The problem with this wish is that the PC is trying to decide how powerful the wish will be. The PC is well within his rights to wish for greater attacking prowess, or something along those lines, but then it is up to the GM to decide how much of a boost the PC gets. Because, ultimately, the GM is the one who should decide how much of a boost would be an benefit without unbalancing the campaign.
So what's wrong with just saying that to the player? Instead, and we've all heard the stories, the DM sets out to screw the player and show him/her who is boss.
Ban wish entirely because it's a plot power, not a new toy for the wizard*.
*I feel this way about a lot of spells though so your mileage may vary.
Ban wish entirely because it's a plot power, not a new toy for the wizard*.
*I feel this way about a lot of spells though so your mileage may vary.
See in this case I would come to you as a player and say something along the lines of:
"I still want a spell at spell level 7 and 9 that allows me the spell casting versatility of limited wish and wish. How about we cut the parts about the higher power wishes, and the inherent bonuses perhaps cut out the material components (except when the spell being mimicked has them) and call it "lesser spell mimick" and "greater spell mimick"?"
That way I get my primary uses out of these spells without giving the GM the headaches of what might be done with the normal wish spells.
If your GM's a bastard he'll turn him into a fighter of equal level.
With the same stats.
A poorly worded wish should do that. A nice GM would give the player a rewrite of the PC as a fighter of equal level.
evil version: change his HD to match his current BAB.
This shall be the version officially endorsed by yours truly!
A poorly worded wish...
Gah! What, should the player obtain legal counsel before presenting his Wish? Why does Wish have to be this crappy?
A poorly worded wish...Gah! What, should the player obtain legal counsel before presenting his Wish? Why does Wish have to be this crappy?
No game designer is going to be able to cover absolutely everything a spell as flexible as wish could accomplish. It's rather like a microcosm of D&D itself. DM adjudication is necessary.
A poorly worded wish...Gah! What, should the player obtain legal counsel before presenting his Wish? Why does Wish have to be this crappy?
That is a thing from the older editions. I just say no, if the player ask for something silly. If they keep asking I might have to go old school on them though. So far once I break down the limitations of wish they seem to understand so it is never an issue.
No game designer is going to be able to cover absolutely everything a spell as flexible as wish could accomplish. It's rather like a microcosm of D&D itself. DM adjudication is necessary.A poorly worded wish...Gah! What, should the player obtain legal counsel before presenting his Wish? Why does Wish have to be this crappy?
Well and some sort of common sense from the wishee.
In fact there is a good article in The Legacy of fire adventure path on Wish magic.
Ban wish entirely because it's a plot power, not a new toy for the wizard*.
*I feel this way about a lot of spells though so your mileage may vary.
The problem with deciding off-hand that certain spells should be banned because they're deemed "plot power" effects by you ignores the fact that everyone involved is making the story, not just the DM.
DM wants you to take on a red dragon to save the town?
"Screw the town, I don't want to mess with a dragon. Let's ditch this place."
Obviously, this doesn't always or even often happen (unless you're unlucky enough to get such players that would always ignore what you want).
Divinations are not purely plot powers, and teleporting is not purely a plot power. If you want a plot power, there are many things that are not explicitly outlined spells and abilities that you can invent and use for the purpose of being a plot power. You can even take powered-up versions of existing spells and use them for this purpose. There are a lot of things you can do that are wholly within outlined abilities that you can do, too, that most players wouldn't (or couldn't) normally do.
The spells that exist that players can use are made for players to be able to use them, and are balanced for this purpose. A Wish is powerful, but it's also very expensive, and it has its own restrictions.
None of this remotely has to do with Wish. Wish's only restriction is "Well ok the DM can screw with you I guess." And there's a huge difference between the party deciding to not follow a plot point and the wizard saying "I cast Wish at it until what I want happens."
I didn't even bring up divination or teleportation so I dunno where you're going with those :U
Certainly everyone makes the story, not just the DM. Consequently, everyone makes the story, not just the wizard. Wish turns wizards from a PC to an NPC in terms of narrative power.
