PDA

View Full Version : 3.5 - Candle of invocation: so broken?



Killer Angel
2009-03-23, 10:32 AM
The answer, of course, is YES, my fellow playgrounders. But...
Let me explain what are my doubts: I’ve often read how the Candle can be abused, obviously through the use of gate followed by the infamous gate chain with an infinite wish loop.
This is the part I don’t think is possible (or easy) to obtain.
Let’s stay strictly Core (given that the Candle is a Core object) and possibly RAW.

The creatures that can grant a wish (or more) are very few: Solar, Efreeti and Djinn (the noble ones); don’t remember if there are any others.
The wish spell can be used to create a magic item... by RAW, there’s no indication on the prize of such magic item. However, there are some other indications in the spell: you can obtain a non-magical object of up to 25.000 gp in value; you can gain a +1 bonus to an ability score (the prize of a manual with the same effect is 27.500), etc.
The description of the spell says clearly that you can try to produce effects greater than this (including magic items with high value), but it’s dangerous: by RAW, wishing for a Staff of the magi might get you transported to the presence of the staff ‘s current owner.
There’s a contradiction in the text of the spell, but the example of the staff of the magi is very clear, so I think that by RAW (or RAI?) you can wish for a magical object more costly than 25.000-27.500, but you are going to face some nasty consequences.

A caster with the right Candle summons a Solar and obtains a free wish (a magical gift of 27.500 gp for an investment of 8.400 gp... Core is broken, there’s no doubt about it).
But the Solar have only one wish... so the chain gate (use 1-2 wishes for objects / ability score and then wishing for another Candle) must be done with the Efreeti.

By RAW, the Efreeti is lawful evil, and no doubt it’s unwilling to follow your orders, even if is forced to obedience by the Gate spell. Every DM had to play the evilness of the Efreeti, and by “tradition” the evil genies tend to turn the wishes against the fool mortal, playing around the terms of the “contract”, in the same way that Devils act. The evilness of Devils and Efreeti tricking on contracts and fine prints are so famous, that every player expects bad news dealing with them.

My point should be clear: you can wish for more than 25.000-27.500 gp, but by RAW you’ll face bad consequences, regardless of the creature involved. But if you Gate an Efreeti to obtain the wish loop, you could have nasty surprises even wishing only for another candle.
If you don’t think VERY carefully to the exact terms of your request, the genie (just following his alignment, so without need to recurring to Rule 0) will tend to cheat you, while staying in the borders of the Gate spell.
Maybe he will “summon” your new candle of invocation, directly from the treasure vault of the main temple of Heironeous. Or Nerull.

That’s why I find hard to believe in the feasibility of the gate chain, in core and by raw. You can do it, but not without suffering backfire.

What do you think?

olelia
2009-03-23, 10:41 AM
Wish
Universal
Level: Sor/Wiz 9
Components: V, XP
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: See text
Target, Effect, or Area: See text
Duration: See text
Saving Throw: See text
Spell Resistance: Yes

Wish is the mightiest spell a wizard or sorcerer can cast. By simply speaking aloud, you can alter reality to better suit you.

Even wish, however, has its limits.

A wish can produce any one of the following effects.

Duplicate any wizard or sorcerer spell of 8th level or lower, provided the spell is not of a school prohibited to you.
Duplicate any other spell of 6th level or lower, provided the spell is not of a school prohibited to you.
Duplicate any wizard or sorcerer spell of 7th level or lower even if it’s of a prohibited school.
Duplicate any other spell of 5th level or lower even if it’s of a prohibited school.
Undo the harmful effects of many other spells, such as geas/quest or insanity.
Create a nonmagical item of up to 25,000 gp in value.
Create a magic item, or add to the powers of an existing magic item.
Grant a creature a +1 inherent bonus to an ability score. Two to five wish spells cast in immediate succession can grant a creature a +2 to +5 inherent bonus to an ability score (two wishes for a +2 inherent bonus, three for a +3 inherent bonus, and so on). Inherent bonuses are instantaneous, so they cannot be dispelled. Note: An inherent bonus may not exceed +5 for a single ability score, and inherent bonuses to a particular ability score do not stack, so only the best one applies.
Remove injuries and afflictions. 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. A wish can never restore the experience point loss from casting a spell or the level or Constitution loss from being raised from the dead.
Revive the dead. A wish can bring a dead creature back to life by duplicating a resurrection spell. 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. A wish cannot prevent a character who was brought back to life from losing an experience level.
Transport travelers. A wish can lift one creature per caster level from anywhere on any plane and place those creatures anywhere else on any plane regardless of local conditions. An unwilling target gets a Will save to negate the effect, and spell resistance (if any) applies.
Undo misfortune. A wish can undo a single recent event. The wish forces a reroll of any roll made within the last round (including your last turn). Reality reshapes itself to accommodate the new result. For example, a wish could undo an opponent’s successful save, a foe’s successful critical hit (either the attack roll or the critical roll), a friend’s failed save, and so on. The reroll, however, may be as bad as or worse than the original roll. An unwilling target gets a Will save to negate the effect, and spell resistance (if any) applies.
You may try to use a wish to produce greater effects than these, but doing so is dangerous. (The wish may pervert your intent into a literal but undesirable fulfillment or only a partial fulfillment.)

Duplicated spells allow saves and spell resistance as normal (but save DCs are for 9th-level spells).

Material Component
When a wish duplicates a spell with a material component that costs more than 10,000 gp, you must provide that component.

XP Cost
The minimum XP cost for casting wish is 5,000 XP. When a wish duplicates a spell that has an XP cost, you must pay 5,000 XP or that cost, whichever is more. When a wish creates or improves a magic item, you must pay twice the normal XP cost for crafting or improving the item, plus an additional 5,000 XP.

Bolded for emphasis.
By RAW you won't suffer a single penalty if you wish for more then 25k magic items. Normally the penalty is you receive a MASSIVE xp hit but since it is being used as a spell like ability they can cast it without any xp or material cost.

EDIT: Spoilered because of the massive size of Wish text.

Killer Angel
2009-03-23, 11:13 AM
By RAW you won't suffer a single penalty if you wish for more then 25k magic items. Normally the penalty is you receive a MASSIVE xp hit but since it is being used as a spell like ability they can cast it without any xp or material cost.



I’m not arguing on the xp cost, I know there’s no one for a SLA.
But the text of the spell says:

“You may try to use a wish to produce greater effects than these, but doing so is dangerous. (The wish may pervert your intent into a literal but undesirable fulfillment or only a partial fulfillment.). For example, wishing for a Staff of the magi might get you transported to the presence of the staff ‘s current owner.”

