Stop emasculating wishes

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Well this should be fun. It's one of those days when crazy stuff just leads to yet more aggravating crazy stuff. So I'm trying to figure out where I posted something about Temple of Elemental Evil (here, BIP, DF, etc...just can't recall where this particular post was) and when I started searching DF, what did I come across? A thread on wishes that caught my eye. And of course - like a car accident - I had to look, right? This on a day when everything from the weather to traffic to everyone I had to deal with is getting on my nerves. And I had to read a post about wishes. It almost tempted me to jump in and burn an account there. Oh, the rant is coming. Yes it is.

It's days like this when I want to get a megaphone, climb a tall building and shout out:

"People! For the love of god, stop emasculating wishes!"

Who is the original person in the gaming industry responsible for starting this insane emasculation of wishes? The post that caught my eye listed "things a wish can do". And of course it talks about being able to duplicate a wizard spell of 8th level or lower, or a 6th level cleric spell or whatever. People...if the 9th level wish spell merely duplicates the effects of a lower level spell then it is not a freaking wish!

How in the name of Bahamut can someone say - with a straight face - that the single most powerful spell in the books, a spell of legendary power, is limited to replicating spells of lower level and less power? Did we merge with the Cthulhu universe and logic has become twisted? What is it with DMs who fear a wish spell? If a wish spell is so devastating to someone's campaign that they have to emasculate the spell, stop being a DM! You're not good enough! Take off that damned wizard hat and go back to Monopoly!

A wish spell is supposed to be the ultimate attainment in magic - the ability to literally alter reality according to your desires. What the hell is the point of using a wish spell as a substitute for stone to flesh, or remove curse, or raise dead? What a waste! By its very nature, a wish is supposed to be above all that. Its very existence is an excuse for asking (and getting) what you want. There are so many DMs who fear wishes so badly that they limit the spell to the point of absurdity.

Like the stupidity about allowing a wish spell to duplicate any wizard spell of 8th level or lower. What idiot originally and actually vomited this out of his decayed brain pan? How about Logic 101? If a 9th level meteor swarm spell will not break your game, then guess what Einstein? Neither will a wish spell that is used to duplicate a - gasp! - 9th level spell! Dear god, I fear losing IQ points when I have to discuss this.

What twisted logic must one indulge in to justify the idea that the most powerful spell in the game cannot duplicate a spell of equal level?

And I also see DMs twisting wishes to screw players. Big time. Look, if you're the type of DM who gets his jollies by allowing his players to find/attain wishes only to then twist those wishes to screw them over, then you're not a DM. You're an ass-hat with a sadistic streak. Yeah, I get it - sometimes a greedy wish can (and sometimes should) lead to problems. It's a legitimate way to control excessive ambition.

But we had a DM back in the day on the old neighborhood who reveled in this type of stupidity to the point where - I am not making this up - the players would interrupt the game for days at a time while typing out several-pages-long freaking dissertations on the exact wording of their wishes. One of these idiots actually asked me to proof read a five page write up for a wish he gained. What did he actually want? To be immune to damage from normal fires.

Just remembering this makes me want to smash my head into the desk. I ripped the damned thing up and told him if it were me, I'd tell my DM: "I want to be immune to damage from normal fires. If that's not clear enough for you, bend over and I'll stick this stupid five page paper you made me write someplace very uncomfortable." And I meant that literally. I would never play in a DM's game who turned a simple freaking wish into a legal exercise. I told that DM when I saw him shortly after that: "You're an idiot. And a shitty DM. This is a game. The players are wishing for something, not signing a real life business deal!".

He actually asked me: "So how would you handle it if one of your players wished to be immune to normal fire? How would you keep that from unbalancing your game?" I had half a mind to punch him in the face on principle for being stupid, but his cousin was one of my players (it's telling that he wouldn't play in his own cousin's game!). I told him that if he couldn't handle a single character being immune to normal fire, that if that caused problems for him, then he was a shit-poor DM. It was so sad, I almost felt sorry for him. After he moaned about how terrible it would be to grant this silly wish, he whined: "If you granted that sort of wish, how would you twist it?"

My reply was: "Why twist it? What the hell is so terrible about a single PC being immune to normal fire? Off the top of my head, without even spending a microsecond thinking it over, you could always rule (much to the unfortunate surprise of the poor PC), when the PC gets infected with rot grubs, that normal fire will not kill them since they are embedded in flesh that is immune to normal fire. Using common sense, if a PC applies a flaming torch to his bare flesh to kill rot grubs, he will suffer burns (whatever a DM rules a flaming torch held against an arm, for example, would incur). So the magical protection of the wish spell now means that fire cannot be used to kill rot grubs. The heat simply cannot penetrate deeply enough to kill the embedded rot grubs. Then I immediately thought of another cool way to twist it - if that's what one wanted to do. Boy, will the PC be surprised when the party is adventuring in the cold wilderness and he wants to warm himself in front of a nice hot fire. Not gonna happen. He can't feel the heat. He's immune to fire, so the heat from a bonfire simply won't warm him. Think about it. If holding a flaming torch to one's arm cannot heat the flesh enough to do damage, then how is the radiant, indirect heat of a campfire going to warm his flesh? Sucks when hypothermia kicks in during an adventure because you can't use a fire to warm yourself. These are small, fun twists that can cause a PC to think carefully, but which don't twist the wish into some sort of psychotic punishment by a sadistic DM."

And even if the PC wished to be immune to all fire (magical or non-magical) - so what? Is that really going to destroy the game of a DM who's worthy of the title? Ok, so the red dragon breathes his massive blast of fire on the immune PC and - it does nothing! So what? His gear isn't immune. In fact, a good DM could argue that his equipment either forgoes any attempt at an item save vs. magical fire, or does so at a huge penalty. Think about it. He knows he's immune and likely will not state he is taking cover. He charges in (or just stands there), exposing himself fully because - after all - he's immune! Bye-bye, equipment and magical items! He's not immune to the smoke inhalation he's going to suffer while the forest around him goes up in flames. And that pissed-off red dragon may well decide to subsequently test the PC's immunity to gravity and falling damage on the next round, when he scoops the immune PC up, flies a thousand feet into the sky, then drops him.

The immune PC tries walking into molten lava. Sure. Go for it. It doesn't even feel hot. Kinda sucks though, how it sucked you under and crushed/suffocated you. Being immune to the heat of the lava does not save you from being crushed under tons of molten rock, or having your air cut off while being submerged in it.

I mean, come on people! This is pre-school level scheming.

And then there are the limiters - people who try to limit the wish spell so that it is in reality only a limited wish spell...

"A single wish can aid one creature per caster level, and all subjects are cured of the same kind of affliction. For example, you could heal all the damage you and your companions have taken, or remove all poison effects from everyone in the party, but not do both with the same wish."

Then it's a limited wish, not a wish.

"A wish can revive a dead creature whose body has been destroyed, but the task takes two wishes, one to recreate the body and another to infuse the body with life again."

Then it's not a wish. This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. What kind of idiot came up with it? Is it really going to hurt your silly girly campaign if a single wish can restore a character who was, say, disintegrated? Come on! A single 7th level resurrection spell would suffice:

"The DM may reduce the chances of successful resurrection if little if the creature's remains are available."

- PHB, pg. 235

Optional. In other words, if the DM feels it should be reduced because all that's left is say the dust left behind from a disintegrate spell.

DMs who, when their players wish for a million gold pieces, have the many tons of coins rain down on top of the PC, crushing him, or who raid the king's hoard for the treasure and then sends out the guard to arrest the PCs - that is so pathetically cliched, not to mention childishly stupid, that no DM should do it. If my players wish for a million gp, I can find almost as many ways of getting them to spend that or to make it a problem for them as there are are gold pieces in that windfall! No need to twist it in a silly way.