No game designer is going to be able to cover absolutely everything a spell as flexible as wish could accomplish. It's rather like a microcosm of D&D itself. DM adjudication is necessary.A poorly worded wish...Gah! What, should the player obtain legal counsel before presenting his Wish? Why does Wish have to be this crappy?
Yes what I really want as a 3/x DM is more work.
If a spell by definition requires DM fiat then it is a spell I do not desire to exist. I'm fine with PCs going on a big quest to gain the usage of a single cast Wish or to delve into the cut-throat politics - literally! - of genies and efreeti to gain a boon. This is a plot power. I'm not fine with "Completely alter reality" being just a standard daily spell. This is a toy.
Wish turns wizards from a PC to an NPC in terms of narrative power.
No game designer is going to be able to cover absolutely everything a spell as flexible as wish could accomplish. It's rather like a microcosm of D&D itself. DM adjudication is necessary.
And in this case, Wish, I am totally onboard with DM adjudication. The thing that gets me, is that it almost always ends in tears when the DM says "you should have more carefully worded your Wish..." I mean, it doesn't have to be like that.
No game designer is going to be able to cover absolutely everything a spell as flexible as wish could accomplish. It's rather like a microcosm of D&D itself. DM adjudication is necessary.And in this case, Wish, I am totally onboard with DM adjudication. The thing that gets me, is that it almost always ends in tears when the DM says "you should have more carefully worded your Wish..." I mean, it doesn't have to be like that.
No it does not, nor should it always.
Ban wish entirely because it's a plot power, not a new toy for the wizard*.
*I feel this way about a lot of spells though so your mileage may vary.
The problem with deciding off-hand that certain spells should be banned because they're deemed "plot power" effects by you ignores the fact that everyone involved is making the story, not just the DM.
DM wants you to take on a red dragon to save the town?
"Screw the town, I don't want to mess with a dragon. Let's ditch this place."
Obviously, this doesn't always or even often happen (unless you're unlucky enough to get such players that would always ignore what you want).
Divinations are not purely plot powers, and teleporting is not purely a plot power. If you want a plot power, there are many things that are not explicitly outlined spells and abilities that you can invent and use for the purpose of being a plot power. You can even take powered-up versions of existing spells and use them for this purpose. There are a lot of things you can do that are wholly within outlined abilities that you can do, too, that most players wouldn't (or couldn't) normally do.
The spells that exist that players can use are made for players to be able to use them, and are balanced for this purpose. A Wish is powerful, but it's also very expensive, and it has its own restrictions.
None of this remotely has to do with Wish. Wish's only restriction is "Well ok the DM can screw with you I guess." And there's a huge difference between the party deciding to not follow a plot point and the wizard saying "I cast Wish at it until what I want happens."
I didn't even bring up divination or teleportation so I dunno where you're going with those :U
Certainly everyone makes the story, not just the DM. Consequently, everyone makes the story, not just the wizard. Wish turns wizards from a PC to an NPC in terms of narrative power.
...A
So,
What you are saying is,
You want to be mentally lazy,
And have a rule for everything???
Or am I reading this incorrectly?
No game designer is going to be able to cover absolutely everything a spell as flexible as wish could accomplish. It's rather like a microcosm of D&D itself. DM adjudication is necessary.And in this case, Wish, I am totally onboard with DM adjudication. The thing that gets me, is that it almost always ends in tears when the DM says "you should have more carefully worded your Wish..." I mean, it doesn't have to be like that.
But it's a lot of fun when it does end like that. Mwah hah ha!
I'm not to that level yet, but I don't expect my players to abuse wish. If they do, they'll likely be screwed over in some fable-esque lesson teaching manner. If they've been good and non-pricks up to that point, I'll probably give them a check to see why they are pushing the limits. If they've been pains in my ass who cause disruptions, slowdowns and petty arguments at the table, I'll likely use it as an opportunity to ruin their character.
So,
What you are saying is,
You want to be mentally lazy,
And have a rule for everything???
Or am I reading this incorrectly?
You are reading it incorrectly.
He's a GM with enough on his plate his saying. Personally I find you accusing him of metal laziness insulting in the extreme.