The example is very specific, and imo contradicts the part relative to the creation of a magical item with no cost limits.

NEO|Phyte
2009-03-23, 11:25 AM
I’m not arguing on the xp cost, I know there’s no one for a SLA.
But the text of the spell says:

“You may try to use a wish to produce greater effects than these, but doing so is dangerous. (The wish may pervert your intent into a literal but undesirable fulfillment or only a partial fulfillment.). For example, wishing for a Staff of the magi might get you transported to the presence of the staff ‘s current owner.”

The example is very specific, and imo contradicts the part relative to the creation of a magical item with no cost limits.

That would be because a Staff of the Magi is a MINOR ARTIFACT, beyond the means of mortals to create.

Tokiko Mima
2009-03-23, 11:43 AM
Just a scroll of gate costs more than the candle does. A scroll would also require you to make a Use Magic Device check (or meet the other requirements to activate a scroll) and pay the XP cost. A scroll also would not have the additional benefit to same alignment party member.

If you want to use Candles of invocation in your campaign I recommend allowing the Candle (when expended) to substitute for the 1,000 XP component for Gate's calling function. Do not allow it to cast the entire spell by itself.

As far as calling creatures and using wishes, remember that the person making the wish is the called creature. Genies *live* to twist wishes, and the smarter you think you are about making them the harsher they tend to be with your inevitable comeuppance.

As for solars, since they can use their wishes themselves there's a good chance that any given solar will have already expended their wish for a given day. It could be an angelic ritual to get up each morning, and just pray a random fiend dead before breakfast. And if one does happen to have an available wish, you'd best make this wish in accordance with the Upper Planes because tomorrow that solar will regain another wish and get to use it on you.

Kylarra
2009-03-23, 11:56 AM
Didn't we just have this argument in the cleric thread? By RAW wishing for whatever magic item is allowed.


As far as solars using up their wishes first thing in the morning, assuming you had the magical equivalent of a nuke once per day, would you fire it off at some random target (while in the middle of a "war") or would you conserve it for when you actually needed its power? (Note: Nuke is rather an understatement, but that's neither here nor there)

Keld Denar
2009-03-23, 12:07 PM
I think he was refering to the fact that you are only limited to 25,000g worth of NON-Magical gear. There is no gold limit in the magical part. Its crazy expensive, but ideal for the mage on the run who doesn't have time to sit down and craft up something big. So really, pick out the MOST expensive item in the DMG, and the Solar can craft it in less than 6 seconds with no chance of corruption.

The real abuse though, is gating in an Efreet for the 3 wishes, and then wishing for more candles to gate in more Efreeti and so on. If you want to actually use a wish, it would probably be a good idea to gate in a Solar for that purpose, but for the expressed mass creation of more candles, Efreeti are the best choice.

Zherog
2009-03-23, 12:13 PM
I think he was refering to the fact that you are only limited to 25,000g worth of NON-Magical gear. There is no gold limit in the magical part.

In the 3.0 version of the spell, there was a limit. Andy & Co. removed it during the revision because they assumed the XP cost was sufficient to prevent any sort of abuse.

afroakuma
2009-03-23, 12:21 PM
Has there ever been any errata or even ruling on that blasted thing?

Because to me, it seems like a gross typo.

Fluffwise, at least, this can't work - the world would have ended.

More realistically, though, I keep my players away from the damn things. My reasoning is that nobody would sell a relatively cheap candle of anything you ever wanted in the history of ever, and nobody would ever just keep it in their loot pile for PCs to grab.

It occurs to me that with minor tweaking to SLAs, a lot of broken concepts could be neatly tidied...

Killer Angel
2009-03-23, 12:22 PM
I think he was refering to the fact that you are only limited to 25,000g worth of NON-Magical gear. There is no gold limit in the magical part.


Yes. There's a limit for non magical objects, some indications of effects with such limit (have a +1 bonus on a char), but no limits on the prize of magical objects.... except for the contraddiction 'bout the Staff of the magi, which let me think to the fact that the spell by raw put a limit (unclear) also on magical object.
The fact that (as said by NeoPhyte) the Staff is a minor artifact, is probably the solution to my dilemma.

Of course, I (as a DM) will never let the player abuse the chain gate trick, but that's another matter, i was wondering about raw.
The fact that the evil efreeti will try to pervert your wish, is also another matter.

Triaxx
2009-03-23, 12:42 PM
Best way to stop it? Give them only used candles.

Waspinator
2009-03-23, 01:44 PM
The real problem is Wish, not the candle. There really needs to be two limitations put on Wish's ability to make magic items: a GP limit and a "no wishing for things that get you more wishes" clause. Otherwise the question should be why your game world hasn't had all manufacturing replaced by chain-wishing things into existence. And if access to wishes like that existed, one of the first things any person would do is try to figure out a way to get infinite wishes. Does anyone really think that nobody would try that? And they obviously did not succeed in most fantasy settings since conventional manufacturing and magic item enchantment still exists.

Myou
2009-03-23, 01:46 PM
It occurs to me that with minor tweaking to SLAs, a lot of broken concepts could be neatly tidied...

Yes, in my game (Su) and (Sp) abilities that duplicate a spell effect require XP if the spell version does, summoned or called creatures cannot be forced to expend XP, and summoned or called creatures cannot summon or call further creatures. It really seems to prevent a lot of abuse.

afroakuma
2009-03-23, 02:06 PM
The real problem is Wish, not the candle.

No, the candle itself is a problem as well, since as has been said: it's cheaper than a scroll of the effect it replicates, and it also has additional abilities. In a magic mart economy, the alignment restriction is largely meaningless. Even sans wish, the candle of invocation is a preposterously abusive item, and seems ridiculously underpriced.

Crow
2009-03-23, 02:15 PM
No, the candle itself is a problem as well, since as has been said: it's cheaper than a scroll of the effect it replicates, and it also has additional abilities. In a magic mart economy, the alignment restriction is largely meaningless. Even sans wish, the candle of invocation is a preposterously abusive item, and seems ridiculously underpriced.


You still have to pay the XP cost with the candle if you use it to summon. The candle just gives you the ability to cast the spell. It doesn't pay the XP cost.

Eldariel
2009-03-23, 02:37 PM
The most rational means? Fix Wish: there should be a GP limit on the magic items it can produce (say, uhh, ~25k), fix Candle's cost (it replicates a high-level spell with an XP component and improves CL of Clerics; the actual cost is calculated like **** and it should be more expensive than that due to the nature of Gate - I'd say ~30k would be rational). There, Candles cost about as much as a Ring of Three Wishes.

