2
\$\begingroup\$

The reason I ask is because of this question. Obviously, mechanically this should work, since it's a creature, but what are the implications?

I'm picturing a simulacrum that wants to be the original, and winds up possessing the original caster's body.

Assume the simulacrum (A), through a casting of Magic Jar, possesses the body of the Original Caster (B).

Since the soul (A) is just a copy of the original (B), would their soul become permanently a part of the Original Caster's body (B), or would the regular effects of Magic Jar still apply?

Provided, of course, that you don't give it any specific instructions to not do something like this, essentially leave it on "free roam" mode, for lack of a better term.

I know that rules-wise, this may be difficult to answer. I can't think of anything specific for 5th edition, but maybe past editions have set some precedents for this.

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm a bit confused by your question can you clear a couple things up? What do you mean when you ask "would the simulacrum's soul wind up staying permanently in the original body, or not"? Are you looking for more implications beyond answering that question? \$\endgroup\$
    – Rubiksmoose
    Feb 17, 2018 at 15:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ Essentially, I would like to know if the simulacrum (A), through a casting of Magic Jar, can possess the body of the Original Caster (B), and since the soul (A) is just a copy of the original (B), would their soul become permanently a part of the Original Caster's body (B), or would the regular effects of Magic Jar still apply? Provided, of course, that you don't give it any specific instructions to not do something like this, essentially leave it on "free roam" mode, for lack of a better term. \$\endgroup\$
    – Jay Kay
    Feb 17, 2018 at 16:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ I've edited your question to include your clarification. Can you confirm that is what you are asking? \$\endgroup\$
    – Rubiksmoose
    Feb 17, 2018 at 16:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yes, thank you, that's it. Sorry, I'm not very good with this kind of posting, I kind of lose track of my thoughts partway through. \$\endgroup\$
    – Jay Kay
    Feb 17, 2018 at 16:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ No worries! It happens to us all. It is a complicated issue so it definitely helps to talk it out with someone. Glad I could help :) \$\endgroup\$
    – Rubiksmoose
    Feb 17, 2018 at 16:52

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
4
\$\begingroup\$

Would their soul become permanently a part of the Original Caster's body? - No

Even if the souls of the simulacrum and the caster were the same, the soul switching is still due to a spell effect from magic jar. The fact that the souls might be the same (as might be more compellingly argued with the clone spell) has no bearing how magic jar operates.

Thus, the normal effects of magic jar apply:

If the container is destroyed or the spell ends, your soul immediately returns to your body. If your body is more than 100 feet away from you or if your body is dead when you attempt to return to it, you die. If another creature's soul is in the container when it is destroyed, the creature's soul returns to its body if the body is alive and within 100 feet. Otherwise, that creature dies.

Addendum #1 - A simulacrum may not even have a soul

See Does a simulacrum have a soul? for more discussion on this.

Addendum #2 - The soul of the simulacrum and the soul of the caster are probably not identical

Assuming the soul (a not defined entity in 5e) consists at least partly of a creature's consciousness, memories, and personality, there is a good argument to make that the souls are definitely not identical. For one thing, nowhere in simulacrum does it say that it has any of knowledge or memories or personality of the creature it duplicated. Another spell, clone, does do this so it is not unreasonable to think that this omission was intentional. See What does a Simulacrum know? for further discussion on this.

Addendum #3 - A simulacrum probably would not try to take their controller's body without being instructed to

The simulacrum is friendly to you and creatures you designate.

Generally, things that are friendly to one, don't try to steal one's body against one's will. I would say that, in most cases, this would be an openly hostile act against its creator.

It obeys your spoken commands, moving and acting in accordance with your wishes and acting on your turn in combat.

I think it is generally assumed that having one's body stolen is generally "against one's wishes".

It is hard to think of a case in which a simulacrum could reasonably pull this off without violating the intent if not the explicit reading of the spell's effect.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ You know what? This works for me. While what animates a simulacrum is probably soul-like, the actual mechanics of the spell are the important parts, at least in a general sense. In a more case-by-case basis, as with all things, a DM may rule otherwise for thematic or story elements, but that's always the case. Unfortunately, this also means that something like Soul Cage won't work on a simulacrum, so that negates any kind of shenanigans there, but that's fine. Thanks for the answer! \$\endgroup\$
    – Jay Kay
    Feb 17, 2018 at 18:00
1
\$\begingroup\$

... It obeys your spoken commands, moving and acting in accordance with your wishes ...

So for sure it will not try that if you let him know that that kind of stuff is "not in accordance with your wishes".

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .