Players Circumventing the limitations of Wish The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat is the maximum PC carrying weight?How do I deal with players persistently arguing for rules loopholes, even after I've tried to finalise my rulings?Does a Simulacrum-Wish combo affect the original caster?Could a wish spell make someone who is not able to cast the wish spell, able again?What happens when polymorph ends in a demiplane that is too small for the creature?How to practically handle the 33% chance to be unable to cast Wish ever again?Can this Wish effect be dispelled?What happens if an Arcana Cleric makes a Divine Intervention of a stressful Wish?Can you wish for more wishes from an Efreeti bound to service via an Efreeti Bottle?A spell that let's you travel to another setting. Which level would it be?
Can you teleport closer to a creature you are Frightened of?
Why the last AS PATH item always is `I` or `?`?
Are the names of these months realistic?
Purpose of level-shifter with same in and out voltages
What difference does it make using sed with/without whitespaces?
Where do students learn to solve polynomial equations these days?
Would a completely good Muggle be able to use a wand?
What flight has the highest ratio of timezone difference to flight time?
How many extra stops do monopods offer for tele photographs?
How to set page number in right side in chapter title page?
Physiological effects of huge anime eyes
What happened in Rome, when the western empire "fell"?
Audio Conversion With ADS1243
Why doesn't UK go for the same deal Japan has with EU to resolve Brexit?
Example of a Mathematician/Physicist whose Other Publications during their PhD eclipsed their PhD Thesis
New carbon wheel brake pads after use on aluminum wheel?
Players Circumventing the limitations of Wish
When "be it" is at the beginning of a sentence, what kind of structure do you call it?
Is it professional to write unrelated content in an almost-empty email?
What was the first Unix version to run on a microcomputer?
Does Germany produce more waste than the US?
How to use ReplaceAll on an expression that contains a rule
Expressing the idea of having a very busy time
Iterate through multiline string line by line
Players Circumventing the limitations of Wish
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat is the maximum PC carrying weight?How do I deal with players persistently arguing for rules loopholes, even after I've tried to finalise my rulings?Does a Simulacrum-Wish combo affect the original caster?Could a wish spell make someone who is not able to cast the wish spell, able again?What happens when polymorph ends in a demiplane that is too small for the creature?How to practically handle the 33% chance to be unable to cast Wish ever again?Can this Wish effect be dispelled?What happens if an Arcana Cleric makes a Divine Intervention of a stressful Wish?Can you wish for more wishes from an Efreeti bound to service via an Efreeti Bottle?A spell that let's you travel to another setting. Which level would it be?
$begingroup$
So I know that Wish is meant to be a really powerful spell, but some of my players from my group (I am the DM) seem to have spent some time into getting around the limitations of Wish. Now, I know that in order for no adverse (other than a mishap) you must replicate a spell of 8th level or lower, with anything else becoming a probability for you to never cast a wish spell again. You could wish for a magical weapon but that would be likely to transport you someplace where the weapon currently resides. I know that the Wish, if making something, must remain within three hundred cubic feet, or you could completely heal 20 creatures, or any number of weird stuff.
Some of my players spent a large amount of time trying to create some wishes so that I cannot twist nor corrupt their wish. Now, I also know that they cannot just wish for something like 45 points of Dexterity, but they are legitimate wishes. One of them ran along the lines of "I wish for the immediate and complete obliteration of all (insert monster here, in this case it was the Tarrasque) in this plane of existence with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever.
How would a DM handle such a wish? Furthermore, if players are putting that much time into such a wish, would that even be considered abusing that power?
I realize that they might never cast that spell again due to the 33% chance of never being able to cast it again, but I honestly believe telling them that their spell fails is an absolute last resort. I would prefer if the answers came from experience and not conjuncture.
dnd-5e problem-players wish
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So I know that Wish is meant to be a really powerful spell, but some of my players from my group (I am the DM) seem to have spent some time into getting around the limitations of Wish. Now, I know that in order for no adverse (other than a mishap) you must replicate a spell of 8th level or lower, with anything else becoming a probability for you to never cast a wish spell again. You could wish for a magical weapon but that would be likely to transport you someplace where the weapon currently resides. I know that the Wish, if making something, must remain within three hundred cubic feet, or you could completely heal 20 creatures, or any number of weird stuff.