Oh, and yeah, fix Gate while at it. Just remove the "compelled to serve you"-clause and force bartering to get anything out of the outsiders. That fixes a dozen other broken uses the spell too while still maintaining the use it's meant to have. The bartering-part should have no mechanics anyways; it should always depend on the barterers, nature of task and so on - this should extend to Planar Bindings too where having Moment of Prescience pretty much automatically wins you all the opposed checks, be it a Pit Fiend/Balor (for Malconvoker), Succubus or any other Ridiculously High Cha-type.


Basically, all these problems are a consequence of poorly thought spells. Wish, Gate and Planar Binding-line are the biggest cultrips in Core (although there are others).

afroakuma
2009-03-23, 03:04 PM
Just remove the "compelled to serve you"-clause

That's the solution in a nutshell.

Chronos
2009-03-23, 05:54 PM
My fix: The rules already include a clause that a summoned creature will not use any spell that costs XP or a significant material component, nor a spell-like ability that simulates any such spell. One could just extend that restriction to called creatures, but the trope of the unwise wizard summoning a fiend to get wishes out of it is too well-established in fantasy. Instead, I offer the following:

Whenever using any calling spell or other effect, the caster may, if he so chooses, pay any additional amount of XP desired. A called creature will use spells that cost XP or expensive components, or SLAs that mimic such spells, only up to a limit of the value of XP the caster gave up (counting 1 XP as worth 5 GP). So, for instance, if I call up an efreet, and want it to wish up a Candle of Invocation for me, I have to spend at least 5,672 XP when I call the efreet.

Curmudgeon
2009-03-23, 07:21 PM
There's no problem with a Candle of Invocation. It's a useful, albeit expensive, way for a Cleric to prepare and cast more and higher-level spells than they normally would be allowed. It's just the thing when you know a big battle is looming.

As for the Gate function: that's ridiculously easy to solve. The summoned creatures that can use Wish have a daily limit. As a DM, I just say that each summoned creature has already gotten to that limit before they were called; no Wishes.

Killer Angel
2009-03-24, 03:11 AM
The most rational means? Fix Wish.

Oh, and yeah, fix Gate while at it.


It's not a problem for me to fix spells like Wish, gate, or objects like the candle (we never had problems with such things).
I was merely wondering about RAW.
An Efreeti is evil... can I try to twist the wishes against the candle's owner (an action that suits perfectly the typical behaviour of the efreeti), even if i'm bounded by the gate spell?
If the answer is "yes", then the chain abuse could be limited even in RAW.

If, by RAW, we don't find any limitations, than (teoretically), we live adventures in a Tippy-world. The problem is: Tippy's pc cannot live to became a full-developed Cindy... because the DM will (logically) set a world dominated by an epic wizard with a coohort of pun-pun at his service.

Crow
2009-03-24, 03:51 AM
As for the Gate function: that's ridiculously easy to solve. The summoned creatures that can use Wish have a daily limit. As a DM, I just say that each summoned creature has already gotten to that limit before they were called; no Wishes.

The only problem I have with this solution is that creatures like Solars and such are supposed to have that spell available. If every Solar the group calls has used it's Wish for the day, then every Solar that the group faces in combat shouldn't have that wish at it's disposal either.

RebelRogue
2009-03-24, 05:26 AM
Yes, in my game (Su) and (Sp) abilities that duplicate a spell effect require XP if the spell version does, summoned or called creatures cannot be forced to expend XP, and summoned or called creatures cannot summon or call further creatures. It really seems to prevent a lot of abuse.
By RAW this is already true for summoned creatures:


A summoned creature cannot use any innate summoning abilities it may have, and it refuses to cast any spells that would cost it XP, or to use any spell-like abilities that would cost XP if they were spells.

Extending to called creatures would solve a lot, although I still think Wish and the Candles could need an update!

MickJay
2009-03-24, 06:24 AM
The only problem I have with this solution is that creatures like Solars and such are supposed to have that spell available. If every Solar the group calls has used it's Wish for the day, then every Solar that the group faces in combat shouldn't have that wish at it's disposal either.

That shouldn't really be a problem, how many Solars is the group going to summon after the first two or three had their Wishes used up? They probably wouldn't even bother getting the third candle. Besides, who said it had to be a different Solar? Make your group summon the same Solar every time and have the Solar explain he's using his Wishes, whenever he has them available, for some good cause.

Or have the Solar explain it's been ill and its wishes are no longer what they used to be (no summoning of magic items, for example) :smalltongue:

As for combat, DM can simply make a rule that Solars that have important tasks (like guarding something or those that are currently fighting evildoers) do not get summoned and thus have their wishes always available.

Myou
2009-03-24, 06:51 AM
By RAW this is already true for summoned creatures:

Extending to called creatures would solve a lot, although I still think Wish and the Candles could need an update!

Well, I ban candles (and nightsticks), but the way I interpret Wish is that it can't ake anything worth more than 25k, and for all that XP that seems fair to me.

And interesting, I had forgotten that summons can't do that stuff by RAW.

Irreverent Fool
2009-03-24, 08:11 AM
By RAW this is already true for summoned creatures:



A summoned creature cannot use any innate summoning abilities it may have, and it refuses to cast any spells that would cost it XP, or to use any spell-like abilities that would cost XP if they were spells.


Extending to called creatures would solve a lot, although I still think Wish and the Candles could need an update!

Myou: That rule only applies to creatures 'summoned' via spells of the 'summoning' subschool. Gate is not such a such a spell.

I thought I'd mention this to avoid confusion since out-of-context it looks like the rule applies to any creatures summoned/called with magic. Extending the rule to calling spells would solve the problem, but as mentioned above would pretty much destroy the 'wizard summoning a powerful fiend to gain a wish' trope.

obnoxious
sig

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 09:33 AM
Got this off of the SRD, and thought I'd throw my two cents in. Sorry if my interpretations are a bit off:

WISH:
XP Cost
The minimum XP cost for casting wish is 5,000 XP. When a wish duplicates a spell that has an XP cost, you must pay 5,000 XP or that cost, whichever is more. When a wish creates or improves a magic item, you must pay twice the normal XP cost for crafting or improving the item, plus an additional 5,000 XP.

It sounds to me like when you use a wish spell you are doing one of two things.
1.Something that involves improving the natural world(inherent stats, 25,000 worth gold, healing allies, etc.), and those all require 5,000 xp.
As a spell like ability this cost would be ignored.

