|
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.
If I can do something everyday, multiple times a day, it will eventually no longer be a big deal.
If I can do something everyday, multiple times a day, it will eventually no longer be a big deal.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.
Is there an errata that says you can cast wish without spending 25000?
I've seen some DM's screw over every wish to the point where the wish spell and all wish items might as well not exist. Maybe it would be better just to say, "I don't like how wish affects the game so it does not exist."
I agree here. Wish was not designed as a player screwer. It IS a double edged sword that should be used very carefully, sparingly and with great forethought. If the a character uses a wish sloppily or for purely greedly or evil intent, then they should suffer somewhat for it.
The DM should not punish a character with a wish, especially since the PC most likely (or should have) gone through a great ordeal to earn it.
|
|
Is there an errata that says you can cast wish without spending 25000?If I can do something everyday, multiple times a day, it will eventually no longer be a big deal.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.
Nope. But look at the super-rich in our own world. After you buy your 15th yacht, is a yacht still a big deal?
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
Not my fault that they were born, as flawed, imperfect mortals. Of course, it's practically impossible to have a formulation that is so good that the GM cannot screw one over with it.
But still, there is a difference between practically impossible and really impossible.
and you aren't going to let the power break the game even if they did.
Nah, I'm fair. I'm up front with stuff like this, and if they really accept that challenge ("Ultimate power through wish requires a perfectly worded wish") and succeeded, they'll get their ultimate power, even if it means the campaign ends right there.
Of course, the chances of something like this breaking our game is infinitesimally small, since I don't play with game-breakers.
However, this could be a great way to end a campaign that is going to end, anyway.
You're tossing that statement out there to pretend the result isn't preordained.
Wrong. I stand by my word. Lesser GMs wouldn't, but I'm not one of them. And I learned from the best.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The DM should not punish a character with a wish, especially since the PC most likely (or should have) gone through a great ordeal to earn it.
Well, I'm somewhere in the middle.
I'm not one to sadistically screw players over*, but I do think that unwise choices should have unfortunate consequences.
I'm honest and open with this sort of thing in my games. In the case of wish, there are a lot of uses for the spell that even the rules say are to work without the risk of going wrong, and I agree with the rules.
When a player states that he wants to go beyond that with his wish (or miracle - that spell has a similar potential), I will talk to the player out of character about his wishes and how likely they are to work. What does he want to accomplish? Why does he want to accomplish it. Is he aware of the consequences something like that could have - not only if they fail, but also if they succeed?
Based on that talk (and something as momentous as a wish that goes off the beaten path does warrant a wish), I will tell them up front how I'm going to handle their attempt in-game, and how much of a magical retribution they have to prepare for should they fail.
If someone tells me he wants to be invincible, just because that is cool and he's so smart he's impossible to fail, and then tells me that he'll go through with it even after I told him that the chances for succeeding are pretty damn small (this is something where you couldn't even hope for a 1-in-20 chance), I'll let him have it. Should that guy actually succeed in it, he'll get what he wished for, but he probably won't succeed. And then I WILL let him have it. He really wanted that. It's not a blunder or a heat-of-the-moment thing.
* Okay, I'm lying through my teeth. However, the old "Your paladin stands before a demon who threatens to murder a child if the Paladin doesn't kill the goodly high priest - what do you do, and since both choices will make your paladin fall, start removing those abilities" is for amateurs. That's for stupid jerks. I'm not stupid. I'm quite smart. And I'm not a jerk. I'm a proper Rat Bastard GM. We know how to torment players and make them come back for more!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Last game I ran, the characters got offered wishes by a dryad. The players then wanted to know if I was planning to screw everyone over and how I ran these. I told them that I stuck very close to folklore and they should have their characters make "Knowledge Nature" checks to remember the appropriate fairytales about dealing with the fey, and specifically being granted wishes by dryads.
The answer was this: According to all the fairy lore, if the person making the wish was humble and modest and asked for no more than they needed or could reasonably desire, then the wishes went flawlessly and were exactly what was wished for. However, if the wisher was rude to the fey, or greedy, or even worse both, then the wishes were horribly twisted and cursed.
If it's a Miracle? You have the miracle filtered through the lens of the god or goddess granting it.
