What if one of your players wishes for no Arcane Spell Failure?


Homebrew and House Rules

51 to 75 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:


Even demons and devils *want* people to make wishes, to draw them into their snares. If every wish ever granted brutally screwed over the wisher, then *nobody* would make deals with glabrezu (efreeti, whatever). They'd be in alleys, "Hey buddy, want a wish?" and even the most desperate person would be like, "What, you think I'm suicidal? Nobody's ever gonna fall for that one. It literally *never* works. Might as well ask if I want to spoon out and eat my own eyeballs."

As GM, I have an infinite number of ways to make PCs suffer. I don't have to twist their wording and piss off my players, who, generally speaking, *are my friends,* by being deliberately obtuse, when, again, generally speaking, I know darn well what they *meant.*

Demons and the like grant wishes, specifically to make mortals suffer, if not immediately, then typically in the ways the wishs are granted, a.k.a. the Monkey's Paw route. It's why tales of dealing with them are always cautionary. Frequently however, when looking to corrupt mortals, they use much more subtler means beforehand.

In a Marvel comic some time back, Tyrannus lampshades the trope by being the only one to profit from a wishing well, by NOT taking any wishes from it. he pretty much says to his cohort. "I know how these things go, I'll let everyone ELSE screw themselves with it instead."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
(seriously it's just ASF, which has always been a gimmicky throwback not a balance issue)

Pretty sure there's a balance issue. A lot of people consider wizards to be one of the more powerful classes. Removing their vulnerabilities makes them more powerful still. I don't think they need it.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If the player worded it according to the title of the thread, then soon they would be facing enemy wizards wearing plate armor also.


LoneKnave wrote:

I can't find anything that's worth wearing for a wizard in the wrist slot. Arcane Armor Training is also terrible.

Melkiador wrote:
I'd think -5% or -10% per wish would be more appropriate for the power of a permanent wish. Depending on what armor they want to wear, one -5% to ASF could be enough.
I think this is the reasonable way to handle it.

Arrowmaster's Bracers and Bracers of Falcon's Aim could be quite useful for arcane casters who utilize Rays. Plus, there's the ability to make mis-slotted items.

Spellguard Bracers.
Vambraces of Defense to open up another ring slot.
Bracelet of Second Chances
Bracelet of Friends for when you're caught without your BSF bodyguard around.
Various Vambraces of the Genie.

Are all of these spectacular items and must-haves for Wizards? No. But there's some useful stuff that can be done with many of them. Most of which wouldn't be available while wearing Bracers of Armor (at the very least, not without some incredibly steep costs).

That Arcane Armor Training isn't great is sort of my point. The biggest problem with AAT is the action economy issue. People don't want to take a feat to have to give up their swift action every round.

You can certainly allow this type of wish if you want. And a 5% reduction in ASF for a wish probably isn't all that out of line with anything. I'm just asking you not to pretend that allowing a wish to remove ASF is anywhere near being in line with a wish that allows a +1 STR bonus.

Two feats and a mythic feat plus opening up a body slot vs. a magic item you can get for 27,500.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Downie wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
(seriously it's just ASF, which has always been a gimmicky throwback not a balance issue)
Pretty sure there's a balance issue. A lot of people consider wizards to be one of the more powerful classes. Removing their vulnerabilities makes them more powerful still. I don't think they need it.

It's such a minor part of their power that it isn't relevant. Especially not at 17/18th level. And while yes, Sorcerer/Wizards have the best list, that doesn't make the other lists bad by any means. Not to mention the Shaman is already swinging around the best parts of the arcane list as divine spells. It's purely thematic, because as a "balancing" tool it's insignificantly better then nothing. Especially since certain spells taking more then one standard action is *also* a balancing feature of Arcane Spells that Wish curb stomps all over. And that balance factor is way more significant then Arcane Spell Failure. I mean seriously... 9th level spells can literally double your spells per day, if you think getting rid ASF is a big deal, you've missed the ship.


I would have the spell create a set of masterwork armor that he has proficiency in that has no arcane spell failure. If the player is wearing armor currently I would have that suit of armor not have any arcane spell failure. In either case the special ability only works for him. Any other caster has the suffers the full effect of the armor.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Did she wish for no arcane spell failure chance for *herself* or just for "no arcane spell failure chance?"

If it's the latter all the enemy casters are going to be very grateful...


New theory: arcane spell failure chance only exists in the first place because a powerful caster wished for it in order to help eliminate possible challengers before they became powerful.


I would have the wish remove arcane spell failure from the world completely. All wizards can now cast spells without having to worry about somatic components. However, as a result, all arcane casters are transformed into inflatable flailing arm tube men.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Peachbottom wrote:
inflatable flailing arm tube men.

Back in orchestra we used to call that "the conductor"


I wouldn't have it to start with. I don't understand it. I'd like one person to name a single spell that has enough complicated gestures mentioned in it to justify it!

And what is with people always wanting to screw up wishes anyway? "Hi, I'm your GM and good friend. Congratulations, your character whom you've spent much time playing has now gained the ability to cast a wish spell! As a reward, every time you try to use it I will royally screw you over. You might as well be a Paladin for purposes of how badly I'll make you suffer."


Indagare wrote:
I wouldn't have it to start with. I don't understand it. I'd like one person to name a single spell that has enough complicated gestures mentioned in it to justify it!

