Wish is obviously a point of contention. The fact that it lacks the inherent veto power of miracle means GMs need to be extra careful to avoid a) ha Ingram wish overpower the game, b) nerfing it into uselessness, and especially c) 'you cast wish, so I'm going to screw you over harder than a deck of many things made from dead monkey paws.'
Another issue with wishes is the fact that players get a cheaper version much earlier. Forgot your cleric? Heal is 5th level for an adept, so use limited wish. Raise dead and restoration are also on the table. True, limited wish is no longer as 'throwaway' as it was when it cost a mere 300 XP, but it still has that 'other effects' clause.
Now, the general consensus is to try and fulfil the wish using existing spells. This leads to some unintentionally hilarious situations, though. If a player wishes for happiness, do you just give them a +2 morale bonus on saves, attacks, ability and skill checks, and damage rolls for 17 minutes and call it a day? (good hope, bard 3)
What are the community's thoughts on common open-ended wishes, how best to handle them, and whether a particular effect requires wish, or if you can get away with limited wish, or if it needs a genie, glabrezu, or deck of many things to bring about.
Also, feel free to add funny, frustrating, insightful, depressing, or inspirational anecdotes about wishes to your post.
I love the idea of giving a group the ability to take big risks, as long as they are aware that it is a chance that they are taking. In one homebrew campaign, I had my party forced (socially, not physically) to draw at least once from the deck of many things. When the wishing card came up, I gave 2 minutes for her two wishes that she got. The sense of panic and excitement in the group was awesome, and she got another deck of many things out of it. May seem overpowered, but the items has an internal balance mechanism through the risk inherent in it. One guy lost two characters to the deck in insta-kill. He doesn't like the deck anymore.
Book Six of Legacy of Fire AP, The Final Wish), has a chapter on wishcraft and some guidance on how to incorporate them into you games based upon casting the spell yourself or getting the wish from an outside source.
Wish is obviously a point of contention. The fact that it lacks the inherent veto power of miracle means GMs need to be extra careful to avoid a) ha Ingram wish overpower the game, b) nerfing it into uselessness, and especially c) 'you cast wish, so I'm going to screw you over harder than a deck of many things made from dead monkey paws.'
Another issue with wishes is the fact that players get a cheaper version much earlier. Forgot your cleric? Heal is 5th level for an adept, so use limited wish. Raise dead and restoration are also on the table. True, limited wish is no longer as 'throwaway' as it was when it cost a mere 300 XP, but it still has that 'other effects' clause.
Now, the general consensus is to try and fulfil the wish using existing spells. This leads to some unintentionally hilarious situations, though. If a player wishes for happiness, do you just give them a +2 morale bonus on saves, attacks, ability and skill checks, and damage rolls for 17 minutes and call it a day?
What are the community's thoughts on common open-ended wishes, how best to handle them, and whether a particular effect requires wish, or if you can get away with limited wish, or if it needs a genie, glabrezu, or deck of many things to bring about.
Also, feel free to add funny, frustrating, insightful, depressing, or inspirational anecdotes about wishes to your post.
I keep wish within the power level outlined. I dont allow open-ended wishes you call them. Those types of spells fail.
Wizards are not gods. And they cannot do what gods cannot do. Wishing for happiness would be an impossible to fulfill wish and thus fail or I guess I might have the wish give them a magic item that produces drugs and makes them artificially happy whenever they take it.
But wishes like "I wish for the most powerful sword ever made" or other such ridiculous wishes would be vetoed or twisted into something like being given the +1 sword of the King of the most powerful empire that is a family heirloom that signifies who the king is.
I'm having trouble coming up with a wish that can't be covered by the core rules.
Talking animal? Awaken.
Find buried treasure/lost loved one? Discern location.
Destroy an object? Disintegrate.
Destroy a building? Sympathetic vibration.
Kill someone? Finger of death or destruction.
Turn something into something else? Polymorph any object.
Change the weather? Control weather.
Repair an object? Make whole.
Control someone? Demand, dominate person, mass suggestion, etc.
Raise the dead? Raise dead, breath of life, resurrection.
Curse someone? Bestow curse.
Heal? Regenerate, greater restoration, heal, etc.
Learn the answer to a question? Divination, vision, commune, etc.