Simply because he has enough to do getting the game ready and waiting for everything else the players to do and doesn't want to contend with as badly worded and openly abusive a spell as wish (for both the players and the GM) doesn't mean he's a bad GM, mentally lazy or wanting a rule for everything.
It means in this one case he doesn't want this specific spell in his campaigns on a player controlled basis due to the range in abilities it grants, doesn't grant and requires from him and the players.
So,
What you are saying is,
You want to be mentally lazy,
And have a rule for everything???
Or am I reading this incorrectly?
You are reading it incorrectly.
He's a GM with enough on his plate his saying. Personally I find you accusing him of metal laziness insulting in the extreme.
Simply because he has enough to do getting the game ready and waiting for everything else the players to do and doesn't want to contend with as badly worded and openly abusive a spell as wish (for both the players and the GM) doesn't mean he's a bad GM, mentally lazy or wanting a rule for everything.
It means in this one case he doesn't want this specific spell in his campaigns on a player controlled basis due to the range in abilities it grants, doesn't grant and requires from him and the players.
not trying to accuse, which is why I was asking. I know of some people who do in fact want it all done for them so they have as little to do as possible. I tend to avoid those games.
I do not think, personally that wish is either open to ease of abuse, or that it requires much work on the GM. Of course I have seen tons of info about the proper adjudication of said spell type since 1st edition.
Honestly I've never seen Wish used to cast any other spell. Sure, Wish can be used for those cases, I guess?
My issue with Wish is that it's a carte blanc "The wizard gets to be a new DM unless the other DM screws him over or tells him no, also he can do this at least once per day, maybe more!" I find it easier just to axe it to begin with. In essence, Wish is the manifestation of Rule 0, only it's the player that's using it.
As for laziness, I find that spells like Wish encourage laziness, not the other way around. Creativity is using rope, two pitons, and a sack of flour to somehow defeat a dragon. Laziness is "I cast wish." I'm fine with creativity (I play Shadowrun for crying out loud, you haven't seen creativity and needless detailing until you see your average Runner's plan for infiltration), but "I cast the spell" isn't creativity.
Although this whole discussion has me thinking about spells and the NPC / PC divide (or lack thereof in 3e or other cases) and how it's influenced things. Hmmm...maybe another M-M-M-M-MEGATHREAD might be coming up ;p
As for laziness, I find that spells like Wish encourage laziness, not the other way around. Creativity is using rope, two pitons, and a sack of flour to somehow defeat a dragon. Laziness is "I cast wish." I'm fine with creativity (I play Shadowrun for crying out loud, you haven't seen creativity and needless detailing until you see your average Runner's plan for infiltration), but "I cast the spell" isn't creativity.
Oooooh yes.... it's not a proper run until three things go wrong and you have a contingency for each of them...
I remember having a character that got upset because the run took 10 seconds longer than it was supposed to because ditching the getaway car took longer than was expected.
(those 10 seconds were spent killing an alley way robber that thought he would be cute and get the jump on the runners... he goes, "stick t..." and his head was gone)
What, do your DMs throw money at the party or something? Wish isn't exactly cheap, and trying to use it to do things more powerful than what's intended shouldn't just be allowed without a second thought, otherwise it's the DM's fault.
I think the problem is what you mistakenly think Wish is, not Wish itself.
Uh, wizards have tons of money due to not having to buy magical weapons or armor. I dunno what to say here - they have more "disposable income" in D&D-land then any other class, save maybe sorcerers.
Plus, they're wizards, it's not like they can't almost literally create money out of thin air.
My problem is Wish. My problem is that the spell is nigh limitless in scope and power and that it's "just another daily spell." It's the kind of thing you expect in Exalted, if Exalted weren't an utterly terrible system.
As for laziness, I find that spells like Wish encourage laziness, not the other way around. Creativity is using rope, two pitons, and a sack of flour to somehow defeat a dragon. Laziness is "I cast wish." I'm fine with creativity (I play Shadowrun for crying out loud, you haven't seen creativity and needless detailing until you see your average Runner's plan for infiltration), but "I cast the spell" isn't creativity.