2. The other purpose is to modify or create a magic item which has a separate xp cost listed(double normal for creation). Since this is handled by determining the rules for creating a magic item I think the XP cost should still apply to creatures with Wish as a spell like ability, because it's going off of crafting magic item rules. Now, lets say that this Efreeti had the eberron feat to reduce the cost by 25% for crafting items. Would it apply? I'd say yes, because he is crafting an item.
Because the XP cost applies, the Efreeti could use the wish for any purpose other than crafting a magic item.

Another thing is that wish doesn't say that it conveys any magical knowledge of anything, so wouldn't you still have to have a good understanding of what you need to make with the spell?
MAGE: *summons efreeti through gate*
EFREETI: What?
MAGE: Give me a candle of invocation!
EFREETI: What the hell is that?
MAGE: ...it's what I used to bring you here...
EFREETI: You used a gate spell?
MAGE: Just grant my wish!!!
EFREETI: *Efreeti crafts an item that looks like a candle labeled "invocation"*

Technically all the spell is doing is crafting an item. It doesn't say that it grabs the item from somewhere else, or anything fun like that. Efreeti -use this spell to craft this item. If he doesn't know how to craft the item does just saying the words "candle of invocation" make exactly what he wants(when he doesn't even really understand what he wants)?

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 09:37 AM
And even if you wanted to take the time to explain every detail of the item you wanted crafted you are on a limited timeframe, and theres no guarantee that the summoned creature would really understand. I still think more often that nought, a creature attempting to wish something into existence that he doesn't really understand wouldn't be quite what was wanted.

Irreverent Fool
2009-03-24, 09:42 AM
I don't think you actually wish for a candle of invocation any more than you say "I wish for a +5 sword".



EFREETI: *Efreeti crafts an item that looks like a candle labeled "invocation"*


Or he summons you a candle that belongs to some guy named 'Invocation'.:smallsmile:

obnoxious
sig

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 10:10 AM
Depends on how he goes about it.

Is the efreeti using Wish to replicate a spell to magically teleport someones candle to this location? Is he using it to do a basic craft of a labelled candle? Is he attempting to craft a magic item based off of your description of it?

Do you just wish for a +5 sword? I've never had a DM who allowed anything like that. You wish for a sword imbued with the essence of "X Spell", etc.

The debate is whether or not this abuse is possible, and I say no - personally because I think that using wish to craft something removes the scenario from the whole "no xp cost for summoned creatures thing" - that's how the text reads to me - but also because the entire scenario is dependant on fluff. Yes, in legends and lore genies can bring whatever you want to you, or craft anything, but from the book all I'm reading is that they can craft a magic item(based off of their own understanding of crafting magic items) or use wish to grab the item you're requesting from somewhere else(assuming they know where the item you want is located).

Without fluff, just by the text alone, how is the genie(or whatever) capable of all these things?

Douglas
2009-03-24, 10:16 AM
Simple way to get around any potential misunderstanding about exactly what you want: "I wish for a duplicate of this candle, magical properties included."

All it requires is one spare Candle of Invocation that you can show, unused, to the Efreet.

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 10:20 AM
A mirror
A polaroid(probably not in the creatures knowledge base :P)
A burning candle, at the exact same spot in its progression

You could word it correctly(I still dont think it would work because I think using a spell like ability that has no xp cost in order to use a function specifically geared towards using xp when there are other uses would break the gate reqs), but what else are you wishing for? And how do you describe that via his knowledge.

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 10:24 AM
And also, looking at Efreeti in the srd, I dont really understand how showing him something enables him to recreate it.

Wish is a magic spell. It isn't literally a wish from the heavens to do your bidding, and magic spells require knowledge to use.

If a fighter showed his Holy Avenger to the efreeti and said "Make me an exact copy of this - all magical effects included) what is the efreeti wishing for?

It's magic from an efreeti, not a wish from the genie in Aladdin.

Alleine
2009-03-24, 10:34 AM
Or alternately as soon as a player does this you say "Congratulations, you won D&D" then pack up and leave/play something else. In the group I'm in only a relatively recent addition to the group has tried to really break the game. Everyone else finds such things pointless, if your players are actively trying to break the game, you have a bigger problem than the candle of invocation.

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 10:54 AM
I agree.

I'm not normally much of a rules lawyer, and I let people do things as long as they're not game breaking, but when it gets down to it some people think they beat the system, and theres usually a way to prevent it.

I think this candle of invocation isn't even something that needs prevented. I think it's impossible from the get-go.

If someone asked a genie to give them something functional, or for a quest - I'd allow it. If they try to break things, then I'm getting out the reading glasses.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 10:56 AM
Well, let's try it. I'll be the efreeti.

Someone make a wish.

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 11:12 AM
Well, let's try it. I'll be the efreeti.

Someone make a wish.

I Wish that you won't try to corrupt a selfless Wish from now on.

Zherog
2009-03-24, 11:13 AM
Well, I ban candles (and nightsticks), but the way I interpret Wish is that it can't ake anything worth more than 25k, and for all that XP that seems fair to me.

In 3.0, your interpretation is correct. However, when they did the conversion to 3.5, they specifically removed the gold piece limit on magic items because the designers felt the XP cost was significant enough that it couldn't be abused.

As for how I solve this in my home game: *shrug* I just count on my players to not be jerks.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 11:18 AM
I Wish that you won't try to corrupt a selfless Wish from now on.

Granted.

I now have the power to succeed in corrupting a selfless wish despite ordinary limitations, and you've still left me with the ability to try to corrupt a selfish one.

But selfish wishes, not selfless ones, are what the issue as about, in any case.

Lamech
2009-03-24, 11:54 AM
The problem is with the wish spell it self. The infinte wish chain can just as easily be done with a ring of three wishes. Or a staff of wishes. Or a scroll of wishes. The problem is also with the gate spell, gating in a outsider with double the caster's HD? No.

I would also like to point out the efreeti doesn't have a wish spell three times a day. An efreeti has the following spell like ablity once a day "grant up to three wishes (to nongenies only)". See how that isn't a wish spell? Way to open to DM interpertation. You could easily end up with a candle in your brain, or a cursed version.

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 12:12 PM
Excellent observation.

That does in deed open up a hole lot more interpretations.

Either way though I dont see it ever coming up as an issue because either the players wont try antyhing that broken or any DM will just slap anyone who does try this.

My opinion still remains that chaining it is impossible(or as close as you can get based upon the need of favorable conditions, extreme luck, and knowledge of the entities involved).

'Quick' side question:
I'm not too familiar with gate, and it's related charm effects. Consider that if an efreeti(or some other wish granting creature) was capable of doing all these things would it still willingly give you something to enable your continued dominance over it, or to completely re-enable your dominance over it?