If it's concrete, it's probably doable with an existing spell, except for possible duration/area changes. If a character wants it to always rain in his little valley, or cover the whole thing in a permanent deeper darkness, and is willing to blow the market price equivalent of a +5 cloak of resistance and a 9th level spell, he should feel free.
Now, cheese wishes are something else entirely. I have my own special table for what happens when they wish for 'immunity to harm' and the spell instead becomes an epic-level one-off rod of wonder.
Now, cheese wishes are something else entirely. I have my own special table for what happens when they wish for 'immunity to harm' and the spell instead becomes an epic-level one-off rod of wonder.
Stoneskin?
Isn't Harm just the negative energy version of Heal? That sounds just fine. Harm doesn't work on them. Cause Critical, negative energy channeling, and swords still do though.
Heheh, harm is in-character for 'damage.'
Now, cheese wishes are something else entirely. I have my own special table for what happens when they wish for 'immunity to harm' and the spell instead becomes an epic-level one-off rod of wonder.Stoneskin?
Good one, together with spell resistance. I like it.
|
All wishes are about wording if he becomes immune to harm make him a statue in the void some where, unlikely to take harm. its all about wording, be a lawyer make a fine print i had a DM do this to protect his plot and to make us think before we worded a wish. we now have a list of stuff we rattle off to gird us against such contingencies
All wishes are about wording if he becomes immune to harm make him a statue in the void some where, unlikely to take harm. its all about wording, be a lawyer make a fine print i had a DM do this to protect his plot and to make us think before we worded a wish. we now have a list of stuff we rattle off to gird us against such contingencies
That's exactly the *opposite* of what you're supposed to do. It makes the 'screw the player' version the most powerful version of the spell (and what if they decide to wish that the BBEG was 'immune to harm?')
And adding a form letter of contingencies would either a) piss off the genie (or have him ignore or misinterpret your words out of confusion) or b) not make sense because it's the caster's own spell, so there isn't an invisible genie to misinterpret them. However, this introduces the caveat that the caster must know what he's trying to wish for (i.e. he must know what sword is the most powerful, and not simply have the spell figure it out for him, because the standard casting of the spell has no genie.)
I find it funny that nobody plays these kinds of games with reality revision (psionic wish).
Think of a wish as the caster peeling back reality, changing it, then trying to paste it back together without breaking anything else. A failed wish results in a temporary magical disjunction in the local fabric of reality (an earthquake, reverse gravity, random plane shift, or some such) rather than an intelligent agent choosing to screw the caster by playing word games.
And the wizard isn't saying "I wish ...," because then the spellcraft DC to identify the spell he's casting would be 0. He's using the same magic gibberish all verbal components do. (Man, just imagine having someone GDM counterspell your wish... 25,000 go of diamonds evaporating for nothing!)
Wouldn't spell names also be in character? If you were to go to the temple to buy a scroll of Harm and for some reason insist on roleplaying the encounter entirely in character wouldn't you ask for a harm scroll?Isn't Harm just the negative energy version of Heal? That sounds just fine. Harm doesn't work on them. Cause Critical, negative energy channeling, and swords still do though.Heheh, harm is in-character for 'damage.'
Nope. Would an eleven swordsmith say "This sword, my masterpiece, adds five to attack and damage rolls!"
I mean, this deserves its own whole thread, but, IMHO, characters would know that a wizard whose fireballs can be delayed by half a minute is casting a more powerful spell than one who's throwing them from a wand, but they don't actually have set names for spells any more than you could have a universal accent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, this deserves its own whole thread, but, IMHO, characters would know that a wizard whose fireballs can be delayed by half a minute is casting a more powerful spell than one who's throwing them from a wand, but they don't actually have set names for spells any more than you could have a universal accent.Surely, since there are rules for hiring people to cast spells and a market for spell trigger and spell completion items these spells have names. It's far more likely that characters not be able to distinguish delayed from standard fireballs than that they not know that standard fireballs are called fireballs and are what come out of a wand of fireballs.
Not knowing what a fireball is called is like not knowing what a kukri is called. Or would you tell someone who wished for an adamantine kukri that they couldn't have it because kukri is an out of character term and there's no evidence they're actually called that in the setting?
