D&D 5E 20th level Sorcerer vs the world

[Hohige]

"You can declare "no Simulacrum cheese" then get cheesy with a specific PC assassin build and a Simulacrum thereof."

Your Galandris friend used a Bard PC level 20, that he chooses his Subclass with magical inspiration Simulacrum to help him. Why the Sorcerer cannot do it?
It also chooses a cleric level 18.
Hypocrysy.

On game. With Unbeatiable Hidden and Subtle Dominate Person, It can have any Simulalcrum.

How does Coffee Boi know there is a contingency to dispel? How does he guarantee that he dispels something? (His check is d20+3 vs 10 + spell level, at least a required roll of 13, and could be up to 16, if the Wizard upcast the Contingency. Trance doesn't help you with that, and aid doesn't really apply. Only Magical Guidance helps.

Cast Subtle Dispel again. HAaha. Magical Guidance helps too.

 

[nogray]

"You can declare "no Simulacrum cheese" then get cheesy with a specific PC assassin build and a Simulacrum thereof."
Your Galandris friend used a Bard with magical inspiration Simulacrum to help him. Why the Sorcerer cannot do it?

On game. With Unbeatiable Hidden and Subtle Dominate Person, It can have any Simulalcrum.

Cast Subtle Dispel again. HAaha. Magical Guidance helps too.

The point being, you don't know if that second roll (post-Guidance) succeeded or failed (other than by metagaming).

@Galandris isn't my friend. I don't know him or her. Galandris seems like an interesting person, and I have nothing against him (or her), but I am particular with who I call "friend." Someone with whom I happen to agree in an online thread, unfortunately, doesn't rise to that level.

I also think Galandris used simulacrum for "a bard that can give me inspiration," so pretty much any bard of sufficient level, or maybe one from a specific subclass (and someone used Simulacrum for "a level 20 cleric of a specific deity.") Contrast that with the specificity of, "a mark-of-shadow elf Assassin rogue with a specific feat." Generic NPCs vs. a specific build. See the difference?

Are you inclined to allow that sort of specificity in builds for simulacrum targets? I'd like to know your thoughts. I might put together a build for Coffee Boi to attack if I can find the time.

 

[Hohige]

Bastion does not need the Antimagic Field trick to defeat any Wizard.
Just defeat it with subtle spells or have binded creatures hunt you down. No Wizard magic is a threat to Bastion. None.

But with Antimagic Field and the painful death of Bastion's blades it is much more fun.

Looking into the eyes of the creature he is going to defeat is a pleasure for Bastion.

Seeing the Wizard's despair being killed is much more fun.

It must be desperate to try to escape and fail, attack and the enemy will simply regenerate while its life is ending. Sad end.

"I am the true heir of magic and your blood is impure.
For Purity!!"

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

That was the greatest Metagame trick I have ever seen.
Haha ha But let me give you some news.
You cannot create effects visible to spells that have no visible effects. This does not change the mechanics of the game.

Something news meaning, in this case, "something totally against what is written in the book". The canonical example given is a Haste spell, with no visual effect, getting an added visuals of small thunderheads surrounding the target, a moonlight radiating around the hands of a Selune cleric casting Cure Wounds (which makes a target regain HP, no visual effect) and a druid with a cherry blossom theme causing branches and pink leaves to grow when they cast Shillelagh (which has no visual effect). The provision about effects is that you can't change damage type (if your fireball is lightning-themed, it doesn't deal lightning damage but fire damage).

You can do fireball visual effect to darkball.
But you cannot create a visual effect on a spell without a visual effect like Mind Spike.

Write to WOTC to ask them to pull Tasha off the shelves if you think they provided illegal examples of the feature.

 

[Hohige]

Something news meaning, in this case, "something totally against what is written in the book". The canonical example given is a Haste spell, with no visual effect, getting an added visuals of small thunderheads surrounding the target, a moonlight radiating around the hands of a Selune cleric casting Cure Wounds (which makes a target regain HP, no visual effect) and a druid with a cherry blossom theme causing branches and pink leaves to grow when they cast Shillelagh (which has no visual effect). The provision about effects is that you can't change damage type (if your fireball is lightning-themed, it doesn't deal lightning damage but fire damage).