A wizard's wish, OTOH, should be run through the filter of the wizard himself, including his interpretation, knowledge, and subconscious desires. For spells within the power limits, these are just spells. For things outside the power limits? It's GM fiat. Things should generally go right, except when they don't, and when they don't, you need another wish to fix the problem.
the boost to the stat will also increase damage output though. An increase to just to hit will help on the same point some (in that you are hitting more) but not as much as the boost to Str (which helps hit more and deals more damage per hit).
I could see an inherent bonus to hit up to +5 as normal for the skills.
To me, this one is probably the most reasonable rout, actually.
It's not over powered, and falls within the guidelines, but is still awfully generous overall.
Nope. But look at the super-rich in our own world. After you buy your 15th yacht, is a yacht still a big deal?Is there an errata that says you can cast wish without spending 25000?If I can do something everyday, multiple times a day, it will eventually no longer be a big deal.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.
Not to a billionaire. A 17-20th level wizard has between 410,000 and 880,000 gp in total wealth, most of it presumably already spent on magic items. He may cast lots of "safe" wishes (stat increases, etc.) for his friends who can pay for them, but dropping a 25,000 gp diamond even at those levels is a considerable cost.
If you play into epic levels, wishes can indeed be like your 15th yacht. Below that, they're too expensive to cast casually.
Which proves my point that eventually, wishes are no big deal. When that happens, of course, varies from person to person.
Sometime after 20th, I'd say, when treasures are always filled with unimagineable wealth, and 25,000 gp diamonds are "Meh. I'll put them in my bag of holding with all the others, and go solo that prismatic dragon after lunch."
I've never really liked epic. I hope it gets revamped.
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.
+1. 1 class can cast it at 17th level, 1 at 18th. No one else. Definitely a big deal.
But Hama, your logic doesn't follow.
"If dragons were that much of a big deal, you wouldn't be able to kill them with a 3rd level party."
Dragons are a big deal in mythology. Wishes are a big deal in mythology. Just because they exist in the game doesn't mean that they aren't something to be treated with respect.
|
Dragons are a big deal in mythology. Wishes are a big deal in mythology. Just because they exist in the game doesn't mean that they aren't something to be treated with respect.
I never said that they shouldn't be treated with respect, just, that they should also not bet treated as something more than that they are.
Dragons are immensely powerful, magical beings that can easily decimate a party, but if party kills it, a gm shouldn't be like:" screw this, it's a dragon, they all die". Dragons are put in the game specifically to be killed, or bargained with. Not to be unbeatable gods.
With wish, it is a means to an end. If you are powerful enough to cast it, and have the funds to actually make it happen, why shouldn't you get what you wanted?
I agree that if a wish was cast by a third party, sure, if the players weren't careful with their wording, and didn't treat the caster with respect, the GM has all the grounds to screw them over. But if a PC casts a wish, that shouldn't happen.
I don't remember that a wish has "Screw players over with this spell because you are afraid of it's capabilities" in it's spell description.
Of course, wish has a limit, as it isn't an epic spell, so, if a PC asks for something improbable, like a whole city filled with people blindly loyal to the character, i would simply tone it down to a willage with willager helpful to the character...no need to screw him over with something that would make him hate the GM
I don't remember that a wish has "Screw players over with this spell because you are afraid of it's capabilities" in it's spell description.
Of course, wish has a limit, as it isn't an epic spell, so, if a PC asks for something improbable, like a whole city filled with people blindly loyal to the character, i would simply tone it down to a willage with willager helpful to the character...no need to screw him over with something that would make him hate the GM
+1. It's up to the GM to decide what's ok for his game. It's fair to assume that he's probably played with the player long enough to know what his character wants and can reasonably get. It's also fair to have a little OOC discussion to establish parameters, and if the player's careful at all, he'll make sure not to exceed them. The typical high-level wiz/sor is already pretty careful, or he wouldn't have lived to reach his level.
Wish can be difficult for the GM, but it shouldn't be game-breaking. That's no fun for anyone. Like I said before, unless you're playing at epic levels, you can't afford to toss wishes around like fireballs. Players will know that.
The safe limits of wish are set out in the spell.
If you go beyond them, why shouldn't you risk (not automatically incur) the danger that the spell DOES state exists?
"You may try to use a wish to produce greater effects than these, but doing so is dangerous. (The wish may pervert your intent into a literal but undesirable fulfillment or only a partial fulfillment, at the GM's discretion.)"
