays have been around since the dawn of time but it was hardly accepted as a universal norm. Homophobia didn't just jump out of nowhere.

>Samurai, Spartans, and Vikings were playin' dick-hockey centuries before your dad squeezed you out of his withered dick.

Just because buggery was going on doesn't mean it wasn't seen as weird or taboo. The modern concept of a homosexual didn't even exist in those cultures. The idea that everyone was totally sex positive before Christians came along is some tumblr-tier revisionism. The
>muh degeneracy
people are annoying but don't go the opposite way.

File: Wizard.gif (25KB, 600x263px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 600x263px

>>51015588
>The plane of rubies is filled roaming tribes of identical simulacrums of some asshole wizard

>>51016037
This sounds like a great thing for a plane hopping party to randomly run into as a wtf moment

>>51014701
>Guess we should all just play 4e
We should

>>51013402
Not really, since it's equally true that civilizations that condemned homosexuality have collapsed and are gone.

Correlation is not causation, Anon. Things end. It's what they do.

>>51004527
You seem upset.
Also don't be a retard.

>>51014701
>Guess we should all just play 4e, since it's the most balanced system out there.

I mean, it's not the worst reason to play 4e for, but, nah. You should play 4e because it's a game with focused design.

So, the conclusion to this thread is "It wont work because you can only have 1 simulacrum of yourself"?

Seems about right. The spell is plenty strong as it is, what does a figgter earn at lvl 17?

>>51004527
why is it OP?
>>51004550
the text doesnt even say that it can cast spells, only that it has the same stats. spells arent stat lines.

>>51015663
>spending 3 spells to kill 1 guy in a way that actually makes sense logically

yes, and?

File: angry german man.jpg (17KB, 475x393px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 475x393px

>>51014701
>4e was balanced, and 4e was terrible

>>51015663
>Of course, this only works if you agree with his rulings, which I have elected to ignore because they're retarded.

While all that stuff you're bitching about actually is the way the rules work, you're totally right about ignoring Mike Mearls' rulings. He doesn't even read his own rules for most of his rulings.

>>51017034
Yeah I want to sit around a table with a bunch of people staring at laptops and tablets because that's the only way to keep track of a 4e character's shit.

>>51004776
Goddamn libcucks need to go

>>51008655
>>51010336
Only in cases of not-duplicating-a-spell does the GM have power.


Also, that game of telephone? Fuck that.
Player creates Sim A
Sim A creates Sim B
Sim A commands Sim B to follow Player's instructions.
Simple errata: Only one Simulacrum of a given entity can exist at one time (repeated castings fail), and Simulacrums cannot be the target of this spell. Thoughts?


>>51013879
Wish has no material component, you nonce.

File: nowneitherofuswillbevirgins.jpg (8KB, 207x204px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 207x204px

>>51010242
>If it does have memories, you know what you do with your simulacrums

>>51004527
>spending 1500 gp worth of ruby (which is not the dame as 1500 gp) to create copies of yourself that can't even regain spells, for each of the simulacra
>they have to cast wish, which comes with a slew of limitations, most noticeably "your dm decides how the wish goes"
> you have to pull it off without any other party member of npc actually stopping you from creating an army of wizards
Totally abusable.

>>51004527
>5e is BETTER balanced
is more like it, it is simply a comparison to 3.pf and you should not think that any D&D version is that well balanced. 5e lowered the power of the most powerful classes and with bounded accuracy characters can't be too different in power, but caster supremacy still exists once you get past the early-game and the classes aren't very well balanced in and of themselves. Compared to 3.pf it's a gift from god, and 4e was even more balanced but because of the way it was done (making fighters quadratic instead of nerfing casters a shit-ton) people don't consider that.

As for liking the creators, I have never seen such a thing said here. Maybe you're too much on Reddit but even Crawford is often spoken badly of because of the shitty sage advice at times and some of the content being so bad (UA has been mixed since his involvement, not that it was better before), and that's not even bringing fucking ((((Mearls)))) into the picture.