Look, I get it. Wishes can get out of hand when cast by pathetic players. A player who wishes to be "permanently immune to damage of any sort" is asking for something ridiculously unbalancing and absurd. So turn him into a reinforced adamantine statue. Or make it where any damage he would have taken is instead shunted off to those around him of similar alignment. A character who wishes for all his ability scores to be raised to 25 may ascend into godhood (the God of Greed) and be taken out of play. Roll up that new character. For crazy stuff like that where the player is intending to go against the rules or worse yet spirit of the game, screw him for it! He's trying to ruin the fun for his own aggrandizement. But for god's sake, stop emasculating the wish spell out of fear and worry. Stop twisting wishes due to some sadistic passive-aggressive ambivalence over wish spells. Fretting over wish spells is almost as pathetic as fretting over West Nile virus. Overblown, unfounded hysterics. Nothing more.

Good lord. Pass the Excedrin.

[Cole]

HAHAHAHAHA!

Nice tangent my friend.

Was a good read ... bravo! However I'm the type of DM that will "twist words" and make the wisher's life hell if they try to get to greedy or try to fuck up shit with my world. I won't allow them to ruin my world with a single wish as in reality my world(s) have taken me a real time of 30+ years to make. My time in real life is worth much more than anything their little bastard minds can come up with. For example;

I've had a player/character going to wish for "all the money in the world", his fellow players advised NOT to do that. But he persisted and thought nothing could go wrong with how he worded it. WRONG!!!!

I promptly dumped ever copper, silver and gold piece in the land onto the front steps of his small keep. Mountains and mountains of coin. He was so happy! The sheer joy of screwing the DM was evident ..... UNTIL... he went to buy something and quickly found out because of his greed, that a new monetary system was put into place as the old one could not sustain any commerce in the land. His money was useless (short of melting down into bricks), which was also useless short of actually building with them. BAM! Fuck you bitch! I ALWAYS WIN!

To this day a new system rules that land and his wish was wasted.

Don't fuck with the DM is the moral of the story!

Wishing for immunity to flame damage is acceptable, hell wishing for 200,000 gold would have been fine... but trying to ruin a campaign world IS NOT!

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Cole wrote:

HAHAHAHAHA!

Nice tangent my friend.

Was a good read ... bravo!

Thanks! Man it felt good getting that off my chest!

However I'm the type of DM that will "twist words" and make the wisher's life hell if they try to get to greedy or try to fuck up shit with my world. I won't allow them to ruin my world with a single wish as in reality my world(s) have taken me a real time of 30+ years to make. My time in real life is worth much more than anything their little bastard minds can come up with.

Absolutely on the same page there! That's when the gloves come off and the twisting is pretty much a self-inflicted screwing over - when the PCs try to wish for outrageous things to break the campaign. In cases like that, I think it's not only allowable to twist wishes, I think it's mandated.

I've had a player/character going to wish for "all the money in the world", his fellow players advised NOT to do that. But he persisted and thought nothing could go wrong with how he worded it. WRONG!!!!

Uh oh! LOL!

I promptly dumped ever copper, silver and gold piece in the land onto the front steps of his small keep. Mountains and mountains of coin. He was so happy! The sheer joy of screwing the DM was evident ..... UNTIL... he went to buy something and quickly found out because of his greed, that a new monetary system was put into place as the old one could not sustain any commerce in the land. His money was useless (short of melting down into bricks), which was also useless short of actually building with them. BAM! Fuck you bitch! I ALWAYS WIN!

LMAO! Indeed, don't mess with the DM! That was a masterstroke! Bravo!

Don't fuck with the DM is the moral of the story!

Wishing for immunity to flame damage is acceptable, hell wishing for 200,000 gold would have been fine... but trying to ruin a campaign world IS NOT!

Amen! That's why I don't fear wishes. Wishing for reasonable things (20,000 gp, a castle, immunity to fire, whatever) is so easy to deal with. It creates fun side effects, but doesn't ruin a good DM's games. Greedy, game-breaking wishes do nothing more than incur the wrath of the DM, which never, ever turns out good. The DM is god. As proved in your example - you simply changed the entire monetary system of the whole world. Good luck to the PCs, chewing those gp for food they now cannot afford despite sitting atop a mountain of gold! Bwahahah!

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

The the bile rises in my throat when I think about that idiot DM who forced his players to write pages-long wishes so that he could find a way to twist the wording. I've always looked to him as my perfect example of a shit-poor DM. When they told me this, at first I thought it was a joke of some sort. Wishes are all about allowing a player/PC to do something that no other spell or actions can accomplish. It should be a wondrous, incredible, exciting spell to use. Sure, sometimes it ends up being used as a matter of utility or to substitute for another highly necessary spell the PCs may not otherwise have access to (resurrection, for example). But usually it should be a spell that allows the PCs to achieve or gain things they could otherwise never achieve or gain.

I have to wonder about DMs who turn wishes into impossibly complicated things, or who fear them to the point where they have to emasculate or twist them into something undesirable. I've found over the course of decades of play that few if any wishes are truly even bothersome, much less game-disrupting. Wishing for a castle, for 100,000 gp, for a suit of +10 armor, for the ability to go without sleep, for immunity to normal (or even magical) fire, for an ability score of 25, etc, etc...these things do not disrupt the game, and in most cases allows the DM to address logical consequences to these things, should he come to consider the problematic.

For example, how about a wizard who wishes never to need sleep? The obvious intent is that he can then memorize spells the next day without needing 6, 8, 10 or even 12 hours of sleep. But that doesn't change the number of spells he can memorize per day. And it doesn't change the memorization time. So how disrupting it that? And if the DM does decide that the ability to forgo sleep allows the wizard to start memorizing spells too quickly (i.e. he can start memorizing 8th or 9th level spells without even an hour of sleep), there are so many easy solutions that spring forth from simple logic. Perhaps the spell memorization time is increased because while the wizard does not need sleep to have energy and feel refreshed, his mind does not empty the "clutter" of thoughts or remnants of old memorized spells a quickly as it did when he needed sleep. Perhaps his chances to learn new spells or to invent new ones is decreased significantly (or even lost altogether) because he's lost his restorative, creative dreaming process. Maybe he becomes prone to depression from the lack of ability to dream, or from constantly being "on" instead of looking forward to a good night's rest. These are things that would naturally take time to develop in-game for the character, giving the DM enough time to decide whether or not to impose any penalty. And if the DM thinks the ability to forgo sleep before studying spells is ok, then there is no problem to solve.

And look at Cole's excellent example. It's not a weird, "I'm gonna screw the players" twisting. It was an act of genius based on reality and logic. If there is no money left in the world, then logically people would have to find some other system of commerce. Barter may become the law of the land, or glass beads may take the place of gold and silver. Or perhaps other rare metals would become the new currency. They would, by necessity, have to find new standards of commerce. Cole didn't screw his players. His players screwed themselves. He was the god-DM who simply enforced the laws of his game reality.

I've challenged players and other neighborhood DMs to stump me with a wish that would break the world or that could not be controlled or that would give the PC a huge advantage that had no drawbacks. No one's ever been able to. Just a few examples of insanely greedy, game-breaking wishes that are easily dealt with:

"I wish to never be able to die from any amount of damage."

Ok, fine. Not a problem. When those savage orcs have you pinned down and they're beating you to near-death with their weapons and you're still kicking and screaming, or when the mountain giant is trying to club you to death only to realize that life is clinging to you like a disease (loved that line from Skyfall!), well guess what? They're going to keep beating on you. "Why isn't this bastard dead yet? I'll try crushing his head with a boulder next!"

