Simulacrum question

[Cheiromancer]

And it's only a 7th level spell, for pity's sake. 100 gp of ruby dust for a material component-that's what, two continual flames? 1000 xp? You'd spend more making a wand of fireballs.

And who needs empower? You don't have to make a simulacrum of yourself. A 13th level caster could make a simulacrum of Elminster, all you need is a hair or fingernail clipping. Sim-Elminster would have more wizard levels than his creator. A fine cohort, even if he doesn't heal normally.

The more I think of it, the more I think that the simulacrum should have the appearance of the original, most of the personality, skills and hit points of the original, and nothing else.

No supernatural abilities. No extraordinary abilities (beyond what exists in real life- a sim-bird could fly, say. And minor things like darkvision or low-light vision). No spells or spell-like abilities. No feats.

Should a 7th level spell really be capable of anything more?

 

[Hammerhead]

Well, yeah.

The way you're putting it, it seems like you want a fancy decoy spell. I think 7th level spells can go a bit beyond that. Mislead would probably be more effective.

 

[da chicken]

In this case I think the order of the static and variable element is important.

So R&D was smart enough to "correctly order" the staic and random potions of this variable element, but not smart enoug to tell us that order is important in the spell description or the feat description? That's ludicrous.

I would view it as a static number plus a variable, instead of a variable that includes a static number.

You can view it however you want, but that isn't how it is written and there are no explicit rules stating otherwise. In the absense of a specific rule, the general rule must be applied.

I disagree that it is the only interpretation. Simulacrum doesn't follow the standard PHB method of stating a variable (i.e. 50% +1d10% instead of 1d10%+50).

Dude, go read some spell descriptions. There is no standard.

I wouldn't count on it working that way in LG or LC.

They don't have an option. LG/LC must play strictly by the rules outlined in the PHB and LC/LG campaign guidelines. No erratum exists on simulacrum or Empower Spell. AFAIK, neither LC nor LG have rules eliminating simulacrum. It is allowable by the rules as they currently stand, and that is all LC/LG care about.

If you want to house rule it, that's fine. But this is the correct interpretation of an Empowered simulacrum using only the rules as a guide.

 

[da chicken]

Well, the only way to get the famed double or triple empowered simulacrum is through broken classes and items. Treat the disease, not the symtoms. Ban metamagic feat rods and the incantatrix. Don't fiddle with simulacrum.

This isn't Magic: The Gathering. We don't need to worry about the horror of rewriting cards already in print. We don't need banned and restricted lists. We don't need the DCI.

For D&D, modifying the single instance of Empower Spell being blatantly overpowered is superior than eliminating supplemental material which otherwise is not overpowered.