No DM/GM fiat at all, and no rule that says you can't attack yourself. In fact, logistically, unless you have some palsied problem, hitting yourself would be a free action by reality and RAW. Nothing anywhere stops you from putting your hands on yourself(unless you don't have hands lol). Not even an attack roll as you can't "miss" yourself. So yes, you can attack yourself. Nail in the coffin. Gives new meaning to touching yourself. lol.
I myself never trust using wishes unless the DM you have is honorable. A dishonorable one will corrupt it so your wish either becomes a detriment, or becomes another plot hook that makes more trouble than what it was worth. I've found the best use was as earlier stated, for inherent bonuses, or some ability not normally part of your race. Examples might be, wings, gills, true sight, things of that nature. The interesting part being that due to the nature of the wish making it a part of the character and not a magical bonus, it means all offspring you have will also have said ability. Technically, you could make an entire race based on that premise and still be human with all the bonuses humans get.
Berinor wrote: If you wanted to put a restriction when they're trapped somewhere that they wouldn't be able to get more stuff that would be a reasonable house rule with a nod toward realism. I can't agree with this on the sole reason that it would be effectively nerfing the caster badly and indeed breaking the class. EX: The party is in a fairly extensive dungeon. After several days, oh no, he has run out of materials in his pouch, now he can cast no spells that have material components and is therefore equal to a much lower level character since he is basically near powerless. The rest of the party is fine an dandy. End EX. See the problem? A DM that does this to his player is garbage for he has effectively unbalanced the system and broken the casters class. Fact. If said DM made the campaign low magic, then for balance purposes, he'd have to make it so they(the players) have ways around magic.
LazarX wrote:
Not sure if pathfinder has the same clause that the 3.5 D&D DMG pg 6 has, but on it, it states "A DM must follow the rules in the publications unless he has a good logical reason to go against them." In other words, someone stating "rule zero, I can do whatever I want because I'm the DM" is false. It's also the same for one who wishes to be a true leader. One must have a good logical reasoning for changing something against the rules. If they do not, than their stance is by definition illogical and bad. That is ironclad as you say for it is pure logic going by the stated rules of the system. This is why I enjoy going to these forums, for it allows others to give their own insights and interpretations. That is what makes a good player, and a good DM/GM. One that can give a rational, logical, good reasoning for their stance. So with what I said my previous DM/GM did, it shows that he was in fact, a bad DM/GM. One must be consistent, honest, follow the rules, and make logical, rational, unbiased decisions, in order to be a true leader. The only good thing my previous DM/GM did well was story telling. His story was good, but everything else he did was bad. That's not an opinion. The texts of the rule books agree. Ironclad. Incidentally, I hate homebrew ;) That's why I like consistency in following structured rules.
Shoemaker wrote: This entire character will be negated by a first level Shield Spell unless we can find a way to bypass the second sentence. Actually, a Force Missile Mage has the ability to punch through the shield spell with his missiles. So that shield spell is worthless to a Force Missile Mage. Also, a 3rd party supplement called Path of Magic: Legends & Lairs has a prc called Force Weaver which really boosts force spells. |