And when you go into negative hit points, you're in a coma. If they beat you down to say -20 hp, it's gonna take a long time to recover and become conscious. You don't die, but you wish you had. Using the advice from the 1E DMG, if you're beaten down into negative hp but don't die, you're probably going to suffer permanent damage. If a giant is bashing your legs with his club and inflicting twice as many hp of damage as you have hit points total, well...he's gonna cripple you! You don't die. You can't die. But your legs will look like a tank rolled over them. I'd argue that the damage in this case is so bad that only a regenerate spell will fix what's left of those stumps. Oh but Halaster, what's the big deal? If the injury is too old or the limbs are missing, he cannot fail his system shock roll, right? Wrong. He can fail it. Only in this case failing does not mean death. It means lowered CON. His body just took too much damage. And again, being crippled severely or losing those legs means your DEX sucks.

Or, the red dragons breathes on you several times. You don't die, but the extreme damage your body was made to endure ensures your CHA score goes down the toilet because you're going to suffer extensive burns. Just because you don't die from damage doesn't mean you don't suffer consequences. You can still be maimed, blinded, crippled, burnt, etc. And drowning/suffocating isn't really damage, now is it? Or how about disease? Rabies? Mummy rot? Plague? Spells such as powerword, kill or death spell or finger of death don't do damage. They snuff out your life force. So how is it a problem for a DM to allow a PC to wish never to die from damage?

I had one really bad player once who wished:

"I wish to be permanently immune to all damage."

Ok. Fine. You're encased in a full body suit of pure adamant armor. You can't really do much because you can't move due to the excessive weight and the fact that the joints of the armor are pretty much fused so as to not allow a weak point where something could bypass your armor. It's hermetically sealed to prevent inhalation of poison gas or electricity or flames. Good luck suffering the torment of your last hours, as you're forced to inhale the fumes of your own piss and shit which have nowhere to go other than to pool up in the legs of your armor. I'm sure your last breaths will be pleasant. What's that you say? Oh, you consider suffocation to be damage? Ok. You can live as long as you like in that armor. It's gonna get really nice and comfortable in that stifling suit of adamant armor as it fills up day to day with your own excrement until you're literally drowning in your own wastes. Oh, drowning is damage? Ok, you breath your waste material like a fish in water. Eventually you'll just starve to death as you rot away. Oh, starving is damage? I'm starting to think this is a special version of Hell you just wished yourself into.

Bottom line, a player, no matter how good he is, can never pull one over on the DM using a wish. Most wishes that most DMs run scared from are not in any way game disrupting. And the few wishes that actually are "game disrupting" can be made to incur natural and logical consequences so horrible as to destroy any desire from another player to mess with the DM's world using wishes to gain world-wrecking powers.

[Lyrwik]

I agree entirely. This is something that frustrates me with so many DMs, as all they're really doing is using their DM powers to be a jerk to their players. Don't need a wish spell to do that. They're also not being nearly as clever as they think they are.

Even as someone who has to use very precise language in my job, I find it frustrating when I see DMs talking about how wishes should only be construed in the most literal sense, thus ignoring all context and everything else that allows for effective communication. Even legal interpretation allows for considering context. While I agree with relying on the plain meaning, that is not the same as trying to apply the 'literal meaning' (inverted commas because the 'literal meaning' which they decide to interpret is often just a twisting of the plain meaning, and is just a contrivance, rather than an interpretation which any sane person would normally make).

It's a 9th level spell. It's supposed to be powerful. If a DM just messes with it, they're just making it less powerful, and completely undermining it, and/or effectively making it a cursed ability. Deal with it, or if your world and/or DMing skills are too fragile to handle it, just don't allow it.

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Just to be a wise-ass, I eventually agreed to draft a special wish for one of that DM's players. I forget the exact wording (it was several pages long), but I designed it in "legalese" and the wish was to make the player's character able to single-handedly defeat any monster he encountered with no risk to himself or others. As I said, I forget the details, but each phrase was spelled out and defined literally, to the point where the DM could not find a way to twist it that stood up to scrutiny. He was pissed! Ruined his stupid campaign.

[garhkal]

Who is the original person in the gaming industry responsible for starting this insane emasculation of wishes? The post that caught my eye listed "things a wish can do". And of course it talks about being able to duplicate a wizard spell of 8th level or lower, or a 6th level cleric spell or whatever. People...if the 9th level wish spell merely duplicates the effects of a lower level spell then it is not a freaking wish!

Gee maybe GYGAX himself? After-all, he DID write it into the 1e DMG. Such as "No wish can raise a stat higher than .1 points once you hit 16 in an attribute". Or on page 130 {ring of three wishes} "As with any wish, you must be very judicious in how you handle the request. If players are greedy, and grasping, be sure to crock them'. Interpret their wording exactly, twist teh wording, or simply rule that the request is beyond the power of the magic".

How in the name of Bahamut can someone say - with a straight face - that the single most powerful spell in the books, a spell of legendary power, is limited to replicating spells of lower level and less power? Did we merge with the Cthulhu universe and logic has become twisted? What is it with DMs who fear a wish spell? If a wish spell is so devastating to someone's campaign that they have to emasculate the spell, stop being a DM! You're not good enough! Take off that damned wizard hat and go back to Monopoly!

And who are YOU to dictate who is or is not a good DM Hal??

A wish spell is supposed to be the ultimate attainment in magic - the ability to literally alter reality according to your desires. What the hell is the point of using a wish spell as a substitute for stone to flesh, or remove curse, or raise dead? What a waste! By its very nature, a wish is supposed to be above all that. Its very existence is an excuse for asking (and getting) what you want. There are so many DMs who fear wishes so badly that they limit the spell to the point of absurdity.

Maybe cause they don't have those other spells, or want to get around the restrictions of them (NO raise dead on an elf, or past 1 day per level of caster)?

And I also see DMs twisting wishes to screw players. Big time. Look, if you're the type of DM who gets his jollies by allowing his players to find/attain wishes only to then twist those wishes to screw them over, then you're not a DM. You're an ass-hat with a sadistic streak. Yeah, I get it - sometimes a greedy wish can (and sometimes should) lead to problems. It's a legitimate way to control excessive ambition.

TO me whether its 'screwed with' depends on WHOM IS GRANTING the wish. If from a ring, who made it? If from a scroll same thing. If from an effriti, you BETCHA its gonna be messed with.

Just remembering this makes me want to smash my head into the desk. I ripped the damned thing up and told him if it were me, I'd tell my DM: "I want to be immune to damage from normal fires. If that's not clear enough for you, bend over and I'll stick this stupid five page paper you made me write someplace very uncomfortable." And I meant that literally. I would never play in a DM's game who turned a simple freaking wish into a legal exercise. I told that DM when I saw him shortly after that: "You're an idiot. And a shitty DM. This is a game. The players are wishing for something, not signing a real life business deal!".

And if you had that attitude in my face, i would have escorted you to the door, promptly kicked you out of my house and NEVER invited you back.. ANd if you HAD attempted to follow through with your threat of violence, you would be LUCKY to get away with just getting the cops called on your ass.. LET ALONE me kicking the hell out of it.

And even if the PC wished to be immune to all fire (magical or non-magical) - so what? Is that really going to destroy the game of a DM who's worthy of the title? Ok, so the red dragon breathes his massive blast of fire on the immune PC and - it does nothing! So what? His gear isn't immune. In fact, a good DM could argue that his equipment either forgoes any attempt at an item save vs. magical fire, or does so at a huge penalty. Think about it. He knows he's immune and likely will not state he is taking cover. He charges in (or just stands there), exposing himself fully because - after all - he's immune! Bye-bye, equipment and magical items! He's not immune to the smoke inhalation he's going to suffer while the forest around him goes up in flames. And that pissed-off red dragon may well decide to subsequently test the PC's immunity to gravity and falling damage on the next round, when he scoops the immune PC up, flies a thousand feet into the sky, then drops him.