Some of my players spent a large amount of time trying to create some wishes so that I cannot twist nor corrupt their wish. Now, I also know that they cannot just wish for something like 45 points of Dexterity, but they are legitimate wishes. One of them ran along the lines of "I wish for the immediate and complete obliteration of all (insert monster here, in this case it was the Tarrasque) in this plane of existence with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever.
How would a DM handle such a wish? Furthermore, if players are putting that much time into such a wish, would that even be considered abusing that power?
I realize that they might never cast that spell again due to the 33% chance of never being able to cast it again, but I honestly believe telling them that their spell fails is an absolute last resort. I would prefer if the answers came from experience and not conjuncture.
dnd-5e problem-players wish
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Are you looking for a rule that governs such wishes, or for a way to communicate to players that wish may be only partially fulfilled?
$endgroup$
– Mołot
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Either would be fine, but a way to communicate to the players would be preferable. I also would not say no to a rule if one existed, but I doubt it does.
$endgroup$
– Bookwyrm
53 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So I know that Wish is meant to be a really powerful spell, but some of my players from my group (I am the DM) seem to have spent some time into getting around the limitations of Wish. Now, I know that in order for no adverse (other than a mishap) you must replicate a spell of 8th level or lower, with anything else becoming a probability for you to never cast a wish spell again. You could wish for a magical weapon but that would be likely to transport you someplace where the weapon currently resides. I know that the Wish, if making something, must remain within three hundred cubic feet, or you could completely heal 20 creatures, or any number of weird stuff.
Some of my players spent a large amount of time trying to create some wishes so that I cannot twist nor corrupt their wish. Now, I also know that they cannot just wish for something like 45 points of Dexterity, but they are legitimate wishes. One of them ran along the lines of "I wish for the immediate and complete obliteration of all (insert monster here, in this case it was the Tarrasque) in this plane of existence with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever.
How would a DM handle such a wish? Furthermore, if players are putting that much time into such a wish, would that even be considered abusing that power?
I realize that they might never cast that spell again due to the 33% chance of never being able to cast it again, but I honestly believe telling them that their spell fails is an absolute last resort. I would prefer if the answers came from experience and not conjuncture.
dnd-5e problem-players wish
$endgroup$
So I know that Wish is meant to be a really powerful spell, but some of my players from my group (I am the DM) seem to have spent some time into getting around the limitations of Wish. Now, I know that in order for no adverse (other than a mishap) you must replicate a spell of 8th level or lower, with anything else becoming a probability for you to never cast a wish spell again. You could wish for a magical weapon but that would be likely to transport you someplace where the weapon currently resides. I know that the Wish, if making something, must remain within three hundred cubic feet, or you could completely heal 20 creatures, or any number of weird stuff.
Some of my players spent a large amount of time trying to create some wishes so that I cannot twist nor corrupt their wish. Now, I also know that they cannot just wish for something like 45 points of Dexterity, but they are legitimate wishes. One of them ran along the lines of "I wish for the immediate and complete obliteration of all (insert monster here, in this case it was the Tarrasque) in this plane of existence with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever.
How would a DM handle such a wish? Furthermore, if players are putting that much time into such a wish, would that even be considered abusing that power?
I realize that they might never cast that spell again due to the 33% chance of never being able to cast it again, but I honestly believe telling them that their spell fails is an absolute last resort. I would prefer if the answers came from experience and not conjuncture.
dnd-5e problem-players wish
dnd-5e problem-players wish
edited 51 mins ago
V2Blast
26k589159
26k589159
asked 1 hour ago
BookwyrmBookwyrm
553417
553417
2
$begingroup$
Are you looking for a rule that governs such wishes, or for a way to communicate to players that wish may be only partially fulfilled?
$endgroup$
– Mołot
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Either would be fine, but a way to communicate to the players would be preferable. I also would not say no to a rule if one existed, but I doubt it does.
$endgroup$
– Bookwyrm
53 mins ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Are you looking for a rule that governs such wishes, or for a way to communicate to players that wish may be only partially fulfilled?
$endgroup$
– Mołot
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Either would be fine, but a way to communicate to the players would be preferable. I also would not say no to a rule if one existed, but I doubt it does.
$endgroup$
– Bookwyrm
53 mins ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Are you looking for a rule that governs such wishes, or for a way to communicate to players that wish may be only partially fulfilled?
$endgroup$
– Mołot
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Are you looking for a rule that governs such wishes, or for a way to communicate to players that wish may be only partially fulfilled?