This will end badly and with neither of us changing our minds, but I'm bored, so here goes: spells have names for ease of play issues. Those names aren't necessarily used in the game, unless the spell is famous, like the various spells with WotC intellectual property in their names that got bastardized to 'mage's ...' Players use the spell names among themselves, but their characters don't. Are a babau's unholy powers over darkness the same as a sixth level wizard's darkness spell? Not really, but the SLA system makes it seem that way, though the seeming similarity is due to not wanting to write the same effect twice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This will end badly and with neither of us changing our minds, but I'm bored, so here goes: spells have names for ease of play issues. Those names aren't necessarily used in the game, unless the spell is famous, like the various spells with WotC intellectual property in their names that got bastardized to 'mage's ...' Players use the spell names among themselves, but their characters don't.
I would really love to hear how you think people locate and purchase wands and scrolls, or what they might possibly call the spells when discussing them with someone.
It can't just be by a description of the effects of casting the spell, because there's no descriptive difference between any of the inflict line, for instance. I mean, if they're going to have to say "the third most powerful spell that lets you touch a living creature to hurt them, and which heals undead" then they really would benefit greatly from the introduction of a naming system for these spells, you know, similar to the naming system we're already provided with as players.
Are a babau's unholy powers over darkness the same as a sixth level wizard's darkness spell? Not really, but the SLA system makes it seem that way, though the seeming similarity is due to not wanting to write the same effect twice.
They are not exactly the same, but they are identical in effect. The Babau need not provide verbal or material components when he manifests his darkness effect. However, the effect he creates is exactly identical to that of a level 7 caster's.
Both can counter or dispel light spells of level 2 or lower. Both do nothing except cause a certain area to fall into darkness. To dispel either one, you'd need to get an 18 on a dispel check with a light spell of level 2 or higher. In fact, if the Babau and the Wizard cast their darkness spell in a different part of the same room before you walked in, you wouldn't know which is which. You could use Knowledge (Arcana) to determine what spell effect each was, but you would identify both as exactly the same thing - the darkness spell effect. If you want to rule that there's some recognizable difference between how they look, then that is a house ruling. There's certainly a difference in how they are cast, since one is a SLA, but no difference in the effect.
The way I see it there are some wishes that are well within the power of a wish spell, copying spell effects and boosting ability scores.
You can wish for things that are beyond that but then you will have to be prepared for a backlash effect, if you wish to be immortal, invulnerable, the most powerful mage alive etc. you should not expect to have the wish granted to you like you expect it to be. That is typically when GMs 'screw' players over. As such a wish's power is not the power in itself but the great flexibility being able to generate any spell effect you can imagine, basically if aother spell can do it, wish can as well.
It depends on the source of the wish, there are several different types of wish granters (I've written a whole thing about it but I don't want to type that out). Things such as "The hard of hearing genie" (doesn't have to be a genie) in which whatever they wish for is granted with other wording eg. "I wish for a magic sword!" and poof he gets a cracked board, yeah it doesn't even have to be close, these are like thesaurus genies but more obviously just being a dick.
A thesaurus genie is your standard give them what they wish for but not in the intended way eg. "I wish to be hard as rock!" poof he's a rock.
Then there is the google genie, your wish is essentially entered as a search term and whatever comes up first is granted, this is usually a non-living source of wishes because it isn't trying to screw you over but it lacks the ability to derive intent. eg. "I wish to be immune to fire!" poof your immune to heat from all sources, which means your always uncomfortably cold (fire here is just taken as heat because that is the only thing that affected you for the wish to grant immunity to)
So decide what kind of wish granter it is a go from their, these are just a few examples.
|
Now, cheese wishes are something else entirely. I have my own special table for what happens when they wish for 'immunity to harm' and the spell instead becomes an epic-level one-off rod of wonder.
Easy one:
The wish user get greater spell immunity from the spell Harm (an only to that spell).It normally will be a temporary effect but if he specified in his wish "permanent immunity to harm" he could even get a pernanent version.
After all he is trading away the possibility to be immune to up to 5 spells (depending on CL) for the spell duration for a permanent protection from a single spell (it is not possible to stack multiple spell immunity).
I agree with Omelite. There is a list of generally know names for spells.
If you hadn't them trading magic items, techings spells, studing as a wizard and so on would be impossible.