Not really sinc eBY the rules item saves are only called for if YOU the owner fail yours.. If he's immune, he can't fail, now can he?

Good lord. Pass the Excedrin.

Better yet, TAKE some vicodin and CHILL!

[Billy_Buttcheese]

Interesting rant and a topic I've occasionally struggled with in my 35+ years of DMing. Wishes are very rare in my campaign. In fact, although my memory has begun to fade about many things re: AD&D, I can seriously only recall giving out perhaps 3 wishes (Never a ring of wishes) and that includes the actual spell for a spell book. I've had several instances of putting in items with wish-like powers in certain instances. Ex: Recall the magic stone in B1 that makes something happen when you place a chip of the rock in your mouth. (Mostly stat adjustments and the like). Decks of many things, etc. But nothing the player has any direct control over.

As I see it, the wish spell can be a game-changer if left unchecked. Your examples, while amusing, certainly make sense and I would have probably handled them in a similar fashion. To purposely screw with the players was, I don't believe, the intent of the spell. It is a game of high fantasy and wishes are a part of that. I do believe players should seriously consider what they are trying to accomplish with a wish and what the long-term effects might be as well as what the effects on their party might be.

I recall one instance in a game I was a player in, we had a young man playing with us (very emotionally immature) had a ring of 3 wishes. The DM was borderline Monty Haulish. We were all ~5 level and fighting a vampire and getting our asses handed to us and in desperation, the young man said he was going to use his last wish and screamed out, "I wish that vampire was dead!!!" Those of us with DMing experience couldn't stop laughing for about 5 straight minutes. It took several more minutes for the young man to finally figure out his gaffe.

But I agree that purposely screwing with players over a poorly or questionably worded wish spell sends a bad message.

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Garhkal wrote:

Gee maybe GYGAX himself? After-all, he DID write it into the 1e DMG. Such as "No wish can raise a stat higher than .1 points once you hit 16 in an attribute". Or on page 130 {ring of three wishes} "As with any wish, you must be very judicious in how you handle the request. If players are greedy, and grasping, be sure to crock them'. Interpret their wording exactly, twist teh wording, or simply rule that the request is beyond the power of the magic".

I think you're missing what I'm saying. I agree with Gygax, Cole, and others when it comes to greedy wishes (which I define as wishes meant to break the game, or give an unreasonable advantage). Sure, screw the player! The example I gave about the indestructible armor and the guy stewing in his own wastes - I inflicted that on an actual player in my campaign. I'm not talking about screwing players who wish for ridiculous things - I wish for all the money in the world, I wish to never have to take damage from any source, I wish for 250 extra hit points - these players deserve to have their wishes screwed.

I'm talking about DMs who seem to have a cruel, immature, sadistic, vindictive fetish when it comes to warping wishes, no matter how benign or fair the wish is.

And who are YOU to dictate who is or is not a good DM Hal??

Only the finest player of all time and the greatest DM ever to play the game! But you already knew that!

But seriously, objectively speaking, a good DM doesn't go out of his way to screw the players. He should be an objective judge and referee. That's pretty much the standard definition of a good DM. DMs who coddle players or screw players for no reason - these DMs suck, and few players will play for long under such DMs.

Maybe cause they don't have those other spells, or want to get around the restrictions of them (NO raise dead on an elf, or past 1 day per level of caster)?

As I said earlier, that is a legitimate use of the spell, if there's no other way to achieve that goal. But it would be a grievous waste of fortune to use a wish to return a PC to flesh when a stone to flesh spell is available.

TO me whether its 'screwed with' depends on WHOM IS GRANTING the wish. If from a ring, who made it? If from a scroll same thing. If from an effriti, you BETCHA its gonna be messed with.

Well yeah, that I agree with as well. Take a wish from Orcus or Demogorgon, and you'd better expect the worst. At least if you're of an alignment antithetical to their goals. I'm talking about DMs who warp every damned wish, whether from the gods, a ring, a demon, an afreet, a scroll, a wish blade, etc. Some of them put wishes in their games expressly for the purpose of screwing players or messing with their heads (as the DM in my example was). It's pathetic. What sort of DM gets his jollies from purposely screwing the PCs at every turn? The DM is not the adversary of the players - he is supposed to be a neutral and objective arbiter and referee.

And if you had that attitude in my face, i would have escorted you to the door, promptly kicked you out of my house and NEVER invited you back.. ANd if you HAD attempted to follow through with your threat of violence, you would be LUCKY to get away with just getting the cops called on your ass.. LET ALONE me kicking the hell out of it.

You act as if I threatened you personally. Chill, Gar! When I said I meant that literally, I meant I would literally say that, not that I'd actually stuff a handful of papers up the DM's ass. Then again... But seriously, the way I wrote that was not as clear as it should have read. But yes, I would tell a DM like that to stuff it, and where to stuff it. And while I clearly would not pin the DM down and literally cram paperwork into his colon (I may be crazy, but I'm not depraved! ), I definitely would rip the sheets up and throw then in his face.

I play the game to have fun, not to have some psycho-pseudo-wannabee-lawyer-DM force me to parse words for a simple wish ("I wish to be immune to normal fires") into a 5 page thesis for the express purpose of giving him ammo to twist the wording for his own sick fetish for screwing wishes.

Screw him! That's insanity if I've ever heard it.

Not really sinc eBY the rules item saves are only called for if YOU the owner fail yours.. If he's immune, he can't fail, now can he?

The way I interpret it (and this could make its own interesting conversation) is that if the PC does nothing to protect himself, then his items are subject to item saves. Look at it this way - if the PC was NOT immune to fire and stood there not trying to protect himself, he would fail his saving throw because he is not trying to protect himself, and therefore he is not protecting his gear. Now the fact that he is immune to fire does not mean his items are. And if he's just standing there letting himself take the full brunt of the attack, then he's forgoing any attempt to protect his items, thus at least a required item saving throw, if not an automatic failed item saving throw. After all, the wish made the PC immune to fire, not his equipment.

Better yet, TAKE some vicodin and CHILL!

I am chilled. It's just a rant for kicks.

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Billy_Buttcheese wrote:

As I see it, the wish spell can be a game-changer if left unchecked. Your examples, while amusing, certainly make sense and I would have probably handled them in a similar fashion. To purposely screw with the players was, I don't believe, the intent of the spell. It is a game of high fantasy and wishes are a part of that. I do believe players should seriously consider what they are trying to accomplish with a wish and what the long-term effects might be as well as what the effects on their party might be.

Exactly! Wishes have always been about getting what you want or accomplishing amazing things. Now sure, sometimes they have natural, unforeseen or unintended side effects. If a PC wishes for a million gold pieces, give it to him! But he had better have a place to store it, or it'll be pillaged. And when the tax collector finds out, he's gonna want his cut. And of course, as word gets around, the PC better hire some trustworthy guards because thieves and warlords will probably come looking for all that gold. Those are natural side effects of that wish, though they are often unforeseen or unintended. That it not twisting the intent of the wish. That stupid cliche of dropping a million gp on the PC's head? It's juvenile and pathetic at best, and the sign of a very uncreative, non-talented DM. Not much better is the silly cliche of taking it from a king's cache or a dragon's hoard.

Or if a PC, for example, wishes for a triple-sized two-handed sword designed for storm giants to wield, well...give it to him! Does he have the STR score necessary to actually wield it in combat? Is it too bulky to hold even if he has the STR? (i.e. can his hands even encircle the hilt?)

