The new Wish spell and thus I presume other magical effects in Pathfinder can only provide inherent bonuses to ability scores by removing points from other ability scores unlike in 3.X edition, where Wish and other magical effects could. This change is universally reviled in my group and I dislike it as a DM too. Would it be possible to revert the Wish and other magical bonus-granting effects back to how this worked in 3.X edition? If necessary, we could make these effects more expensive or requiring rare components to compensate, but I thought the XP/gp conversion rate was already established with balance in mind.
As an alternative idea, perhaps Wish (and other Inherent-bonus-granting magical effects) could work on a point-buy basis. The number of Wishes cast in immediate succession grants the equivalent number of point-buy points which provide an inherent bonus to the given ability score. The inherent bonuses should probably still not stack.
The changes to that usage of Wish make virtually unusable, as very few people I know are willing to spend 25000 gp to lower one of their stats.
This is made somewhat worse and somewhat better by the fact that the inherent bonus items do not lower another score. Also they actually cost less to craft than casting the spells now, though they take much longer than previously (8 days for +5 is now 138 days).
Given a book can be crafted (at higher difficulty) without even having the Wish spell, I think very few players will end up taking the spell.
The changes to that usage of Wish make virtually unusable, as very few people I know are willing to spend 25000 gp to lower one of their stats.
I agree. I was shocked when I saw that. I mean, this is WISH we are talking about here... this is the big dog, the king daddy of all spells... it really reduces another stat?
The changes to that usage of Wish make virtually unusable, as very few people I know are willing to spend 25000 gp to lower one of their stats.I agree. I was shocked when I saw that. I mean, this is WISH we are talking about here... this is the big dog, the king daddy of all spells... it really reduces another stat?
If the overall intent is to heavily slow down real stat boosts with only crafting the books (over periods of about 1 month per +1), then this is a success. I can actually respect that goal.
But there is very little point to even bothering to leave the ability in the Wish spell at all in that case - or at the very least it should mention the crafting way in the spell. Something like "Such quick boosts to abilities are taxing on the recipient and command a matching price. However when integrated into Tomes of study the negative side effects can be negated."
I agree that dropping a stat in order raise another is really silly.
Wizard: I have now gained access to the most powerful magic that most wizards will ever wield as a normal spell . . . I can cast it now to make you stronger than a titan my friend . . . but it's going to make you dumb as a box of rocks . . .
Fighter: Um . . . that's fine, I didn't really like communicating with the rest of the party anyway.
I'm almost afraid to mention this, for fear that they will be nerfed as well, but it makes more sense to create one of the Tomes that boosts a stat now than to cast wish.
I think the solution seems to be more in a cost difference between permanent effects and instantaneous ones created by the Wish.
I believe that the current rules regarding Wish's modification of ability scores are fine, and they should be extended to the Tomes as well. Lord knows that PCs are already going to have their ability scores cranked up through the roof with Enhancement items - the new Inherent Bonus rules simply allow characters to tweak their ability scores a little without pushing them over into "crazy overpowered" territory.
I believe that the current rules regarding Wish's modification of ability scores are fine, and they should be extended to the Tomes as well. Lord knows that PCs are already going to have their ability scores cranked up through the roof with Enhancement items - the new Inherent Bonus rules simply allow characters to tweak their ability scores a little without pushing them over into "crazy overpowered" territory.
I agree, I am one of the few that thinks that the new 'ability swap' of Wish is a better solution than the old 'ability boost'; it needs only some re-word, IMHO (and a tweak to the Tomes, but for that we have to wait a little more). I would go for 'get rid of the inherent bonus and grant a real "swap" to the scores'.
Of course, I'm part of a minority, so it could change back as well; but I would not complain if it stays more or less as it is now.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Depending on the attributes, I could see shifting 1 point from the other five attributes to get a +5 in one, but it will be a rare thing.
Now, I noticed that Pathfinder keeps the +5 inherent cap on Wish. This creates a problem with abyssal bloodline sorcerers that get a +6 inherent bonus to Strength by 17th level. Is +5 a hard cap across the board or only a cap for Wish? If the cap is only for Wish, could a sorcerer then add another +5 to Strength if he wanted to?
Additionally, is the ability increase from dragon disciple an inherent bonus? It is not listed as such.
Depending on the attributes, I could see shifting 1 point from the other five attributes to get a +5 in one, but it will be a rare thing.
Now, I noticed that Pathfinder keeps the +5 inherent cap on Wish. This creates a problem with abyssal bloodline sorcerers that get a +6 inherent bonus to Strength by 17th level. Is +5 a hard cap across the board or only a cap for Wish? If the cap is only for Wish, could a sorcerer then add another +5 to Strength if he wanted to?
Additionally, is the ability increase from dragon disciple an inherent bonus? It is not listed as such.
I would think it's implied to be racial, since you effectively gain the half dragons bonuses and eventually become a half dragon.
As an alternative idea, perhaps Wish (and other Inherent-bonus-granting magical effects) could work on a point-buy basis. The number of Wishes cast in immediate succession grants the equivalent number of point-buy points which provide an inherent bonus to the given ability score. The inherent bonuses should probably still not stack.
I like your idea, but it's pretty much just trying to fix what's fundamentally broken. Wish became a lost cause back since 3.0 when it was downgraded to Limited Wish (And Limited Wish, in turn, becoming completely worthless unless there's no Cleric in your party). The best thing they could do for the poor Wish spells would be just removing them from game and stop beating around the bush, since early 3E they're nothing but placeholders.