$endgroup$
– Mołot
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Either would be fine, but a way to communicate to the players would be preferable. I also would not say no to a rule if one existed, but I doubt it does.
$endgroup$
– Bookwyrm
53 mins ago
$begingroup$
Either would be fine, but a way to communicate to the players would be preferable. I also would not say no to a rule if one existed, but I doubt it does.
$endgroup$
– Bookwyrm
53 mins ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You could use worldbuilding to inflict an unforseen consequence on the players that is nothing to do with the wish itself.
For example: It turns out that there is a greater-power level lawful neutral organization in the multiverse of your setting that are dedicated to preventing and punishing the genocidal use of magic against any creature. They target your PCs for death and eternal afterlife imprisonment in a lawful neutral prison plane as retribution for crimes against reality itself. Set the CR of attacks from that organization above what a Tarrasque would have been. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or have it be the case that some greater evil power was trapped in a mountain prison on that plane of existence, and the prison was guarded by Tarrasques. Because the guards were eliminated, the servants of the great evil were able to unleash their master from the prison. Chaos and mayhem ensue. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or do both. Or do something else completely, the Tarrasques all get sent to the abyss, get converted into demons. This allows the demons to overpower the forces of hell and break out into the Prime Material, and now all of reality is under threat by the armies of abyssal Tarrasques under the command of Demogorgon. Whatever. Get creative.
Give the players an out in that the only way they can fix things is to acquire a macguffin and take it to the place of power to rewrite the timeline, undo the wish, and bring back the monsters they destroyed through the misuse of god-level magic.
It checks out because this isn't an adverse side effect of the wish itself. The wish isn't misfiring and causing an adverse effect, so the wish works as described. The world itself just turns out to have an unexpected consequence built in that the players didn't know about.
You're letting the spell through, but using the consequences of that in the world to incentivize the players to undo the effects of the spell.
Only thing I'd consider in terms of overriding the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part would be to take the 33% chance of losing access to the wish spell and just setting that to 100% for a usage of that magnitude, but give it back after they reset the timeline, which seems fair.
I'd also set the wish in such a way that it can't be undone by another wish spell if another party member tries to dig everyone out of trouble that way.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Have you tried this at your table? How did it work out?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
26 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I'm really confused by what you are saying when you say that the PC is "misusing" magic. If magic is not for eliminating but huge threats to the players and the world, what is it for? Would the shadowy organizations come after the PC for killing the tarasque with fireball or true polymorph? What is considered proper use of the wish spell by your definition (and how do you support that judgement)?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not at an epic level: I've only GM'd twice with 5th edition, and three times back in the 3.5 days. None of the groups lasted long enough to get to 9th level spells. I've had this happen at an epic level to me as a player: A member of the party (Wizard) tried to steal Mystra's divine portfolio. GM decided to let it happen, and the player became the new god of magic: But then magic itself started to break down and the whole multiverse began to unravel. We had to reset the timeline to bring Mystra back and set the universe to rights. Was fun and epic stuff, the whole party loved it.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
12 mins ago
$begingroup$
As a meta-gaming question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that I think that it's too powerful a use of the spell. As an in-game question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that it's genocide. On both fronts, I think that blocking it is acceptable, but boring and reduces player agency. On the other hand, letting them do it but then having in-world consequences that incentivize the players to undo it feels both more interesting while using player agency to fix the problem of player agency. I like it, and that's how I'd deal with it if I had a high-level table try to do this.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
7 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The wish spell says that, if you wish for too much:
the spell might simply fail, the effect you desire might only be partly achieved, or you might suffer some unforeseen consequence...
If someone says they want their wish "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever", three obvious solutions are:
- to rule that the spell simply fails
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted (for example to rule that the Tarrasque was injured but not killed)
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted and the part that is not granted is the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part, and then make up some appropriate adverse side effects
You still want to give the character something in exchange for their wish, so my approach is generally to decide how much of of a benefit their wish is worth, and then give them that much benefit, regardless of how much they asked or didn't ask for.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144236%2fplayers-circumventing-the-limitations-of-wish%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You could use worldbuilding to inflict an unforseen consequence on the players that is nothing to do with the wish itself.