I'm not saying give the PC(s) anything he (they) wish for without regard to the natural consequences of that wish. Just don't twists it into some sort of punishment for daring to use something the DM put into the game in the first place.

I recall one instance in a game I was a player in, we had a young man playing with us (very emotionally immature) had a ring of 3 wishes. The DM was borderline Monty Haulish. We were all ~5 level and fighting a vampire and getting our asses handed to us and in desperation, the young man said he was going to use his last wish and screamed out, "I wish that vampire was dead!!!" Those of us with DMing experience couldn't stop laughing for about 5 straight minutes. It took several more minutes for the young man to finally figure out his gaffe.

That was good! Though I have to admit, I would say "OK, I get it. He's dead now, not undead." Though after such a gaffe, the player was probably wishing he was dead! LMAO!

But I agree that purposely screwing with players over a poorly or questionably worded wish spell sends a bad message.

Yep, the message being "don't bother to use wishes because I'll screw you if I do". Who's gonna want to play in that sort of nightmare campaign?

[garhkal]

I'm talking about DMs who seem to have a cruel, immature, sadistic, vindictive fetish when it comes to warping wishes, no matter how benign or fair the wish is.

True, there are numerous stories over on DF and other places (iirc mortality.net) where people whined about how their DM borked over a wish.. BUT i've never personally seen a DM require someone to type out the wish in more than just a short 2-3 sentences..

But seriously, objectively speaking, a good DM doesn't go out of his way to screw the players. He should be an objective judge and referee. That's pretty much the standard definition of a good DM. DMs who coddle players or screw players for no reason - these DMs suck, and few players will play for long under such DMs.

But what some people consider 'objective' is not the same as other people's definition.. That said i DO agree, a DM who consistently screws his players will soon find himself being game less..

As I said earlier, that is a legitimate use of the spell, if there's no other way to achieve that goal. But it would be a grievous waste of fortune to use a wish to return a PC to flesh when a stone to flesh spell is available.

Not if the DM lets a wish return that pc to flesh WITHOUT the need for a system shock roll to survive being unpetrified!

Well yeah, that I agree with as well. Take a wish from Orcus or Demogorgon, and you'd better expect the worst. At least if you're of an alignment antithetical to their goals. I'm talking about DMs who warp every damned wish, whether from the gods, a ring, a demon, an afreet, a scroll, a wish blade, etc. Some of them put wishes in their games expressly for the purpose of screwing players or messing with their heads (as the DM in my example was). It's pathetic. What sort of DM gets his jollies from purposely screwing the PCs at every turn? The DM is not the adversary of the players - he is supposed to be a neutral and objective arbiter and referee.

It does seem some DMs do like that. BUT to say we are all that way, and thus we should all take lessons in not borking players over is a bit much..

You act as if I threatened you personally. Chill, Gar! When I said I meant that literally, I meant I would literally say that, not that I'd actually stuff a handful of papers up the DM's ass. Then again... But seriously, the way I wrote that was not as clear as it should have read. But yes, I would tell a DM like that to stuff it, and where to stuff it. And while I clearly would not pin the DM down and literally cram paperwork into his colon (I may be crazy, but I'm not depraved! ), I definitely would rip the sheets up and throw then in his face.

Thing is Hal, i have seen some players who DID get violent when they thought the DM was doing something stupid (and didn't find ot WHY, they just got violent/aggrivating).. AND i don't tolerate that.. especially if we are gaming at my house.

The way I interpret it (and this could make its own interesting conversation) is that if the PC does nothing to protect himself, then his items are subject to item saves. Look at it this way - if the PC was NOT immune to fire and stood there not trying to protect himself, he would fail his saving throw because he is not trying to protect himself, and therefore he is not protecting his gear. Now the fact that he is immune to fire does not mean his items are. And if he's just standing there letting himself take the full brunt of the attack, then he's forgoing any attempt to protect his items, thus at least a required item saving throw, if not an automatic failed item saving throw. After all, the wish made the PC immune to fire, not his equipment

I don't disagree. In fact that's to ME what makes spells like Burning hands MUCH MORE powreful than sleep or magic missile. Cause they don't give the target(s) a save, thus therefore they SHOULD NOW be making item saves for their items.. However, people HAVE pointed out to me, that saves for stuff worn only should come when THEY've failed their own save.. Just not being required to make a save or not getting the chance does not equate to 'auto failed'..

Exactly! Wishes have always been about getting what you want or accomplishing amazing things. Now sure, sometimes they have natural, unforeseen or unintended side effects. If a PC wishes for a million gold pieces, give it to him! But he had better have a place to store it, or it'll be pillaged. And when the tax collector finds out, he's gonna want his cut. And of course, as word gets around, the PC better hire some trustworthy guards because thieves and warlords will probably come looking for all that gold. Those are natural side effects of that wish, though they are often unforeseen or unintended. That it not twisting the intent of the wish. That stupid cliche of dropping a million gp on the PC's head? It's juvenile and pathetic at best, and the sign of a very uncreative, non-talented DM. Not much better is the silly cliche of taking it from a king's cache or a dragon's hoard.

BUT where is all that money coming from, if NOT from someone else's horde? And why is it 'pathetic' to say (especially since the DMG and other sources) that "Fine your million of coins appear and fall all around you..? Is that NOT THE Definition of a greedy as hell wish?

Or if a PC, for example, wishes for a triple-sized two-handed sword designed for storm giants to wield, well...give it to him! Does he have the STR score necessary to actually wield it in combat? Is it too bulky to hold even if he has the STR? (i.e. can his hands even encircle the hilt?)

Hell, yes he might have the Str to hold it, but does he have the SIZE to wield it!!!

Yep, the message being "don't bother to use wishes because I'll screw you if I do". Who's gonna want to play in that sort of nightmare campaign?

Which to me is why if a DM is going to brok them over, DON'T hand them out in the first place.. Same with illusions.. If you hate making calls on what is/isn't allowed, don't allow illusionists..

For a note. Here's some of my wishes i have ruled on.

Player wished {Exact wording] "My skin was rock, so no weapon could damage me". SO i ruled fine, you are now a statue.

Player wished for My god's Strength (exact wording was more "I WANT my gods exact strength period). So i ruled since his god has 25 str, fine, your weapons need to save vs crushing blow EACH TIME You hit with them, as they are not crafted to withstand such force.. And at the end of that combat he was in, his strength was taken as the god took it back.

One other said "I wished everyone dead in the party, was brought back to life as if they had raise dead cast on them all.. However since 3 of those dead were elves and raise dead Doesn't work on elves, it didn't do anything for them, the other 3 dead pcs had to make a resurrection roll and lost the standard point of con.. ONE FAILED his ressie roll though.

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Garhkal wrote:

True, there are numerous stories over on DF and other places (iirc mortality.net) where people whined about how their DM borked over a wish.. BUT i've never personally seen a DM require someone to type out the wish in more than just a short 2-3 sentences..

Oh, I've seen lots of talk about emasculating wishes. There's a huge thread on that running now at DF. I see these all the time, everywhere. True, I've rarely seen a DM force the players to write out any extensive analysis of a wish, with the exception of that one crackpot "DM".

But what some people consider 'objective' is not the same as other people's definition..

Objective is objective for everyone. It can't change from person to person, otherwise it would be subjective. All throughout the rules, the DM is admonished to be a fair and objective referee. The 2E rules even warn about killer DMs and Monty Haul DMs. The DM was never intended to be an opponent of the players. He's always been there to write the game, design the adventure, and adjudicate the rules. He has to be objective, otherwise by definition he's not even being a DM, much less a good DM.