I've heard of people saying that you could order a charmed creature to fail saves so that you can keep the charm going forever, but depending on the situation(adventurers hijacking a creature who is being caused to abandon his monstrous family ,etc. etc.) would it work, or would it know that that isn't something it didn't want to do?

Because I'm not so sure an Efreeti would willingly give this candle(if it was possible for it too) considering the possible consequences?

Killer Angel
2009-03-24, 02:07 PM
The problem is with the wish spell it self. The infinte wish chain can just as easily be done with a ring of three wishes.


This is a very good point.
I think that the use of the candle is dangerous, 'cause the efreeti will try to turn the wish against you.
But if you have a scroll of wish, the game (by raw) is done: wish for a ring of 3 wishes (which is not a minor artifact, while the Staff of the magi is), et voilà.
So, i fear that the solutions to the problem, are only two:
1 - use some house rules and fix the spell / object (possibly before playing)
or
2 (the best one) - have a group of players not interested in breaking D&D

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 03:30 PM
The basic scroll of wish is calculated at having less than or equal to 5,000 xp.

Crafting a ring of wishes would cost:
15,918 x2(Twice the normal xp cost) + 5,000

So 36,1836

From what I can see though the ring of wishes does bugger things up a bit. There doesn't seem to be any xp cost, and it doesn't state a limit on what it can be used to create(no xp limit).

My guess would be that since the xp cost is normally 15,918, and that each casting of wish costs a minimum of 5,000 that each wish is limited(or at least close to 5,000). That's would be the houserule I used at least.

But, without it saying anything particular yes you could continually make more rings. I'm only going off of the SRD for now, but I'll check when I get home too.

Typewriter
2009-03-24, 03:38 PM
I will also point out that the description of the ring reads that it has three rubies and that:
Each ruby stores a wish spell

Meaning that it stores the casting of the spell that was put into it. Meaning that it would be cast as it was created, with only about 5000xp per stone.

Sure you could use your scroll wish for a double strength ring, but then the xp cost from that would go up.

hamishspence
2009-03-24, 03:48 PM
When player finds ring:

"Written on the ring in runic script are these words: Ring of Three Wishes, to be Exact, and IXNAY on the wishing for more wishes" :smallamused:

Myou
2009-03-24, 04:18 PM
Myou: That rule only applies to creatures 'summoned' via spells of the 'summoning' subschool. Gate is not such a such a spell.

I thought I'd mention this to avoid confusion since out-of-context it looks like the rule applies to any creatures summoned/called with magic. Extending the rule to calling spells would solve the problem, but as mentioned above would pretty much destroy the 'wizard summoning a powerful fiend to gain a wish' trope.

obnoxious
sig

Actually, my rule makes it impossible to force them to spend their XP granting wishes, but it doesn't forbid bargaining with them to persuade them to do it. Which is really what the trope is all about.


In 3.0, your interpretation is correct. However, when they did the conversion to 3.5, they specifically removed the gold piece limit on magic items because the designers felt the XP cost was significant enough that it couldn't be abused.

As for how I solve this in my home game: *shrug* I just count on my players to not be jerks.

Huh, I totally missed that.

But without the candle to wish for, how is it broken? Anything they make costs double XP.

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 05:34 PM
Granted.

I now have the power to succeed in corrupting a selfless wish despite ordinary limitations, and you've still left me with the ability to try to corrupt a selfish one.

But selfish wishes, not selfless ones, are what the issue as about, in any case.

...

You're a mean genie. :smallfrown:

Zherog
2009-03-24, 05:37 PM
But without the candle to wish for, how is it broken? Anything they make costs double XP.

The candle isn't the only way to fuel the wish economy; it's just the easiest.

The real problem - when you boil it down - is converting wish into a spell-like ability.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 05:38 PM
You're a mean genie. :smallfrown:

That was the whole point. :smallamused:

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 05:52 PM
That was the whole point. :smallamused:

I'm curious, say a character did wish for something like that (yes, I know almost no one is going to use a wish like that; they'll see it as a waste, but imagine they did), do you think it would be corrupted? I imagined that certain things (items up to a certain value, small boosts to ability scores) were fine and without danger of being corrupted. If that's right (it may be wrong), would a request like the one I made go beyond that level of "I won't tamper with this wish"? In other words, do you think it would exceed the level of power acceptable when asking for a wish without corruption?

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 05:56 PM
There's no problem with a Candle of Invocation. It's a useful, albeit expensive, way for a Cleric to prepare and cast more and higher-level spells than they normally would be allowed. It's just the thing when you know a big battle is looming.

As for the Gate function: that's ridiculously easy to solve. The summoned creatures that can use Wish have a daily limit. As a DM, I just say that each summoned creature has already gotten to that limit before they were called; no Wishes.

And that's ridiculously easy to bypass. Hit that once, and they simply make sure to cast the next spell at the stroke of midnight.

And Afro: I Wish that you would never again pervert a Wish to do other than the intent of the Wisher from here on and in perpetuity, nor would you ever refrain from granting said Wish if it is within your capabilities to grant.

Followed by: I Wish that you would forever more serve me, follow my every order in the spirit in which it was intended, and never fail to act in my best interests.

Followed by: I Wish that your daily allocation of Wishes were refreshed now.

Followed by: going to town.

Myou
2009-03-24, 05:57 PM
The candle isn't the only way to fuel the wish economy; it's just the easiest.

The real problem - when you boil it down - is converting wish into a spell-like ability.

Ahhh, let me direct your attention to my original post. :3


Yes, in my game (Su) and (Sp) abilities that duplicate a spell effect require XP if the spell version does, summoned or called creatures cannot be forced to expend XP, and summoned or called creatures cannot summon or call further creatures. It really seems to prevent a lot of abuse.

So, what that does is it makes wish just as available as ever, but restores it's value, since even solars and efreets will have to go out and earn their wishes.

And it means that even if you gate in a solar/efreet he may not have the XP to cast a wish, and even if he does, he can always refuse.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 06:07 PM
Paramour Pink: If dealing with an evil creature, I'd say on average yes.


And Afro: I wish that you would never again pervert a Wish to do other than the intent of the Wisher from here on and in perpetuity, nor would you ever refrain from granting said Wish if it is within your capabilities to grant.

Granted

I will never again pervert a wish that instructs me explicitly to do something the wisher does not intend me to do. Of course I won't. The only way to pervert such a wish would be to do exactly what they intend of me. And I most certainly will endeavor to grant a wish to do something you don't intend me to do, to the best of my capabilities. :belkar:

Also, since that phrasing technically invokes a compulsion effect, it may be cast as a stronger version of geas/quest, entitling me to SR.