For example: It turns out that there is a greater-power level lawful neutral organization in the multiverse of your setting that are dedicated to preventing and punishing the genocidal use of magic against any creature. They target your PCs for death and eternal afterlife imprisonment in a lawful neutral prison plane as retribution for crimes against reality itself. Set the CR of attacks from that organization above what a Tarrasque would have been. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or have it be the case that some greater evil power was trapped in a mountain prison on that plane of existence, and the prison was guarded by Tarrasques. Because the guards were eliminated, the servants of the great evil were able to unleash their master from the prison. Chaos and mayhem ensue. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or do both. Or do something else completely, the Tarrasques all get sent to the abyss, get converted into demons. This allows the demons to overpower the forces of hell and break out into the Prime Material, and now all of reality is under threat by the armies of abyssal Tarrasques under the command of Demogorgon. Whatever. Get creative.
Give the players an out in that the only way they can fix things is to acquire a macguffin and take it to the place of power to rewrite the timeline, undo the wish, and bring back the monsters they destroyed through the misuse of god-level magic.
It checks out because this isn't an adverse side effect of the wish itself. The wish isn't misfiring and causing an adverse effect, so the wish works as described. The world itself just turns out to have an unexpected consequence built in that the players didn't know about.
You're letting the spell through, but using the consequences of that in the world to incentivize the players to undo the effects of the spell.
Only thing I'd consider in terms of overriding the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part would be to take the 33% chance of losing access to the wish spell and just setting that to 100% for a usage of that magnitude, but give it back after they reset the timeline, which seems fair.
I'd also set the wish in such a way that it can't be undone by another wish spell if another party member tries to dig everyone out of trouble that way.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Have you tried this at your table? How did it work out?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
26 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I'm really confused by what you are saying when you say that the PC is "misusing" magic. If magic is not for eliminating but huge threats to the players and the world, what is it for? Would the shadowy organizations come after the PC for killing the tarasque with fireball or true polymorph? What is considered proper use of the wish spell by your definition (and how do you support that judgement)?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not at an epic level: I've only GM'd twice with 5th edition, and three times back in the 3.5 days. None of the groups lasted long enough to get to 9th level spells. I've had this happen at an epic level to me as a player: A member of the party (Wizard) tried to steal Mystra's divine portfolio. GM decided to let it happen, and the player became the new god of magic: But then magic itself started to break down and the whole multiverse began to unravel. We had to reset the timeline to bring Mystra back and set the universe to rights. Was fun and epic stuff, the whole party loved it.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
12 mins ago
$begingroup$
As a meta-gaming question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that I think that it's too powerful a use of the spell. As an in-game question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that it's genocide. On both fronts, I think that blocking it is acceptable, but boring and reduces player agency. On the other hand, letting them do it but then having in-world consequences that incentivize the players to undo it feels both more interesting while using player agency to fix the problem of player agency. I like it, and that's how I'd deal with it if I had a high-level table try to do this.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
7 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could use worldbuilding to inflict an unforseen consequence on the players that is nothing to do with the wish itself.
For example: It turns out that there is a greater-power level lawful neutral organization in the multiverse of your setting that are dedicated to preventing and punishing the genocidal use of magic against any creature. They target your PCs for death and eternal afterlife imprisonment in a lawful neutral prison plane as retribution for crimes against reality itself. Set the CR of attacks from that organization above what a Tarrasque would have been. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or have it be the case that some greater evil power was trapped in a mountain prison on that plane of existence, and the prison was guarded by Tarrasques. Because the guards were eliminated, the servants of the great evil were able to unleash their master from the prison. Chaos and mayhem ensue. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or do both. Or do something else completely, the Tarrasques all get sent to the abyss, get converted into demons. This allows the demons to overpower the forces of hell and break out into the Prime Material, and now all of reality is under threat by the armies of abyssal Tarrasques under the command of Demogorgon. Whatever. Get creative.
Give the players an out in that the only way they can fix things is to acquire a macguffin and take it to the place of power to rewrite the timeline, undo the wish, and bring back the monsters they destroyed through the misuse of god-level magic.
It checks out because this isn't an adverse side effect of the wish itself. The wish isn't misfiring and causing an adverse effect, so the wish works as described. The world itself just turns out to have an unexpected consequence built in that the players didn't know about.
You're letting the spell through, but using the consequences of that in the world to incentivize the players to undo the effects of the spell.
Only thing I'd consider in terms of overriding the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part would be to take the 33% chance of losing access to the wish spell and just setting that to 100% for a usage of that magnitude, but give it back after they reset the timeline, which seems fair.