Not if the DM lets a wish return that pc to flesh WITHOUT the need for a system shock roll to survive being unpetrified!

It would still be a waste. Most likely (unless the PC has some atrociously low CON score), the PC will survive the system shock. So why not first use stone to flesh? Most likely it will work and the victim will survive. Using the wish first wastes it, because he will most likely not need the wish to be restored. If the stone to flesh spell fails, there's always that wish available. But why jump the gun and waste it (assuming the PCs have other spells that will do the job) by using it as a first resort rather than as a last resort?

It does seem some DMs do like that. BUT to say we are all that way, and thus we should all take lessons in not borking players over is a bit much..

Again, keep in mind - I'm not talking about borking wishes from demons or creatures of evil alignment, or twisting the wish of a player trying to break the game. In those cases, I see no problem with it. What I'm ranting about are DMs who are so timid they seem afraid of wishes. It's as if they have a wish phobia, and cannot just allow great things to be done with wishes. All those posts about putting limits on wishes (" the player can wish for up to 150,0000 gp", etc)...it's just silly. Do these DMs have any actual experience DMing? Are they really such poor DMs that a PC wishing for immunity to fire or a million gp is going to break their game?

Thing is Hal, i have seen some players who DID get violent when they thought the DM was doing something stupid (and didn't find ot WHY, they just got violent/aggrivating).. AND i don't tolerate that.. especially if we are gaming at my house.

I had a player like that once. He would throw tantrums and his dice. He once tried to throw a miniature I painted across the room. I gave him the option of setting it down gently or picking it up off the floor after he got done picking up his teeth with broken fingers. He chose the former. Wisely. That was his last game with us. Other than that, I've only seen a couple of whiners, no one really violent or anything.

I don't disagree. In fact that's to ME what makes spells like Burning hands MUCH MORE powreful than sleep or magic missile. Cause they don't give the target(s) a save, thus therefore they SHOULD NOW be making item saves for their items.. However, people HAVE pointed out to me, that saves for stuff worn only should come when THEY've failed their own save.. Just not being required to make a save or not getting the chance does not equate to 'auto failed'..

Like I said, that will make a good debate. I'll start the thread.

BUT where is all that money coming from, if NOT from someone else's horde?

Are you serious? It's the most powerful spell in existence! It can simply create a million gp out of thin air. Why would a wish spell need to use money already in existence to grant wealth? A wish changes reality. I've never even considered the idea of having it come from a king's treasury or a dragon's horde. It makes more sense that the wish simply creates the wealth.

And why is it 'pathetic' to say (especially since the DMG and other sources) that "Fine your million of coins appear and fall all around you..? Is that NOT THE Definition of a greedy as hell wish?

Wishes should be greedy. It's all about getting what you want.

But that sad example from the DMG about the wisher being buried under a ton of gold - to me that's just a very poor example they gave. It shows a lack of creativity, intelligence, and pizzazz! It sounds like something a 5th grader who doesn't understand the game would do. It pisses off the players because the DM was simply being vindictive: "How dare you wish for so much gold?".

First, what's wrong with giving the PC a million gp? It's not going to break the world, if the DM is worthy of his title. Sure, it will change economic conditions in the city or town, when all those taxes are collected. But if a DM can't handle a million gp injected into his game, then in my eyes he should step down and let a real DM handle it.

Second, if the DM wants to assure that the "greedy" wish has some side effects, then a good DM has countless options open to him. As I said, first there are taxes to deal with. The king will surely want a generous cut. And where does the gold appear? In the dungeon with the wisher? Or out in the wilderness where the PCs gather after conquering the dungeon/bad guys, and looking forward to their wishes being fulfilled? Well...how to get all that gold home safely? What happens if a dragon flying about sees it and decides to add it to his horde? What about bandits, bands of pillaging orcs, or others who would want that gold? The PC needs to find a way to safely get all those gp home. Or does it appear back home in his castle, or just outside his castle door? Hope the servants are very, very loyal, and that the PC has some powerful henchmen to guard all that gold until the PC arrives home. Does the PC have family? If so, he's now a good target for blackmail: "We have your daughter. We know you have a mountain of gold. Surely a few hundred thousand gp can be spared to save her life...". Oh, the thieves' guild will definitely be eying that haul! Again, how much will the PC need to spend to safely store all that gold? And with wealth comes all sorts of annoyances - long lost relatives looking for help, charities and churches looking for donations, rulers looking for taxes, "friends" looking for help, etc. Crafty enemies may claim the gold was stolen from them, and demand it back. Perhaps the king of an enemy nation contacts the king of the nation where the PCs who gained all that gold live, and insist it was stolen from him while offering fabricated "proof". Now the PCs' king needs to find a way to avoid war because an enemy nation is making a credible claim that the PCs stole it. What to do? I mean, I can go on all night. Crushing the PC under a ton of gold is a juvenile, uncreative, crude use of the power of the DM. It's actually a waste, since the other PCs will simply use some of that gold to get the PC raised. Burying the PC under a mountain of gold is just stupid in my eyes.

Hell, yes he might have the Str to hold it, but does he have the SIZE to wield it!!!

Yup. Had a barbarian wish for that once. He was pretty upset that he didn't have large enough hands to even pick the damned thing up correctly, much less wield it in combat. I also inquired as to how he was going to actually carry the damned thing, since he did not wish for a sheath to go with it, or a belt that could hold it up.

Which to me is why if a DM is going to brok them over, DON'T hand them out in the first place.. Same with illusions.. If you hate making calls on what is/isn't allowed, don't allow illusionists..

I'd have to agree, though it is a sad and pathetic thing to have a DM who doesn't allow wishes simply because he's not good enough to handle wishes.

Player wished {Exact wording] "My skin was rock, so no weapon could damage me". SO i ruled fine, you are now a statue.

Yeah, that one almost demands twisting. I mean, how else can you interpret that? He wished for skin made of rock. I would probably have done the same thing, or simply made his skin so stiff and hard to move that his DEX score became 1, or something along those lines. Poorly worded wishes aren't the DM's fault.

Player wished for My god's Strength (exact wording was more "I WANT my gods exact strength period). So i ruled since his god has 25 str, fine, your weapons need to save vs crushing blow EACH TIME You hit with them, as they are not crafted to withstand such force.. And at the end of that combat he was in, his strength was taken as the god took it back.

Wait...so you mean you took the STR from his god, and later his god reclaimed his STR? I wouldn't have allowed the wish to work at all. Instead, his god would appear and demand some pretty serious restitution for the courtesy of continued life, after trying in vain to steal his god's STR. Although I have to say, since he said "I want my god's exact STR" as opposed to "I want my god's STR", I wouldn't have done anything. Reading it literally, he didn't wish to take STR from his god, he wanted his own STR to be exactly the same as his god's (assuming I'm reading his words correctly). Had he said "I want my god's STR", then I can see it as wishing to take STR from his god. Not sure I'd have gone the route with the weapons either, when you consider that there's no rule saying that a weapon must be rated for a particular STR score (except the mention of special bows). Going by that rule, anyone who finds a girdle of giant strength would need to make an item save for his weapons each time. Then again, I have to admit that is a damned fine way to control the excess damage the PC will be inflicting all the time. Sucks to have to always find or buy new weapons.

One other said "I wished everyone dead in the party, was brought back to life as if they had raise dead cast on them all.. However since 3 of those dead were elves and raise dead Doesn't work on elves, it didn't do anything for them, the other 3 dead pcs had to make a resurrection roll and lost the standard point of con.. ONE FAILED his ressie roll though.