You'll have to do better than that! :smallbiggrin:


Followed by: I Wish that you would forever more serve me, follow my every order in the spirit in which it was intended, and never fail to act in my best interests.

Granted

Given what I just did above, you're probably in grave danger right now.

*ahem* I immediately slay you, preserve you to the best of my ability and bring you to a restaurant, where I add you to the menu as a rare an exotic stew. You'll become a famous secret recipe, and I'll employ my wish ability to create copies of your deceased flesh so that you may be served forever more. Granted, I'll have to remain at the restaurant, at least until I sell it to someone and geas him to keep you on the menu, so that every order that comes in for a chunky bowl of you can be followed in the spirit it was intended, namely the spirit of eating a chunky bowl of you. As you have made this wish so clearly to me, I can only assume that said actions are in your best interests.


Followed by: I Wish that your daily allocation of Wishes were refreshed now.

Not Granted

First of all, you're dead (see above) or I'm dead, depending on who was awesomer. Secondly, that effect is beyond my power to grant.

Assuming I was to subvert it: Granted, the daily allocation of wishes that I am allowed to make, namely 0, has been refreshed. Also to 0.


Followed by: going to town.

That takes on a rather bleak humor after the second wish... :smalleek:

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 06:11 PM
Never mind, spotted the loophole. Hmm.

I wish that you would never again pervert a Wish in such a way that it does anything other than the intent of the Wisher from here on and in perpetuity, nor would you ever refrain from granting said Wish if it is within your capabilities to grant.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 06:18 PM
Determined, aren't we?


I wish that you would never again pervert a Wish in such a way that it does anything other than the intent of the Wisher from here on and in perpetuity, nor would you ever refrain from granting said Wish if it is within your capabilities to grant.

Granted

To ensure that I never again pervert a wish, I strip myself of all possibility of doing so by divesting myself of the power to grant wishes. Wasn't doing me a whole lot of good anyway.

:smallsmile:

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 06:31 PM
Hmm, cunning. That's fairly drastic measures though.

In that case take my second wish first. Though slightly modified for the highly imaginative way you interpreted it above - you're good at this!

I Wish that you would forever more, without causing harm of any sort to my person, follow every command given by me to you in the spirit in which it was intended, never fail to act in my best interests, and never move more than 20 feet away from me save when I explicitly command it.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 06:41 PM
Hmm, cunning. That's fairly drastic measures though.

Hardly. Efreeti don't get to make use of their wish ability personally. If I were one I'd take the first possible excuse to burn it away.


you're good at this!

DM. Have to be. Goddamn players...


I Wish that you would forever more, without causing harm of any sort to my person, follow every command given by me to you in the spirit in which it was intended, never fail to act in my best interests, and never move more than 20 feet away from me save when I explicitly command it.

This could go one of two ways:

Not Granted

Replicates a permanent dominate monster, which is beyond my power to grant.

Granted

Done. I trap your soul, and wear the gem at all times so that I am always within 20 ft. of you. Your person is perfectly preserved, unharmed, within the gem, and as such I am acting in your best interests because I am keeping you away from all possible harm, enemies, age and disease, not to mention ensuring that you never die.

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 06:44 PM
...
*casts Tongues on self*
*casts Tongues on Efreet*
*Wishes in Lojban (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban)*

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 06:51 PM
Having looked at that article, I'm fairly certain of two things:

1) That the preposterous structuring of the language would allow me a heck of a lot more loopholes than English does.


what is-an-inherent-site-of that-which-is toilet

An-inherent-site-of-that-which-is-toilet-is-a-site-for-that-that-which-is-toilet-is-inherent.

You won't win by that.

2) I'm pretty sure there's no way to express wish in Lojban.

chiasaur11
2009-03-24, 06:58 PM
Okay. New plan.

All wishes made after using tongues to get good at that obscure diabolic language Asmodeus uses to screw people over at the bargaining table.

I mean, I'm sure he has, like, twenty of those.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 07:01 PM
Tongues doesn't give you the know-how to pull off Asmodeus-level legalese with such languages, though - just the vocabulary, syntax and grammar to communicate.

chiasaur11
2009-03-24, 07:04 PM
Tongues doesn't give you the know-how to pull off Asmodeus-level legalese with such languages, though - just the vocabulary, syntax and grammar to communicate.

I figure he has at least one designed only to screw genies over.

As a non genie, even being awful at it you still come out on top of any prospective bargain.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 07:08 PM
Sure, but you have to cast tongues on the genie to get it to understand. And then the genie can use the Asmodeus Gambit on you.

And I'm fairly certain that you have to hear the language used while under tongues to speak it. For example, you wouldn't be able to cast the spell, sit down, speak Druidic aloud to yourself and transliterate it for when the spell expires.

Alleine
2009-03-24, 07:08 PM
Why are we calling an efreeti in the first place? Why not just a noble djinn? It looks to be withing the bounds of a gate spell.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 07:13 PM
To summon, sure, but they can only grant wishes to those that capture them. Gate is a limited duration compulsion effect, so it doesn't validate the wish clause.

Zherog
2009-03-24, 07:15 PM
Ahhh, let me direct your attention to my original post. :3



So, what that does is it makes wish just as available as ever, but restores it's value, since even solars and efreets will have to go out and earn their wishes.

And it means that even if you gate in a solar/efreet he may not have the XP to cast a wish, and even if he does, he can always refuse.

I did in fact see your original post (though I rarely pay attention to (or can't remember :smallannoyed: ) who said what in a thread). And it does address the problem. I was addressing the idea that the candle - on it's own - is the problem. And it's not (although whoever thought allowing an 8400 gp item to cast gate ought to think twice about their design philosophies). The same thing, for example, can be accomplished at a higher level with a dweomercheater build.

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 07:15 PM
Having looked at that article, I'm fairly certain of two things:

1) That the preposterous structuring of the language would allow me a heck of a lot more loopholes than English does.



An-inherent-site-of-that-which-is-toilet-is-a-site-for-that-that-which-is-toilet-is-inherent.

You won't win by that.So it doesn't translate well into English. The entire purpose of the language is to eliminate loopholes, I somehow doubt there will be more loopholes than in English. As I understand it, each concept has precisely one way to describe it, and that way can't be used to describe anything else.


2) I'm pretty sure there's no way to express wish in Lojban.
*Common* I wish that *Lojban* rest of wish.

Alleine
2009-03-24, 07:16 PM
If you say so.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 07:21 PM
So it doesn't translate well into English. The entire purpose of the language is to eliminate loopholes, I somehow doubt there will be more loopholes than in English. As I understand it, each concept has precisely one way to describe it, and that way can't be used to describe anything else.

Except that clearly, it can.