I'd also set the wish in such a way that it can't be undone by another wish spell if another party member tries to dig everyone out of trouble that way.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Have you tried this at your table? How did it work out?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
26 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I'm really confused by what you are saying when you say that the PC is "misusing" magic. If magic is not for eliminating but huge threats to the players and the world, what is it for? Would the shadowy organizations come after the PC for killing the tarasque with fireball or true polymorph? What is considered proper use of the wish spell by your definition (and how do you support that judgement)?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not at an epic level: I've only GM'd twice with 5th edition, and three times back in the 3.5 days. None of the groups lasted long enough to get to 9th level spells. I've had this happen at an epic level to me as a player: A member of the party (Wizard) tried to steal Mystra's divine portfolio. GM decided to let it happen, and the player became the new god of magic: But then magic itself started to break down and the whole multiverse began to unravel. We had to reset the timeline to bring Mystra back and set the universe to rights. Was fun and epic stuff, the whole party loved it.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
12 mins ago
$begingroup$
As a meta-gaming question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that I think that it's too powerful a use of the spell. As an in-game question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that it's genocide. On both fronts, I think that blocking it is acceptable, but boring and reduces player agency. On the other hand, letting them do it but then having in-world consequences that incentivize the players to undo it feels both more interesting while using player agency to fix the problem of player agency. I like it, and that's how I'd deal with it if I had a high-level table try to do this.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
7 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could use worldbuilding to inflict an unforseen consequence on the players that is nothing to do with the wish itself.
For example: It turns out that there is a greater-power level lawful neutral organization in the multiverse of your setting that are dedicated to preventing and punishing the genocidal use of magic against any creature. They target your PCs for death and eternal afterlife imprisonment in a lawful neutral prison plane as retribution for crimes against reality itself. Set the CR of attacks from that organization above what a Tarrasque would have been. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or have it be the case that some greater evil power was trapped in a mountain prison on that plane of existence, and the prison was guarded by Tarrasques. Because the guards were eliminated, the servants of the great evil were able to unleash their master from the prison. Chaos and mayhem ensue. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or do both. Or do something else completely, the Tarrasques all get sent to the abyss, get converted into demons. This allows the demons to overpower the forces of hell and break out into the Prime Material, and now all of reality is under threat by the armies of abyssal Tarrasques under the command of Demogorgon. Whatever. Get creative.
Give the players an out in that the only way they can fix things is to acquire a macguffin and take it to the place of power to rewrite the timeline, undo the wish, and bring back the monsters they destroyed through the misuse of god-level magic.
It checks out because this isn't an adverse side effect of the wish itself. The wish isn't misfiring and causing an adverse effect, so the wish works as described. The world itself just turns out to have an unexpected consequence built in that the players didn't know about.
You're letting the spell through, but using the consequences of that in the world to incentivize the players to undo the effects of the spell.
Only thing I'd consider in terms of overriding the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part would be to take the 33% chance of losing access to the wish spell and just setting that to 100% for a usage of that magnitude, but give it back after they reset the timeline, which seems fair.
I'd also set the wish in such a way that it can't be undone by another wish spell if another party member tries to dig everyone out of trouble that way.
$endgroup$
You could use worldbuilding to inflict an unforseen consequence on the players that is nothing to do with the wish itself.
For example: It turns out that there is a greater-power level lawful neutral organization in the multiverse of your setting that are dedicated to preventing and punishing the genocidal use of magic against any creature. They target your PCs for death and eternal afterlife imprisonment in a lawful neutral prison plane as retribution for crimes against reality itself. Set the CR of attacks from that organization above what a Tarrasque would have been. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or have it be the case that some greater evil power was trapped in a mountain prison on that plane of existence, and the prison was guarded by Tarrasques. Because the guards were eliminated, the servants of the great evil were able to unleash their master from the prison. Chaos and mayhem ensue. Continue to escalate and just wreck everything the players have achieved.
Or do both. Or do something else completely, the Tarrasques all get sent to the abyss, get converted into demons. This allows the demons to overpower the forces of hell and break out into the Prime Material, and now all of reality is under threat by the armies of abyssal Tarrasques under the command of Demogorgon. Whatever. Get creative.
Give the players an out in that the only way they can fix things is to acquire a macguffin and take it to the place of power to rewrite the timeline, undo the wish, and bring back the monsters they destroyed through the misuse of god-level magic.