Does any spell with Somatic components mention the motions involved?

Indagare wrote:
And what is with people always wanting to screw up wishes anyway? "Hi, I'm your GM and good friend. Congratulations, your character whom you've spent much time playing has now gained the ability to cast a wish spell! As a reward, every time you try to use it I will royally screw you over. You might as well be a Paladin for purposes of how badly I'll make you suffer."

Because that's how wishes typically work in fiction, you have to be very careful and precise in your wording lest it come back to bite you. Now I wouldn't do this kind of trickery from a wish spell cast by a PC, but if they're getting it from some other entity I'm going to have fun with wording and interpretation.

Key word there is fun and I'd try to keep it fun for the player as well rather than punitive. For example with the topic of the thread I'd probably grant the player Still Spell, allows them to bypass ASF at the cost of 1 spell level.


Arcane spells are balanced around SCF. This is why Divine spells are not as good, because there is no SCF so you can wear armor with them.


you could try this: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qm0m?An-Easier-Alternative-to-Arcane-Spell-Fai lure#1

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I'd tell my PC to pick a new wish, because that one will fizzle. They aren't going to break the game rules with a wish spell in my games.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Indagare wrote:
And what is with people always wanting to screw up wishes anyway? "Hi, I'm your GM and good friend. Congratulations, your character whom you've spent much time playing has now gained the ability to cast a wish spell! As a reward, every time you try to use it I will royally screw you over. You might as well be a Paladin for purposes of how badly I'll make you suffer."

It's because if you took the spell wish, removed the name called it something else and all it ever did was the specific listed effects it would still be the most obscenely versatile spell ever, even without the inherent bonuses effect.

In other words what it can do before invoking the DM discretion clause is already 9th level spell worthy and DMs who invoke DM discretion when the character is making a wish within those parameters is indeed a bad DM.

However pushing past those boundaries comes with a risk that the caster is well aware of. a DM who decides a wish is going too far and decides to pervert the intent isn't being mean, he's doing exactly what the rules are telling him to do and exactly what the caster knew could happen.

It's right there in black and white, push the limits and it could go bad for you. My question isn't why do DMs go there it's why do players whine about it when they knew damn good an well it could happen.

- Torger


WombattheDaniel wrote:
As a gm, would you allow it?

If he just said "I wish to never suffer Arcane Spell Failure" then I'd just have armor melt away every time he tries it on.

Honestly, though, I don't understand WHY. If you can cast Wish, you have access to insanely powerful magic. No armor bonus is better than Prismatic Sphere. No armor bonus is better than Time Stop. You can easily afford Bracers of Armor +8 and an Amulet of Natural Armor +5 and a quickened shield spell and no reason to not have Stoneskin up (use Extend and you're talking nearly 6 hours of Stoneskin when you're high enough level to cast wish). Plus armor is going to interfere with your dexterity (say you start with a 11, +5 inherent bonus from your wishes, +6 from a belt and you're at 22).

And I'm really, really crappy at min/maxing characters. If you're running a 17th level wizard, he's going to have way better stuff than this.


Indagare wrote:
And what is with people always wanting to screw up wishes anyway? "Hi, I'm your GM and good friend. Congratulations, your character whom you've spent much time playing has now gained the ability to cast a wish spell! As a reward, every time you try to use it I will royally screw you over. You might as well be a Paladin for purposes of how badly I'll make you suffer."

Wish isn't supposed to be "whatever you want". It's got a very clearly defined level of what it can do. You keep to that, you're gold. You want to try to break the game, yeah, you get screwed over. Wizards are insanely powerful when they're high enough level to cast wish. Why make them MORE powerful by just saying "Yeah, forget it, you can just do anything and everything all the time and don't worry about it because the spell is called "wish" even though it has defined limits."


I'm sorry for spamming but really - is Still Spell all that difficult for someone to take?


MeanMutton wrote:
I'm sorry for spamming but really - is Still Spell all that difficult for someone to take

Hell I'm currently running a sorcerer who has Still and Silent Spell, and the wizard laughed at me until we ended up bound and gagged. But that doesn't let them ignore ASF without penalty so it's not good enough.


I suppose you could just allow the wizard to have 0 level adjustment on still spell. If they don't have that feat already they would need to get it.

Alternatively if you think the wish is too powerful you could give them the option to ignore asf on any spell but make those spells take a full round to cast. Or make those spells burn up another spell at least one level lower.

I really hate to be mean with wishes unless the player is being a jerk about it.


I'd have the wish effect manifest like this:

Anytime that he casts a spell, his armor phase shifts into an alternate dimension, leaving him unprotected until the start of his next turn at which point it reappears.

2nd Option -- you can use the retraining rules to replace the character's last feat gained with arcane armor training.

3rd Option -- allow no arcane spell failure -- if the caster makes a concentration check as if taking continual damage.


I would say "Wish granted, but only when casting spells from your specialist school, and one other school of your choice. If you are a universalist, simply select two schools."

While it is a good thing to wish for, I'd feel more comfortable granting just that.


What about applying it only up to 8th level spells? Your caster still needs the strength and feat investment to pull this off so this seems more like a fun concept thing as it is.


He could wish himself into being a magus. Poof. Now he can cast in armor without needing metamagic rods or the Still Spell feat.

51 to 75 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / What if one of your players wishes for no Arcane Spell Failure? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.