No language in existence can factor out simple obtuseness, let alone deliberate obtuseness. The example I cited above was specifically to show that Lojban can be bruteforced into stupidity, if nothing else, and therein lies its vulnerability.

Also, see preceding post regarding use of languages you've never encountered.


*Common* I wish that *Lojban* rest of wish.

*shrug* you changed languages. Requires a break in sentence per tongues' "only one language at a time" and thus loses all meaning.

Alleine:


A noble djinni can grant three wishes to any being (nongenies only) who captures it.

It's supposed to be more of an iron flask thing.

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 07:25 PM
Actually, I may have been trying to get too complex with these. I disagree on the Lojban not working, but that's neither here nor there.

Obviously a paragraph of dense Legalese would do the trick, but there's always the old trick of misinterpreting a pause for breath in an unfortunate manner.

I suspect this might work:
I wish that all subsequent wishes I make of you be taken and granted in the way in which I intended them to be, without perversion or corruption; further, that this wish not be granted by in any manner impairing my ability to make subsequent wishes nor by impairing your ability to grant them.

Chronos
2009-03-24, 07:39 PM
That old pause for breath trick works just fine there. As soon as you reach the semicolon, the effreet says "Granted", and kills you. Since you're now dead, "all subsequent wishes" you make is the empty set.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 07:40 PM
Obviously a paragraph of dense Legalese would do the trick, but there's always the old trick of misinterpreting a pause for breath in an unfortunate manner.

Aww, you caught me. :smallamused:


I wish that all subsequent wishes I make of you be taken and granted in the way in which I intended them to be, without perversion or corruption; further, that this wish not be granted by in any manner impairing my ability to make subsequent wishes nor by impairing your ability to grant them.

Again, could go one of two ways (well phrased, by the way):

Not Granted

We can make no assurances regarding services not yet requested, specifically as regards possible unforeseen limitations hindering our ability to comply with future service requests.

Granted

Your wish specifically states that only subsequent wishes need to be honored at face value. As it leaves itself exempt, almost deliberately, I can only assume that you intend me to pervert this wish and distort its intent entirely, thus basically burning a wish on nothing.

Your response, and second of three wishes, would then naturally be:


I wish that this and all subsequent wishes I make of you be taken and granted in the way in which I intended them to be, without perversion or corruption; further, that this wish not be granted by in any manner impairing my ability to make subsequent wishes nor by impairing your ability to grant them.

Granted

This and all subsequent wishes you make of me will be taken from you and allocated to another. You are not allowed subsequent wishes, because the wish that you just made specified that it too was to be taken, transferring the "I make of you" and "I intended" clauses, as well as the "impairing my ability" clause, to some lucky and unknowing individual, likely a cat.

Although, as fun as my own meanness is, I like Chronos' better, since I get to kill you.

Tiki Snakes
2009-03-24, 07:56 PM
There's always the 'Prince' gambit, from the latter season of Lexx.

The Big bad in question, Prince, agrees to return the series undead assassin to life. He doesn't say when. He is true to his word, worthy of Asmodeus, popping him back to mortality just as soon as he's caught in a situation that is guarenteed to kill him once and for all.

Simply enough, you need to be careful about the time you want things delivered, the state you wish to be when they are delivered, the state you wish to be after they are delivered.

You basically need to tie down your entire existence from the second of the wish till the end of your life.
And then hope the creature in question can't time travel.

Seriously, if you believe that wishes and chain wishing is broken, then your DM is not evil enough. Whenever we even go near something capable of granting wishes, we are likely to sell it so quick the receipt will combust.

A PC in our group nearly got Pk'ed on account of announcing he was considering using the ring of three wishes, infact. ^_^

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 07:56 PM
Swap out "taken" for "interpreted". Also add "to the best of your ability" to the first clause. Airtight yet?

And Chronos, I can manage that in one breath, with no pause long enough to be taken as having finished.

I wish that this and all subsequent wishes I make of you be interpreted and granted in the way in which I intended them to be, to the best of your ability, without perversion or corruption; further, that this wish not be granted by in any manner impairing my ability to make subsequent wishes nor by impairing your ability to grant them.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 08:06 PM
If you don't allow pauses and breaths, then the sentence depunctuates. Guess what happens then? :belkar: Hint: you die.

Not to mention, I'm evil. I decide when you're finished. The merest excuse is sufficient. Stutter and I'll gut you.


I wish that this and all subsequent wishes I make of you be interpreted and granted in the way in which I intended them to be, without perversion or corruption, to the best of your ability; further, that this wish not be granted by in any manner impairing my ability to make subsequent wishes nor by impairing your ability to grant them.

Granted

You didn't say which ability, so I choose that they be granted by my ability to detect magic. As you can imagine, the results of your subsequent wishes will be... less than optimal.

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 08:20 PM
You're clutching at straws there. The conventions of the English language and setence structure means that "grant them to the best of your ability" means "grant them to the best of your ability to grant them". Claiming that it could mean "grant them to the best of your ability to detect magic" just doesn't work.

And I practised saying it aloud. I can say it in one breath with sufficient inflection for punctuation to be obvious, yet without enough pause to be interpreted as a termination.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 08:26 PM
Fine, in that case... (I was hoping to save this)


I wish that this and all subsequent wishes I make of you be interpreted and granted in the way in which I intended them to be, to the best of your ability, without perversion or corruption; further, that this wish not be granted by in any manner impairing my ability to make subsequent wishes nor by impairing your ability to grant them.

Granted

87 million years from now. In the meantime, the next wish you make is going to involve you dying in an atrocious fashion.

I can't determine when you intend for your wishes to be granted. Shame you won't find that out until something hideous happens.

Tiki Snakes
2009-03-24, 08:26 PM
The Lawfull Evil Outsider thinks otherwise.

Good, Bad. He's the one with the Wish. :smalltongue:


[edit] In the SRD it says you may summon a single creature of any HD if you summon by type rather than a named individual;
If you choose to call a kind of creature instead of a known individual you may call either a single creature (of any HD) or several creatures. You can call and control several creatures as long as their HD total does not exceed your caster level.

It doesn't actually state that you get to specify, however, how many HD. Just that you can summon a creature of any HD. If we're in the territory of dissuading Wish Hijinks, it's pretty close to Raw that, well, if you're careful, you might be in control. If you are not careful, you might not be. Uncontrolled creatures, obviously, do as they like.

It's worth considering, you may not even be aware that it isn't a controlled creature, rather than an advanced, class-hd possessing Efreeti fellow.

To make matters worse, the gate physically opens next to it, in it's native realm, whether breifly or otherwise. I don't see anywhere that it prevents unwanted guests(/Efreeti allies and/or minions) joining it on it's interplanar journey.


