Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Flamestrike" data-source="post: 6843524" data-attributes="member: 6788736">It follows your orders as a friend would and subject to its interpretation of those orders. It has a mind of its own (subject to its magical compulsion to obey you).Nothing in the spell contradicts this interpretation.The simulacrum doesnt follow your exact commands either. It is not a mindless automata. It is free to interpret your orders as it sees fit (subject to the DM). It has a will of its own (Wisdom score) intelligence of its own and charisma of its own. It has all the experiences of its double, all its skills, and all its languages. It remembers what spells its double prayed for or prepared that morning over breakfast even. A simulacrum of yourself has all your knowledges, experience and spells and skills (including spells prepared by you that morning). Its also instantly aware that it is a simulacrum (by virtue of this). It likes you and must obey your orders (and it knows why). Its as if your character suddenly popped into existence as a simulacrum, aware that he was a simulacrum.If that simulacrums creator has a penchant for using past simulacrums as expendable suicidal force multipliers, it's aware of that too... and this could cause issues. Thats how I run simulacrums; as a form of AI. Thats my perogative as a DM based off my interpretation of the spell. No, this is no house rule. You interpret the spell to grant the player of the caster full unswerving and precise control over the simulacrum. I interpret the spell as creating a DMPC AI that is friendly to the caster, and is magically compeled to obey his orders to the best of its abilities (subject to the simulacrums understanding and interpretation of those orders).Its a difference in interpretation.Seeing as this is my adventure and my campaign, my interpretation trumps yours.We dont have to. I've made a ruling as DM. Welcome to 5E - 'rulings not rules'. Point me to this text. Im looking at the spell now and I cant see this.Point me to this text. Im looking at the spell now and I cant see this.Any reason why it wouldnt choose to defend itself from a caster that intends to throw it into a suicide mission in the absence of express commands to the contrary?I think we've already established that you wouldnt be welcome at my table IRL. Your play style is miles apart from what I expect at my table from my players and friends both when I DM and when I play. I would tire of wave after wave of (paraphrasing you here) 'morally nebulous PCs with no connection to the game world or anything in it, no need for wealth beyond that which can be used to gain in game bonuses to abilities, no moral convictions so the DM cant engage us that way or ever have to face moral choices, who seamlessly work together as an ommniscient tactical strike force, and refuse to engage in DM hooks, metagame, are only concerned with XP and magic items, and refuse to play in any games featuring any interpretation of a rule that differs from their own or players that dont optimise to the same level'. But none of this is relevant to the discussion at hand at present.For the purposes of this thread, no simulacrums, cohorts, hirelings, NPCs, allies, constructs, undead armies, or similar DM dependent force multipliers are allowed.Thats the ruling.</blockquote>

Verification