Oooooh yes.... it's not a proper run until three things go wrong and you have a contingency for each of them...
I remember having a character that got upset because the run took 10 seconds longer than it was supposed to because ditching the getaway car took longer than was expected.
(those 10 seconds were spent killing an alley way robber that thought he would be cute and get the jump on the runners... he goes, "stick t..." and his head was gone)
Shadowrun is basically Oceans 11 with orcs and elves. And sometimes the plans are even more bizarre. And something always goes wrong, and you always need to improvise.
Shadowrun is basically Oceans 11 with orcs and elves. And sometimes the plans are even more bizarre. And something always goes wrong, and you always need to improvise.
Yeah... I like cyberpunk better... but shadowrun wasn't bad by a long shot.
What, your Wizards walk around naked or something? Any Wizard worth his spellbook would have at least a few toys at hand. There are a lot of things a Wizard would (and should) get as their gear. No, they don't need magical weapons or armor, but they do need other things.
...And those other things equate to them spending less then other classes. This isn't even arguable. Wizards need less things then other classes. The things they do need, those other classes also need.
Except, of course, that they can't.
No, it's just as I guessed. Your problem is what you mistakenly think Wish is, and not Wish itself.
Perhaps you should take some time to actually read the spell description.
How about instead of being snide and smug you actually say what I'm doing wrong?
Shadowrun is basically Oceans 11 with orcs and elves. And sometimes the plans are even more bizarre. And something always goes wrong, and you always need to improvise.
As for laziness, I find that spells like Wish encourage laziness, not the other way around. Creativity is using rope, two pitons, and a sack of flour to somehow defeat a dragon. Laziness is "I cast wish." I'm fine with creativity (I play Shadowrun for crying out loud, you haven't seen creativity and needless detailing until you see your average Runner's plan for infiltration), but "I cast the spell" isn't creativity.
Oooooh yes.... it's not a proper run until three things go wrong and you have a contingency for each of them...
I remember having a character that got upset because the run took 10 seconds longer than it was supposed to because ditching the getaway car took longer than was expected.
(those 10 seconds were spent killing an alley way robber that thought he would be cute and get the jump on the runners... he goes, "stick t..." and his head was gone)
that, that leaves me speechless.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll take a stab at that, Professor.
First, I'll start by saying, I don't have an issue with you removing the spell due to headaches. Perfectly valid use of DM power.
However, this is where you are incorrect.
Wish is limitless - no, it has limits spelled right out in the spell. Anything beyond that runs into your 'headache' area, but there are absolutely limits.
Wish is auto-win - I've never seen "I wish the dragon was gone" to generate a no-save, instant removal of said dragon from the scenario that created a happy ending.
Wish is anti-creative - To me, and I take great pleasure in the precise area of wish you find a headache, creative wishing and wish granting is part of the fun of the spell. Wish does not remove the need to encounter the dragon, but wish can be used creatively to help aid the team in encountering the dragon. It allows a player to call upon Deus ex machina, but as DM, I still get to decide how much machina is provided. And I typically guide myself by the fact that it is a 9th level spell and costs 25,000 gp a pop.
So basically, those three ideas you are espousing don't seem to be the case for me, and as such I'd suggest they are not universal, but more situational depending on how one approaches it.
that, that leaves me speechless.
Shadowrun is basically Oceans 11 with orcs and elves. And sometimes the plans are even more bizarre. And something always goes wrong, and you always need to improvise.
With guns and cybernetics... big guns... :D
...And those other things equate to them spending less then other classes. This isn't even arguable. Wizards need less things then other classes. The things they do need, those other classes also need.There are things that other classes don't need that Wizards should have (I would say "need" but obviously you seem to be of the opinion that they can perform just fine naked.)
Sure they can!No, they can't. Major creation is highly limited. Wall of Iron even specifically states that, "Iron created by this spell is not suitable for use in the creation of other objects and cannot be sold." Fabricate can only work with existing materials, and still requires a craft check for a lot of things (probably the only ones you can make a decent profit versus raw materials cost).
They cannot do what you are attempting to argue they can do. I wonder if you even play this game.