Yes, but most GMs see this as a free pass at perverting ANY wish cast by the player regardless of the fact that it actualy is well articulated and does not exceed the limits placed in the spell description.
The most part is incorrect. Most DM's will allow the Wish to work until you set off a mental alarm that is attached to their "greed" detector.
You want to wish for a metamagic version of a lower level spell, fine.
You want to wish for permanent immunity to several different things, not so much. This might get you transformed into a rock or something else. I currently just tell my players no, but they never went to extremes either.
If the player did not understand the limits of the spell I would not pervert the wish. If the player is trying to get over on me, as some have in the past it's time to twist the wish.
Nope. But look at the super-rich in our own world. After you buy your 15th yacht, is a yacht still a big deal?
If, after buying 15, they're still looking to buy more, I'd say so. Maybe not as much occasion to throw a big party, but it's obviously scratching some extravagant itch somewhere.
Yes, but most GMs see this as a free pass at perverting ANY wish cast by the player regardless of the fact that it actualy is well articulated and does not exceed the limits placed in the spell description.
I don't think 'most' DMs do, but that's not the point. The point is there is a time to twist and a time not to, and both are perfectly valid when employed correctly.
|
Conservation of energy
This is one of my guiding rules.
A wish, no matter who 'grants' it, will not go out of it's way to do something ridiculously powerful to screw someone over, if it's 'easier' to just give the PC some small bonus.
That sort of nonsense just leads to players understanding that whatever crazy thing I did can now be done by wishing. The momentary surge of sadistic pleasure from playing a mean trick (assuming I had ever experienced such...) is no excuse to set a bad precedent that might come back later to bite me!
Assuming that's it's okay to be a mean, adversarial DM, there's still no excuse to be a short-sighted one and get hoist by one's own petard!
In games, I tended to use Wishes for practical things.
One character wished to have the half-dozen spellbooks she'd acquired over the last couple years assembled in alphabetical and level order into new books, with duplicates shuffled off into limbo, so that she no longer had to carry as many of them around (or keep a spreadsheet of captured spellbooks, and consult it to find out which book had spell Y in it).
Another wished to have the magical enhancements of some weapons and armor we'd found transfered to his own weapons and armor, so that he could keep using his signature gear, and we didn't have to sell all of the crappy +X glaive-glaive-guisarme-glaives or whatever at half-price.
The GM could have twisted the wishes, but since I wasn't doing anything particularly twisted in the first place, he wasn't motivated to do so.
Eh with a campaign im forming, im actually on the fence on allowing wish spell at all or cutting it and have it rarely rewarded from a quest.
Question is IF I allow the spell wish to exist in the campaign, how many wishes would incur the wrath of the beings who go out and seach after people abusing wish?
In Legacy of Fire, there's articles about wishcraft and the like.
They speak about how overpowered wishes can warp the fabric of reality and thus the genies - caretakers of the power of wishcraft - will sense wish abuse and hunt down those who abuse wishes (even if they find the perfect wording and don't get screwed by the wish itself).
It all reflects my stance very nicely: In the case of wishes, I tailor my level of bastardlyness to the level of powergaming/ruleslawyerism/munchkinism perpetrated by the players. Meaning that the standard applications can be hand-waved (I even waive the material component for basic stuff on par with the stuff from miracle), but if you go overboard, you will suffer for it.
KaeYoss! It's good to see you, man! I haven't seen you around in a while!
Thanks for pointing out the article before I did. :)
Speaking of Legacy of Fire, here's my basic house rules for handling wishes. Of course, being house rules, they're easier for me to grant leeway with. (That post and the four or five posts I make following).
KaeYoss! It's good to see you, man! I haven't seen you around in a while!Thanks for pointing out the article before I did. :)
Well really, you still have not seen him. This thread died 2 years ago.
Huh. I... don't know how I came across it, then. Oops. :(
EDIT: Oh, I see. Someone revived it recently who wasn't me. Okay, yeah, that makes sense.
Regardless:
Well... one possibility would be to replace 11 of his levels with a level in fighter or ranger or barbarian and then 10 of eldritch knight... even more so if it was a sorcerer since the battle sorcerer variant from 3.5 would plug in just fine, giving a (battle) sorcerer 7/fighter type 1/ek 10 a base attack of 16 which is only 2 away from where he 'wanted' to be... and he'd lose access to 2 levels worth of spell casting.
This is a pretty good idea, too.