It checks out because this isn't an adverse side effect of the wish itself. The wish isn't misfiring and causing an adverse effect, so the wish works as described. The world itself just turns out to have an unexpected consequence built in that the players didn't know about.
You're letting the spell through, but using the consequences of that in the world to incentivize the players to undo the effects of the spell.
Only thing I'd consider in terms of overriding the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part would be to take the 33% chance of losing access to the wish spell and just setting that to 100% for a usage of that magnitude, but give it back after they reset the timeline, which seems fair.
I'd also set the wish in such a way that it can't be undone by another wish spell if another party member tries to dig everyone out of trouble that way.
answered 39 mins ago
Daniel ScheallerDaniel Schealler
805
805
$begingroup$
Have you tried this at your table? How did it work out?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
26 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I'm really confused by what you are saying when you say that the PC is "misusing" magic. If magic is not for eliminating but huge threats to the players and the world, what is it for? Would the shadowy organizations come after the PC for killing the tarasque with fireball or true polymorph? What is considered proper use of the wish spell by your definition (and how do you support that judgement)?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not at an epic level: I've only GM'd twice with 5th edition, and three times back in the 3.5 days. None of the groups lasted long enough to get to 9th level spells. I've had this happen at an epic level to me as a player: A member of the party (Wizard) tried to steal Mystra's divine portfolio. GM decided to let it happen, and the player became the new god of magic: But then magic itself started to break down and the whole multiverse began to unravel. We had to reset the timeline to bring Mystra back and set the universe to rights. Was fun and epic stuff, the whole party loved it.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
12 mins ago
$begingroup$
As a meta-gaming question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that I think that it's too powerful a use of the spell. As an in-game question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that it's genocide. On both fronts, I think that blocking it is acceptable, but boring and reduces player agency. On the other hand, letting them do it but then having in-world consequences that incentivize the players to undo it feels both more interesting while using player agency to fix the problem of player agency. I like it, and that's how I'd deal with it if I had a high-level table try to do this.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
7 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Have you tried this at your table? How did it work out?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
26 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I'm really confused by what you are saying when you say that the PC is "misusing" magic. If magic is not for eliminating but huge threats to the players and the world, what is it for? Would the shadowy organizations come after the PC for killing the tarasque with fireball or true polymorph? What is considered proper use of the wish spell by your definition (and how do you support that judgement)?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not at an epic level: I've only GM'd twice with 5th edition, and three times back in the 3.5 days. None of the groups lasted long enough to get to 9th level spells. I've had this happen at an epic level to me as a player: A member of the party (Wizard) tried to steal Mystra's divine portfolio. GM decided to let it happen, and the player became the new god of magic: But then magic itself started to break down and the whole multiverse began to unravel. We had to reset the timeline to bring Mystra back and set the universe to rights. Was fun and epic stuff, the whole party loved it.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
12 mins ago
$begingroup$
As a meta-gaming question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that I think that it's too powerful a use of the spell. As an in-game question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that it's genocide. On both fronts, I think that blocking it is acceptable, but boring and reduces player agency. On the other hand, letting them do it but then having in-world consequences that incentivize the players to undo it feels both more interesting while using player agency to fix the problem of player agency. I like it, and that's how I'd deal with it if I had a high-level table try to do this.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
Have you tried this at your table? How did it work out?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
Have you tried this at your table? How did it work out?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
26 mins ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I'm really confused by what you are saying when you say that the PC is "misusing" magic. If magic is not for eliminating but huge threats to the players and the world, what is it for? Would the shadowy organizations come after the PC for killing the tarasque with fireball or true polymorph? What is considered proper use of the wish spell by your definition (and how do you support that judgement)?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
I'm really confused by what you are saying when you say that the PC is "misusing" magic. If magic is not for eliminating but huge threats to the players and the world, what is it for? Would the shadowy organizations come after the PC for killing the tarasque with fireball or true polymorph? What is considered proper use of the wish spell by your definition (and how do you support that judgement)?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not at an epic level: I've only GM'd twice with 5th edition, and three times back in the 3.5 days. None of the groups lasted long enough to get to 9th level spells. I've had this happen at an epic level to me as a player: A member of the party (Wizard) tried to steal Mystra's divine portfolio. GM decided to let it happen, and the player became the new god of magic: But then magic itself started to break down and the whole multiverse began to unravel. We had to reset the timeline to bring Mystra back and set the universe to rights. Was fun and epic stuff, the whole party loved it.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