I suppose in yuour world wizard learn their trade only as apprentices from a older wizard, as magical academies would be impossible.
|
|
My wish anecdote:
After a fight with an Oni, GM rolled random loot with one major magic item and rolled a scroll of wish. My character, a level 8 bard, was the only one to make the spellcraft check to identify the scroll and successfully bluffed the rest of the party to think it was just some old history text or something.
Many sessions later, both GM and I had all but forgotten the scroll was on my gear sheet. We were doing badly in a fight against a Rakshasa and the sorcerer was ready to call for a retreat. I remembered my get out of jail free card, but chances of making my two UMD rolls were slim and I couldn't think of the best use of the wish anyhow.
I handed the wish scroll to the sorcerer and his eyes boggled. After spluterring for a few seconds he composed himself and cast Dragon Shape III on me (GM allowed range of the spell to change from personal to close). Breath weapon, line. Rakshasa rolls a 1. Dies in agony in a geyser of acid.
Might not have been the best use of a wish that early but we'll never forget that fight.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As Thazar pointed out, the Legacy of Fire AP has a lot of stuff on wishes, both articles, and quite a few examples of the sorts of non-standard wishes which do get granted. It also reinforces one of the oft-overlooked aspects of the wish spell (and wishes in general) - that some requests are just too much for a single wish to grant them. The most well-known of these, of course, is adding an inherant bonus to Ability Scores. A single wish won't grant you more than a +1 bonus, but cast 5 of the suckers in turn, and it can get you the full +5 boost. Other powerful effects are like this too (I won't spoil it for anyone, but like I said, it's covered in some detail in Legacy of Fire) - wishes can, eventually, do pretty much anything, but you may need a lot of them to do big stuff. In essence, any effect which will take more power than a level 9 spell can churn out is, by its very nature, going to require more power than a single wish can fuel.
Page 116 of the GameMastery Guide also has some helpful advice on wishes... probably the most helpful IMHO being that a wish may successfully put into motion events which will lead the wisher to their desired result, if they grab the opportunities along their way, rather than giving an instant 'poof' result (under the 'Deferred Results' heading on that page). So a character who wishes to be immune from harm may be led on a path which, ultimately, will conclude with their immortality (maybe they're led towards taking the test of the Starstone, for example), but they still have to make an effort and progress may be slow. Maybe they'll be immune to harm once they hit level 20, for example. Maybe the wish transforms their usual class capstone feature into some sort of functional immortality... but they still have to get to the capstone. Long story short, these sorts of wishes can be put to good use by the DM as plot hooks (instead of just being used to screw over the PCs in a 'jackass-genie' type of a way...).
Page 116 of the GameMastery Guide also has some helpful advice on wishes... probably the most helpful IMHO being that a wish may successfully put into motion events which will lead the wisher to their desired result, if they grab the opportunities along their way, rather than giving an instant 'poof' result (under the 'Deferred Results' heading on that page).
Holey moley that's a great idea!
I really need to bump the GMG up in my reading list.
I also use precedent to adjudicate wishes. Like one NPC enemy used a wish to negate a harmful effect one time when it occurred. I would allow that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you're really concerned with Wishes imbalancing the game there's a pretty simple method of controlling it. Add a Spellcraft check that represents the Wizard's control of the arcane forces with which he's trying to warp the Universe.
If he's just recreating the effects of another spell, make the check 20 + spell level. Any Wizard should be able to hit a Spellcraft 29 by the time he's casting Wish.
On the other hand if he's trying to warp the foundation of the Universe then institute a DC 30 (min) check on the Wish. The kick though is that for every point above 30 they get a 5% chance. So if they roll a 40 they've got 50% chance of their spell working the way they want it too.
That way you're rewarding the Wizards who have put a lot of time and effort into perfecting their Spellcraft skill and still giving them the CHANCE to alter reality. Basically the more "learned" they are in arcane theory the more chance they have of doing it right.
And the failed check doesn't necessarily mean that the Wish fails, it just means that SOMETHING went wrong. A mispronunciation, a slightly wrong tilt of the pinkie during casting. Etc. But this mistake has caused a ripple effect that travels through the Wish. That way the DM gets to be creative.
If the players wish for happiness, throw them into a "planned community" with a ton of gold and no magic shops for miles around. Then the subterranean monster/robot wives can start trying to kill them cause they "just don't fit in."
That'll learn 'em.