How about instead of being snide and smug you actually say what I'm doing wrong?How about I have been saying exactly why you're wrong, and you are just ignoring reality. If you want to maintain your delusions about Wish and Wizards despite what you can even read for yourself in the rules, do it elsewhere.
While you are correct there is no need to be insulting. If he is incorrect post the quotes such as:
"Attempting to use any created object as a material component causes the spell to fail."--Minor Creation which has the base rules for Major creation.PS:Professor while I normally agree with you I have to disagree this time. The spell does not inhibit creativity at all. Using it to make up new version of lower level spells on the fly is what my last group did most of the time, among other things.
And in this case, Wish, I am totally onboard with DM adjudication. The thing that gets me, is that it almost always ends in tears when the DM says "you should have more carefully worded your Wish..." I mean, it doesn't have to be like that.
My rule of thumb is: The more greedy you are, the more the wish is going to screw you over.
If you stick to the beaten path, i.e. the stuff laid out in wish, you'll succeed. If you go only a bit beyond that, you'll have to be a little bit cautious and if the wish screws you over, nothing too bad will happen.
If you want it all, you better have a perfect formulation, or you're going to suffer big time.
If you want it all, you better have a perfect formulation, or you're going to suffer big time.
Be honest though...they aren't going to have the perfect formulation, and you aren't going to let the power break the game even if they did. You're tossing that statement out there to pretend the result isn't preordained.
If you want it all, you better have a perfect formulation, or you're going to suffer big time.Be honest though...they aren't going to have the perfect formulation, and you aren't going to let the power break the game even if they did. You're tossing that statement out there to pretend the result isn't preordained.
@ Kae Yoss - I'm not saying the above is what you're doing; but I do agree with Kain Darkwind, when he says PC [catastrophic] failure, in regards to Wish, is preordained by many, if not most, DMs.
I personally wonder if fear of losing control is what causes most GMs to nuke wishes. Wish, more blatantly than any other spell, lets the PCs alter the world to suit their whims. Assuming, of course, the PCs make a wish that fits into the guidelines. We know our friends that we game with, and we know what they're capable of. So we fear on some level what they'll do when they get the chance. Even a friendly disagreement could come back to haunt you when the PC has a wish and the will to use it. So GMs just make the wish twist and/or fail, the worst of which then comment/boast that the "phrasing wasn't right" and that they "could do better".
@ Kae Yoss - I'm not saying the above is what you're doing; but I do agree with Kain Darkwind, when he says PC [catastrophic] failure, in regards to Wish, is preordained by many, if not most, DMs.If you want it all, you better have a perfect formulation, or you're going to suffer big time.Be honest though...they aren't going to have the perfect formulation, and you aren't going to let the power break the game even if they did. You're tossing that statement out there to pretend the result isn't preordained.
I should point out that I don't have a problem with that per se, as I've admitted above I'll wreck a dick player who tries to screw the game with wish. But to paraphrase the Dread Pirate Roberts, "we are men of action, you and I. Self-deception does not become us."
Let's call the spade a spade. There isn't room for the guy who wishes beyond the DM-set limits. He's not going to get it through a clever RP scenario, he's not going to get it through a high Wisdom check, he's not going to get it through a perfect iron clad wording.
|
Ok, let's see this. the Wish is a 9th lvl spell. It is an incredibly powerfull tool, that the wizard or sorcerer can use to literally reshape reality in a minor way (to all reality of course). A wizard who has capability to cast wish is at least 17th lvl (18th if a sorcerer), which makes him incredibly powerful. For the sake of the gods, most people in the world are 1-4th lvl...a 17th lvl wizard iz a demigod. He can do most things others only dream of, and then some things they don't even dare to dream.
Then, you add a 25.000 gold piece price...and then you actualy have the gall to screw the player over? Come on. If he wishes for something to great for the wish to cover, just dial it down. If for example he wishes to be twice as healthy as he is now, you add permanent 20 hit points to his hp. And similar stuff...
If for example he wishes to be twice as healthy as he is now, you add permanent 20 hit points to his hp. And similar stuff...