12 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not at an epic level: I've only GM'd twice with 5th edition, and three times back in the 3.5 days. None of the groups lasted long enough to get to 9th level spells. I've had this happen at an epic level to me as a player: A member of the party (Wizard) tried to steal Mystra's divine portfolio. GM decided to let it happen, and the player became the new god of magic: But then magic itself started to break down and the whole multiverse began to unravel. We had to reset the timeline to bring Mystra back and set the universe to rights. Was fun and epic stuff, the whole party loved it.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
12 mins ago
$begingroup$
As a meta-gaming question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that I think that it's too powerful a use of the spell. As an in-game question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that it's genocide. On both fronts, I think that blocking it is acceptable, but boring and reduces player agency. On the other hand, letting them do it but then having in-world consequences that incentivize the players to undo it feels both more interesting while using player agency to fix the problem of player agency. I like it, and that's how I'd deal with it if I had a high-level table try to do this.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
As a meta-gaming question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that I think that it's too powerful a use of the spell. As an in-game question, I think it's a 'misuse' in the sense that it's genocide. On both fronts, I think that blocking it is acceptable, but boring and reduces player agency. On the other hand, letting them do it but then having in-world consequences that incentivize the players to undo it feels both more interesting while using player agency to fix the problem of player agency. I like it, and that's how I'd deal with it if I had a high-level table try to do this.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schealler
7 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The wish spell says that, if you wish for too much:
the spell might simply fail, the effect you desire might only be partly achieved, or you might suffer some unforeseen consequence...
If someone says they want their wish "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever", three obvious solutions are:
- to rule that the spell simply fails
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted (for example to rule that the Tarrasque was injured but not killed)
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted and the part that is not granted is the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part, and then make up some appropriate adverse side effects
You still want to give the character something in exchange for their wish, so my approach is generally to decide how much of of a benefit their wish is worth, and then give them that much benefit, regardless of how much they asked or didn't ask for.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The wish spell says that, if you wish for too much:
the spell might simply fail, the effect you desire might only be partly achieved, or you might suffer some unforeseen consequence...
If someone says they want their wish "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever", three obvious solutions are:
- to rule that the spell simply fails
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted (for example to rule that the Tarrasque was injured but not killed)
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted and the part that is not granted is the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part, and then make up some appropriate adverse side effects
You still want to give the character something in exchange for their wish, so my approach is generally to decide how much of of a benefit their wish is worth, and then give them that much benefit, regardless of how much they asked or didn't ask for.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The wish spell says that, if you wish for too much:
the spell might simply fail, the effect you desire might only be partly achieved, or you might suffer some unforeseen consequence...
If someone says they want their wish "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever", three obvious solutions are:
- to rule that the spell simply fails
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted (for example to rule that the Tarrasque was injured but not killed)
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted and the part that is not granted is the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part, and then make up some appropriate adverse side effects
You still want to give the character something in exchange for their wish, so my approach is generally to decide how much of of a benefit their wish is worth, and then give them that much benefit, regardless of how much they asked or didn't ask for.
$endgroup$
The wish spell says that, if you wish for too much:
the spell might simply fail, the effect you desire might only be partly achieved, or you might suffer some unforeseen consequence...
If someone says they want their wish "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever", three obvious solutions are:
- to rule that the spell simply fails
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted (for example to rule that the Tarrasque was injured but not killed)
- to rule that the wish is only partially granted and the part that is not granted is the "with absolutely no adverse side effects whatsoever" part, and then make up some appropriate adverse side effects
You still want to give the character something in exchange for their wish, so my approach is generally to decide how much of of a benefit their wish is worth, and then give them that much benefit, regardless of how much they asked or didn't ask for.
edited 51 mins ago
V2Blast
26k589159
26k589159
answered 1 hour ago
Dan BDan B
38.5k872146
38.5k872146
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144236%2fplayers-circumventing-the-limitations-of-wish%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
$begingroup$
Are you looking for a rule that governs such wishes, or for a way to communicate to players that wish may be only partially fulfilled?
$endgroup$
– Mołot
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Either would be fine, but a way to communicate to the players would be preferable. I also would not say no to a rule if one existed, but I doubt it does.
$endgroup$
– Bookwyrm
53 mins ago