Write to WOTC to ask them to pull Tasha off the shelves if you think they provided illegal examples of the feature.

Whats your trigger? You have now a espetacular spell around, revealing you as Wizard
Metagamer one

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I also think Galandris used simulacrum for "a bard that can give me inspiration," so pretty much any bard of sufficient level, or maybe one from a specific subclass (and someone used Simulacrum for "a level 20 cleric of a specific deity.") Contrast that with the specificity of, "a mark-of-shadow elf Assassin rogue with a specific feat." Generic NPCs vs. a specific build. See the difference?

Actually, I referrenced a Bard Simulacrum as following an NPC in Foggy Bottom that was doing Law enforcement by applying the silly rule proposal that convincing someone to kill his friend was DC 15. So she just walked around chanting "cease and desist" so nobody could ever steal anything in Foggy Bottom. The Cleric Simulacrum was a Simulacrum of Llewellyn, cleric of Foggy Bottom, mentionned in passing once in a short story to illustrate the use of a class feature to know the emotional feeling of the Sorcerer, which had no effect whatsoever on summoning a creature later and was just for flavour (Alfred won't do anything about sorcerers until a legal build is posted).

Are you inclined to allow that sort of specificity in builds for simulacrum targets? I'd like to know your thoughts. I might put together a build for Coffee Boi to attack if I can find the time.

As it is established that we aren't friend, I am volunteering to referee the duel again if needed.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

5) Now, your minimum attack is +19 to hit (Clockwork's Trance of Order), which automatically hits any Wizard. With sentinel feat (I traded + 2dex for sentinel feat).

All of my Wizard characters from actual play have known and kept perpetually prepared both Mage Armor and Shield by level 2 and had a Dex of 14 or more. So that means an AC 20 or better with Shield. Minimum 19 to hit (which is what Trance of Order actually does for you, not +19 to hit) just means you always make them burn a spell slot for Shield. You still miss half your shots.

Now certainly not everyone plays their Wizards like that, but I'm hardly the lone eccentric in preferring Dex over Con for Wizards and in consistently using the two basic Wizard defense spells.

If you had pumped Charisma above 16 like a normal Sorcerer, rather than taking a bunch of feats for gimmicky "ultimate" strategies, trance of order would give you a minimum 20 or 21 on the attack and you would hit practically any Wizard rather than just those who don't prioritize their AC.

 

[Hohige]

All of my Wizard characters from actual play have known and kept perpetually prepared both Mage Armor and Shield by level 2 and had a Dex of 14 or more. So that means an AC 20 or better with Shield. Minimum 19 to hit (which is what Trance of Order actually does for you, not +19 to hit) just means you always make them burn a spell slot for Shield. You still miss half your shots.

Now certainly not everyone plays their Wizards like that, but I'm hardly the lone eccentric in preferring Dex over Con for Wizards and in consistently using the two basic Wizard defense spells.

If you had pumped Charisma above 16 like a normal Sorcerer, rather than taking a bunch of feats for gimmicky "ultimate" strategies, trance of order would give you a minimum 20 or 21 on the attack and you would hit practically any Wizard rather than just those who don't prioritize their AC.

You didn't get It.
its +19 against you inside an Antimagic Field.
Its on Antimagic Field. No Mage armor ou shield for you.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Its on Antimagic Field. No Mage armor ou shield for you.

Sure, but you see this is one of the core problems with your whole approach in a nutshell. You could just have a 20 Charisma and basically always hit with Trance of Order under normal circumstances and that would be plenty awesome. Instead you neglect the basics (like Charisma on a damned Sorcerer) so that you can rely on more overbuilt, overdesigned, strategies which, of course, are always going to have their limitations and counterstrategies.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

You didn't get It.
its +19 against you inside an Antimagic Field.
Its on Antimagic Field. No Mage armor ou shield for you.

You have written that one time too many, With a +19 to hit, your Sorcerer should be able to hit AC 35 creature without a critical hit (on a roll of 16-20). So, OK, demonstrate us, step by step, how you get from a dice roll to the end result of hitting AC 35 outside of rolling 20, from the confine of your antimagic field and supposing we accept the strange rule that class features aren't blocked by said antimagic field.

It should be easy since you'have claimed that so many time.