That's what, like 1.2 hit points per level? For 55k, if you could find it, you could get a Manual of Bodily Health +2. I dunno, I think I'd just have the book appear in the guy's hand...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, let's see this. the Wish is a 9th lvl spell. It is an incredibly powerfull tool, that the wizard or sorcerer can use to literally reshape reality in a minor way (to all reality of course). A wizard who has capability to cast wish is at least 17th lvl (18th if a sorcerer), which makes him incredibly powerful. For the sake of the gods, most people in the world are 1-4th lvl...a 17th lvl wizard iz a demigod. He can do most things others only dream of, and then some things they don't even dare to dream.
Then, you add a 25.000 gold piece price...and then you actualy have the gall to screw the player over? Come on. If he wishes for something to great for the wish to cover, just dial it down. If for example he wishes to be twice as healthy as he is now, you add permanent 20 hit points to his hp. And similar stuff...
25,000gp plus a 9th level spell IS a big deal. So the spell ought to accomplish a great deal. I'm with you there.
However, casting wish yourself isn't the only way to 'get a wish', so some of that doesn't apply all the time.
Moreover, 'screwing the player over' for wish serves to drive home two points. 1. Wishes are dangerous entities in fantasy. 2. Don't screw around with wish.
The first is important because it sets a tone. Dealing with devils and genies...watch Wishmaster. Aladdin. King Midas. There is a theme here.
The second is important because wish can be an important tool, but it can also be an invitation for players to start trying to screw with the game, rather than enhance and improve the game. Making such attempts not only fail, but counter productive serves to dissuade others from following suit.
I agree there is a fine line though. If you screw over each and every wish, you'll effectively create a de facto situation like Professor Cino has...no wishes at all. Assuming my players are working with me rather than against, I would prefer that even twisted wishes provide an effect that is worth 25,000 gp plus a 9th level spell. It serves them and it serves the tone of the game.
|
|
The concept that the wish is dangerous if used properly is dragged from 1st and 2nd edition. Pathfinder wish can be used without any risk to the character as long as the character doesn't wish for something so ridiculously big that the universe goes:"whoa dude...less is more". And in that case, i usually just take what the player asked for and dial it down to appropriate levels.
For example, in one game, the wizard asked for a huge castle and 10.000 professional soldiers bilndly loyal to him. What i gave him was the actual Leadership feat, (provided he swapped it with a feat of his own) and a five story stone tower with a 10 foot stone wall in a 50foot circle around it.
The concept that the wish is dangerous if used properly is dragged from 1st and 2nd edition.
No. It is one dragged from thousands of years of mythology.
If you cast wish 5 times in succession for a boost to a stat or your BAB, etc., you just spent 125,000 gp of hard-earned treasure. Given that a 20th level PC gets 880,000 gp total, that's a huge chunk of change for any character. That sort of wish is a big expenditure, and one you can't afford to do ad infinitum.
The spell description explains the danger of wishing for too much. I'd think any player wanting to push the limits will know that, and word things accordingly. As rare and potentially self-screwing as it can be, casting the spell is a momentous event in a campaign, because something big is about to change.
Nobody can afford to cast the spell casually. The caster in the OP would indeed get a +1 to his BAB in my games. Another GM might give him the ability to cast transformation as a spell-like ability for a certain # of times or rounds per day. Either one is fine, IMHO. The wish has been granted. He got what he wanted, more or less.
"My 20th level sorcerer has a BAB that goes up to 11. That's more, innit?"
I could see certain characters wanting to raise their BAB that way, like melee-oriented rogues and such. Most wouldn't gain much bang for their buck that way.
Characters trying to "win" by making ridiculous or far-fetched (game-breaking) wishes would either lose the wish (and the diamond) altogether, or cause the GM to end the session until he comes up with a suitably nasty "fulfillment" based carefully on the wording, like a monster would do.
Wishes are a BIG deal. They should be played that way.
If wishes were that much of a big deal, then, characters wouldn't be able to cast them and the only way you could get a wish is if you captured a genie, efreeti or some other wish casting monster.
17th level and higher characters can cast them, and they cost 25,000. That's a big deal in my book.