Ouch! See, there's the gray area I hate dealing with. I try not to warp wishes, but when a player make a really, really clumsy wish, what can you do? He said he wanted it to work just like a raise dead spell, so the PCs he was trying to bring back would be subject to the rules of a raise dead spell. I tend to respond to a wish like that in the following way:

"Ok, let me get this straight. You want to use your wish to act as a raise dead spell? Did I understand that right? You basically want the wish to cast raise dead on each of your elven teammates?"

I try to give a hint that the wording is poor, because I don't like twisting wishes and I realize that sometimes in the excitement of the game, the player(s) will try to word something carefully only to later realize they weren't thinking about what they were saying. My players learned to be careful. In a situation like that, they usually would say something like: "I want my teammates restored to full life and full health with no negative side effects." I try to go by the obvious intent rather than the literal wording, although sometimes if they insist on wording it wrong...

[garhkal]

Oh, I've seen lots of talk about emasculating wishes. There's a huge thread on that running now at DF. I see these all the time, everywhere. True, I've rarely seen a DM force the players to write out any extensive analysis of a wish, with the exception of that one crackpot "DM".

There may have been one a while back, but i don't see any current wish related threads on DF.. The closest is the one in (both 1 and 2e sub-forums) about wishing for thieving skills.. And that certainly is not one about borking/emasculating wishes..

It would still be a waste. Most likely (unless the PC has some atrociously low CON score), the PC will survive the system shock. So why not first use stone to flesh? Most likely it will work and the victim will survive. Using the wish first wastes it, because he will most likely not need the wish to be restored. If the stone to flesh spell fails, there's always that wish available. But why jump the gun and waste it (assuming the PCs have other spells that will do the job) by using it as a first resort rather than as a last resort????

??? If i can use one spell to do what may need two (or more) how is it a waste?

What I'm ranting about are DMs who are so timid they seem afraid of wishes. It's as if they have a wish phobia, and cannot just allow great things to be done with wishes. All those posts about putting limits on wishes (" the player can wish for up to 150,0000 gp", etc)...it's just silly. Do these DMs have any actual experience DMing? Are they really such poor DMs that a PC wishing for immunity to fire or a million gp is going to break their game?

Maybe.. Maybe they are just used to reading stories of OTHERS who have had wishes get so out of hand, they would just rather NOT deal with it in their game..

I had a player like that once. He would throw tantrums and his dice. He once tried to throw a miniature I painted across the room. I gave him the option of setting it down gently or picking it up off the floor after he got done picking up his teeth with broken fingers. He chose the former. Wisely. That was his last game with us. Other than that, I've only seen a couple of whiners, no one really violent or anything.

GHha.. I hate players like that. Gives other players a bad name.

Are you serious? It's the most powerful spell in existence! It can simply create a million gp out of thin air. Why would a wish spell need to use money already in existence to grant wealth? A wish changes reality. I've never even considered the idea of having it come from a king's treasury or a dragon's horde. It makes more sense that the wish simply creates the wealth.

Cause i don't SEE it as being able to create something out of nothing. IT follows the path of least resistance generally, meaning it doesn't CREATE something from nothing, but just takes what's already there..

Wishes should be greedy. It's all about getting what you want.

Then why is it in EVERY edition they say the DM should be more than willing to warp, GREEDY wishes, if they all should be greedy?

Yup. Had a barbarian wish for that once. He was pretty upset that he didn't have large enough hands to even pick the damned thing up correctly, much less wield it in combat. I also inquired as to how he was going to actually carry the damned thing, since he did not wish for a sheath to go with it, or a belt that could hold it up.

Lol.. It's why i find it strange how some seem to think those oversized blades in various computer games are in anyway realistic..

I'd have to agree, though it is a sad and pathetic thing to have a DM who doesn't allow wishes simply because he's not good enough to handle wishes.

Would you say someone is sat and pathetic if they don't allow illusions or psionics, cause they just don't want to deal with the hassle those cause?

Wait...so you mean you took the STR from his god, and later his god reclaimed his STR? I wouldn't have allowed the wish to work at all. Instead, his god would appear and demand some pretty serious restitution for the courtesy of continued life, after trying in vain to steal his god's STR. Although I have to say, since he said "I want my god's exact STR" as opposed to "I want my god's STR", I wouldn't have done anything. Reading it literally, he didn't wish to take STR from his god, he wanted his own STR to be exactly the same as his god's (assuming I'm reading his words correctly). Had he said "I want my god's STR", then I can see it as wishing to take STR from his god. Not sure I'd have gone the route with the weapons either, when you consider that there's no rule saying that a weapon must be rated for a particular STR score (except the mention of special bows). Going by that rule, anyone who finds a girdle of giant strength would need to make an item save for his weapons each time. Then again, I have to admit that is a damned fine way to control the excess damage the PC will be inflicting all the time. Sucks to have to always find or buy new weapons.

In essence yes. HIS god had given him several visions of great praise up to that point even hinting of what was to come.. So when the wish came "That i get my gods strength" i rolled a reaction roll, and got a VERY favorable result. So the god relinquished his Str score for that battle only... Then once the last monster fell, and the battle was over, he took it back..
Pity for the player he broke iirc 8 weapons inc 3 magical ones..

Ouch! See, there's the gray area I hate dealing with. I try not to warp wishes, but when a player make a really, really clumsy wish, what can you do? He said he wanted it to work just like a raise dead spell, so the PCs he was trying to bring back would be subject to the rules of a raise dead spell. I tend to respond to a wish like that in the following way:

Glad you liked how i handled it.

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Garhkal wrote:

There may have been one a while back, but i don't see any current wish related threads on DF.. The closest is the one in (both 1 and 2e sub-forums) about wishing for thieving skills.. And that certainly is not one about borking/emasculating wishes..

Oh, I didn't mean just at the moment. I'm talking about over the many years I've been online, I've seen a lot of threads at DF, Mortality, etc. about wishes and discussions that led to all these weird DM restrictions imposed on the spell, as if it were a virus that needed to be contained. The one I came across on the link that took me to DF had a bunch of stuff more about limiting the power of wishes rather than borking them. Same general idea though.

??? If i can use one spell to do what may need two (or more) how is it a waste?

What I mean is, let's say my team mate is turned to stone by a medusa. I know he's pretty hardy (high CON) so his chances of making his system shock roll are very good. Even with an "average" CON of 10, he has a 75% chance of surviving the spell. A CON 13 gives him an 85% chance of surviving it. So most likely, he'll survive the stone to flesh spell to restore him to flesh. In which case I can use my wish spell to wish for a new castle or a million gp. But if I go straight to the wish spell, I've probably wasted it, because he had at least a 75% chance (or higher) of success using the stone to flesh spell. In other words, why drop a nuclear bomb on the enemy when a small conventional one will likely achieve the same effect? Why use more power than is needed? The nuke will still be there if the conventional bombing fails. Likewise, the wish will still be there in the unlikely chance the stone to flesh fails. It's just better risk/reward management to use stone to flesh first.

Maybe.. Maybe they are just used to reading stories of OTHERS who have had wishes get so out of hand, they would just rather NOT deal with it in their game..

But that's my point. Assuming the DM has some common sense of the game, he's not going to be handing out wishes like candy. So how do wishes get out of hand? In most cases they don't. It's just that the DM doesn't have the requisite skill to handle wishes. Wishing for things like complete immunity to normal (or even all) fire, wishing for a STR 25, wishing for a castle, wishing for 1,000,000 gp, etc...these things are not out of hand, and are in fact easily dealt with by the DM. They certainly don't unbalance the game. Ridiculous wishes that are intended to give the PC powers or abilities that actually do harm the game are so easy to deal with, it's impossible for me to see how any DM could possibly fear a wish.

GHha.. I hate players like that. Gives other players a bad name.