Depending on the attributes, I could see shifting 1 point from the other five attributes to get a +5 in one, but it will be a rare thing.
Now, I noticed that Pathfinder keeps the +5 inherent cap on Wish. This creates a problem with abyssal bloodline sorcerers that get a +6 inherent bonus to Strength by 17th level. Is +5 a hard cap across the board or only a cap for Wish? If the cap is only for Wish, could a sorcerer then add another +5 to Strength if he wanted to?
Additionally, is the ability increase from dragon disciple an inherent bonus? It is not listed as such.
The Dragon Disciple's ability score modifications are Untyped ability score bonuses. The Abyssal Sorcerer's ability score modifications should accordingly be changed from Inherent bonuses to Untyped bonuses.
I agree that this change makes Wish just loathsome to use, I certainly wouldn't.
If the intent is to prevent overexploitation of Wish (including from sources like Genies),
I'd rather see some "global" changes rather than to the spell singularly:
This works off a paradigm where each individual can only "recieve" so much wishes in X time period,
inherently from the nature of Wishes and the Universe.
Like wise, that Genie's wish-granting is sourced from a "Universal" Pool that all Genies draw upon (and which is limited per recipient/per time period), rather than being drawn from each Genie in particular.
If Wishes are limited globally like this, it seems much less exploitable,
therefore the individual Wish doesn't need to be nerfed as much.
...Thoughts?
Have you seen Miracle? It's even worse.
Miracle is indeed a rather vaguely worded spell - probably because the design team is tying the "balance" of the spell against the likelihood that your deity will believe that your request will advance its own interests and grant it accordingly. This works fine in more reasonable gaming groups, but when dealing with power-gamers or in groups with very permissive GMs, it's a recipe for disaster...
I agree that this change makes Wish just loathsome to use, I certainly wouldn't.
If the intent is to prevent overexploitation of Wish (including from sources like Genies),
I'd rather see some "global" changes rather than to the spell singularly:limit the # of Wishes per time period per person (individual soul)
perhaps Genie Wishes could be separate, but also have their OWN limit per time period per recipient This works off a paradigm where each individual can only "recieve" so much wishes in X time period,
inherently from the nature of Wishes and the Universe.
Like wise, that Genie's wish-granting is sourced from a "Universal" Pool that all Genies draw upon (and which is limited per recipient/per time period), rather than being drawn from each Genie in particular.If Wishes are limited globally like this, it seems much less exploitable,
therefore the individual Wish doesn't need to be nerfed as much....Thoughts?
I'm not sure why you would need to do this. If the only "reliable" wish is the one provided for by the spell, and it costs too much for the caster to use consistently, then the only way the PCs could get "too many" wishes would be by the GM allowing too many chances for them to get wishes, which seems like a GM issue.
I just don't get this change, at all.
KnightErrant: I'm not sure what you're saying...
It seems that Jason/Paizoia(?) felt a mere gold cost (now that XP costs are out the door)
was NOT enough to balance the spell, and that's what motivated the change...
Or do think there was another reason?
There could be a multitude of solutions here,
but why WOULDN'T a global per-recipient limit potentially be able to address these concerns?
If you feel that there are sufficient other limits on # of wishes, then wouldn't a separate hard limit just be icing?
In any case, the current Wish just seems silly:
I'd rather have Wish's abilty to raise stats inherently simply REMOVED and made a completely unique quality of Tomes, than Beta's "Giveth & Taketh Away" version, since nobody in their right mind would use Wish for this purpose anymore under the current setup.
KnightErrant: I'm not sure what you're saying...
It would seem that Jason/Paizoia felt that a mere gold cost (now that XP costs are out the door)
was NOT enough to balance the spell, and that's what motivated the change...
Or do think there was another reason?There could be a multitude of solutions here,
but why WOULDN'T a global per-recipient limit potentially be able to address these concerns?
What I'm saying is, why limit something that the GM can already limit (i.e. contact with NPCs/Monsters that can and will grant wishes) when it seems that the variable is how many times the PCs have it under their control to grant their own wishes? It seems like it would be more reasonable to make the material component more rare and/or costly than to come up with a wish threshold.
What I'm saying is, why limit something that the GM can already limit (i.e. contact with NPCs/Monsters that can and will grant wishes) when it seems that the variable is how many times the PCs have it under their control to grant their own wishes? It seems like it would be more reasonable to make the material component more rare and/or costly than to come up with a wish threshold.
I was simply extrapolating from the fact it seems those at Paizo apparently DID feel it was important to have some limit on it, and perhaps they DIDN'T want a huge GP cost, but wanted to prevent "abuse".
So sure,
You can argue the motivation/appraisal behind the change was misplaced in the first place (DMs can control abuse in the first place, etc...) I'm just coming from the point of accepting their sentiment, but seeking a solution that doesn't make the spell a joke.
Perhaps increasing an ability point without lowering another could come at an extra cost, say (for example) £5,000 gp per point of the ability score you are increasing it to.
For example - using a wish to advance from 19 Itn to 20 Int would cost:
25,000 gp for the wish spell
100,000 gp for the ability score increase (20 time 5,000 gp)
This would still allow for ability score increase up to +5 but at a greatly increased cost, while still leave the option of reducing one ability score to boost another at a cost of 25,000 gp
For backwards compatibility there should be some way of increasing ability scores via a wish - otherwise the stats for such luminaries as Rary, Iggwilv and Mordenkainen would need to be seriously overhauled.