They sure do. Another DM who was part of the goofy group in that neighborhood community of games once took a blow torch to the lead figurine of a player's character who died from red dragon breath. I actually was shown the melted figurine covered in burnt paint. All I can say is that if a DM ever came after a miniature that I paid for and spent a long time painting with a blow torch, he'd best be at peace with the idea of being forced to eat his own charred testicles.

Cause i don't SEE it as being able to create something out of nothing. IT follows the path of least resistance generally, meaning it doesn't CREATE something from nothing, but just takes what's already there..

Then it's not really altering reality, is it? I mean, it's like a magnetic teleportation spell, if used to wish for wealth. I never liked the "path of least resistance" argument because it's too scientific and it implies that the spell doesn't really have the ability to alter reality, just change things around. If we start getting scientific with it (path of least resistance), then what is the path of least resistance if a PC wishes to have the ability to fly? Is the spell allowing him to selectively ignore gravity? And if so, how does he fly as opposed to merely levitating? Or should the wish grant him wings? But if that's the case, then he'd need the bones and light body structure of a bird. How do we determine which is the path of least resistance in such a case? That's why I don't try to read too much into wishes. I don't try to limit them or justify them or figure out where the wished-for thing is coming from ("do those million gp come from the dragon's hoard or the king's treasury?"). It's a wish. It exists to alter reality. So I let it alter reality. In most cases that altering has little if any effect on the world or the campaign. Should a player make a ridiculous wish, well...that's when the DM puts on the Asmodeus hat and twists it deviously. And there is an almost unlimited number of ways of doing that, limited only by the DM's imagination and skills.

Then why is it in EVERY edition they say the DM should be more than willing to warp, GREEDY wishes, if they all should be greedy?

Probably for the same reason Gygax (and later editions) kept level limits. They assumed that DMs couldn't handle such silly things. Maybe Gygax feared wishes himself? I really don't have an answer for that. I assume it's because the original intent was to not make things too easy on the PCs. But again, wishing for the ability to fly, being immune to fire, receiving a castle, receiving a million gp, etc...sure you can call some of these wishes "greedy". But to me that's part of the fun.

Imagine the PC who wishes for a castle. BOOM! He has a castle. Did he think about how he's going to pay for upkeep? Did he consider the reaction of the king to a new castle suddenly popping into existence in his kingdom? Who is going to manage his castle? Keep it stocked? Protect it from monsters? Pay taxes on it? A quick peek at the Castle Guide tells us that he has to now hire a Marshal of the Stables, a Chief Porter, a Chief Steward, a Castellan, a Chief Gardner, men-at-arms to guard the castle, serfs to clean the castle, craftsmen and workmen to make repairs and maintain upkeep, etc. Between paying all the taxes and paying all the servants, the poor PC may end up destitute! What happens when the kingdom goes to war and the king says to the PC: "Your castle is on the front lines...you'd better make sure the attacking army doesn't siege it or sack it"? Running a castle is costly, and time consuming. Careful what you wish for!

And if the DM wants to stick it to the player for being greedy, why go to such crude and unimaginative methods such as having the castle appear atop the PC, like a scene from the Wizard of Oz? I've NEVER heard of a player saying "I wish for a castle right here in my homeland, on this nice, easily defensible tract of land." (I have heard of players wishing for a castle). Since the PC did not state exactly where he wants his castle (they never do), why not simply have the castle appear exactly on the border of two rival nations? Now it exists in two kingdoms. Good luck! Or maybe it appears in a desert or arctic land. Again, good luck! Hell, it could appear underwater! Or at the (unstable) edge of a series of cliffs that just happen to be bordered by orc tribes? I mean, we can go through stuff like this all night.

Likewise with my earlier example of wishing for a million gp. Without using the overused and silly cliches of taking it from a dragon's hoard or the king's treasury, there are almost countless ways that the wish is going to cause problems. Yes, he now has a million gp, but what about the taxes on that? Where to store it? How to protect it? Etc.

To me, the line about "greedy" wishes meant wishes that broke the game - being immune to all damage, having scores of 25 in every stat, etc. Even wishing to be 100% magic resistant would be insignificant to my DM-mind. Oh dear god how I wish someone would wish for that in one of my campaigns! I'd have the biggest, most evil grin on my face once that was uttered. Let your imagination run wild...I'm sure you can imagine some of the things I'd rule because of that. No raise dead, no stone to flesh, no restoration, no regeneration, no magical healing, perhaps even no magic items work for the PC, etc. You can't beat a good DM no matter what you wish for.

Lol.. It's why i find it strange how some seem to think those oversized blades in various computer games are in anyway realistic..

God, that's one major reason I cannot stomach 3E+ art. It's like...that sword weighs about 10 times as much as your entire body. Even with the STR to lift it, you'd topple over with the first swing because of momentum, gravity, and balance.

Would you say someone is sat and pathetic if they don't allow illusions or psionics, cause they just don't want to deal with the hassle those cause?

Yes and no.

I do think it's sad and pathetic to remove all illusions because it's part of the game - a really significant-sized and fun part. You're talking about removing an entire school of magic. Illusions aren't that hard to handle, though they do take a good deal of reading, understanding, and knowledge on the part of both the DM and the players. But then again, that's part of the game. This isn't Candyland, it's AD&D. Players and DMs are expected to have some skills. So just saying "It's too much hassle to use illusions" to me is being lazy, and it's a shame because illusions are such a big part of the genre and the game.

Removing psionics can go either way. If the DM is removing them simply because "they're too hard", then that's being lazy. If the DM removes them simply because he feels they're too sci-fi and don't fit the theme of the game (as I and many other DMs feel), then that's a judgement call and it's ok. In that case it's about whether or not something fits in with the feel of the campaign.

In essence yes. HIS god had given him several visions of great praise up to that point even hinting of what was to come.. So when the wish came "That i get my gods strength" i rolled a reaction roll, and got a VERY favorable result. So the god relinquished his Str score for that battle only... Then once the last monster fell, and the battle was over, he took it back..
Pity for the player he broke iirc 8 weapons inc 3 magical ones..

Ah, that clarifies it! LMAO! I'd have loved to have seen that player's face! 8 weapons and 3 magic items! Good god, I bet he regretted that wish!

Glad you liked how i handled it.

Bottom line, it's really not up to me how another DM handles his game (but yes, I actually did love your example!). I used to say this at DF so many countless times, but some of the dickheads there always ignored that part. If the DM and the players are having fun, then how I see things has absolutely less than zero relevance, because it's their game. If they're having fun, they're doing it right. But as in this rant about wishes, it's really more about games where the DM and the players aren't having that fun. The DM feel compelled to grant wishes, but then fears the consequences because he lacks the skill, knowledge, experience or whatever to handle wishes, so he emasculates them or twists them into totally undesirable results. The players are unhappy the because they feel screwed over. Pretty much the point of the entire rant (technically, do rants really have a point?) is that DMs need to relax, loosen up, stop fearing wishes to the point where they either turn wishes into very limited wishes, or emasculate them totally, or worst of all twist them into punishments for daring to enjoy the game. Wishes aren't going to break a campaign. In about four decades of gaming, I've seen wishes destroy the exact same number of campaigns/worlds as I have seen destroyed by removing level limits - a running total of exactly zero.

[garhkal]

Ah, that clarifies it! LMAO! I'd have loved to have seen that player's face! 8 weapons and 3 magic items! Good god, I bet he regretted that wish!

He was actually ok with the losses.. Cause without it, the poor decision by the party to go face off against over a dozen mountain giants (at an ave Level of would have wiped them out.. And unluckily for him, he really could have done with that wish 2 game sessions later, when BOTH party clerics and the only mage, died in a spider ambush... and they had no more means of raising the dead at the time..