Also, If your task requires more than 1 round/caster level to perform, it requires an actual exchange of goods, bargained for by the Efreeti. If it's feeling particularly peeved, then it may include the three minutes you spent outlining exactly the terms and conditions of your wish as part of the length of it's task, and charge you accordingly. If you don't deliver on your part of the bargain, your soul is now and immediately his.

Heliomance
2009-03-24, 08:33 PM
*casts Spell Reflection on efreet*
*casts Detect Thoughts on efreet*

Now you can determine my intent.

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 08:37 PM
I wish you were no longer Evil. :smallsmile:

Thane of Fife
2009-03-24, 08:39 PM
Fine, in that case... (I was hoping to save this)


I wish that this and all subsequent wishes I make of you be interpreted and granted in the way in which I intended them to be, to the best of your ability, without perversion or corruption; further, that this wish not be granted by in any manner impairing my ability to make subsequent wishes nor by impairing your ability to grant them.

Granted

87 million years from now. In the meantime, the next wish you make is going to involve you dying in an atrocious fashion.

I can't determine when you intend for your wishes to be granted. Shame you won't find that out until something hideous happens.

Wouldn't it be easier to say that

Being under your complete command could impair my ability to grant your wishes without perversion. Since you specified the best of my ability, the gate is now gone. So I leave.

Lamech
2009-03-24, 08:39 PM
Hardly. Efreeti don't get to make use of their wish ability personally. If I were one I'd take the first possible excuse to burn it away.
As much fun as this is, I'm going to point out another problem with wishing. Efreeti have slaves. Those guys whole job is probably reading slips of paper. The DM would be totally justified in killing you for attempting to abuse an Efreeti's wishes. "Make three will saves or be transported into a sphere of annihilation."

A third thing about this whole wish thing. The DnD wish spell has this line
You may try to use a wish to produce greater effects than these, but doing so is dangerous. (The wish may pervert your intent into a literal but undesirable fulfillment or only a partial fulfillment.)
Don't forget about this part; if someone pulls out a block of legalese, the DM could say ignore clause 34. Of course, the Efreeti does not actually have the wish spell so it may not apply. (Of course, seeing as how its up to the DM...)

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 08:39 PM
Now who's grasping at straws? :smallwink:


I wish that this and all subsequent wishes I make of you be interpreted and granted in the way in which I intended them to be, to the best of your ability, without perversion or corruption; further, that this wish not be granted by in any manner impairing my ability to make subsequent wishes nor by impairing your ability to grant them.

Not Granted

Effect would replicate a spell of effective level higher than arcane 8th. I cannot grant the wish.

It's as simple as that. Except that I don't think I have to tell you that. So what you'll actually hear is, "Your second wish?" followed by some tedious request of yours and then me impaling you.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 08:41 PM
I wish you were no longer Evil. :smallsmile:

Fine, I'm the same length of Evil I always was. :smallwink: The old baseball bat routine.

lamech, Thane, I like your answers better than my own. They reek of incoming fail and violence.

Tiki Snakes
2009-03-24, 08:45 PM
*casts Spell Reflection on efreet*
*casts Detect Thoughts on efreet*

Now you can determine my intent.

And then the efreeti gives you what you actually want, rather than what you believe you want, or what your rational mind believes you want.

For visuals, feel free to commit google-seppuku (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Google+Seppuku) at this point. Insert Character there.

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 09:03 PM
Fine, I'm the same length of Evil I always was. :smallwink: The old baseball bat routine.

Lol!! I like that, but darn it. You may be 2 to 0, but I will get you to be a nice genie.

I wish you immediately became and stayed altruistic towards anyone that makes an unselfish wish . :smallbiggrin:

I don't mind Evil creatures messing with other Evil types. :smalltongue:

quick_comment
2009-03-24, 09:05 PM
First Try) I wish that you, in a way that I can understand, comprehend and remember, as well as being grammatically and syntactically correct, without doing anything to me that would break the effect of a normal invisibility spell, tell me the elements in the set that contains the exact wording of the three wishes that would bring me the greatest happiness and fulfillment.

Second Try) I wish that you would grant me the wish that a human with my alignment, goals, experience and personality would wish for as his second wish if he had a wisdom score of over nine thousand.

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 09:17 PM
Second Try) I wish that you would grant me the wish that a human with my alignment, goals, experience and personality would wish for as his second wish if he had a wisdom score of over nine thousand.

Wouldn't he just say "Someone with all that would be too driven and wise to ask for a wish." Or something like that...? I think the high wisdom score messes with you.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 09:21 PM
Lol!! I like that, but darn it. You may be 2 to 0, but I will get you to be a nice genie.

Sure, and I will get a date this Friday night. Oh look, we're both wrong. :smalltongue:


I wish you immediately became and stayed altruistic towards anyone that makes an unselfish wish . :smallbiggrin:

Not Granted

Your request requires replication of an effect that is higher than 8th level arcane. I cannot grant the wish.

In this case, I simply interpret that as anyone, anywhere, ever, saying the words "I wish," permanent knowledge of which would require an Epic spell.


First Try) I wish that you, in a way that I can understand, comprehend and remember, as well as being grammatically and syntactically correct, without doing anything to me that would break the effect of a normal invisibility spell, tell me the elements in the set that contains the exact wording of the three wishes that would bring me the greatest happiness and fulfillment.

The bolded part is about how far you get before I just kill you out of tedium.

Granted

Of course, I also modify your memory to remove said knowledge immediately afterwards. The invisibility clause only applies until I finish telling you, after all.

Alternate Granted

Sure, but I structure it in such a way that you need exactly three. And you just used one. So very sad for you.

Guess what I do next? :belkar:


Second Try) I wish that you would grant me the wish that a human with my alignment, goals, experience and personality would wish for as his second wish if he had a wisdom score of over nine thousand.

There's no such thing as a "wisdom score," what are you talking about? :smalltongue:

Granted

As it happens, there is such an individual a few planes over. I'll just give him the woman you've been mutually lusting after, shall I? :smallamused: After all, that's exactly the wish that he would wish, namely that he get the girl. Artifact. Resurrected younger sibling. Et cetera.

Thane of Fife
2009-03-24, 09:27 PM
First Try) I wish that you, in a way that I can understand, comprehend and remember, as well as being grammatically and syntactically correct, without doing anything to me that would break the effect of a normal invisibility spell, tell me the elements in the set that contains the exact wording of the three wishes that would bring me the greatest happiness and fulfillment.

1. I wish that you would go away and leave me alone before I'm tempted to make any more wishes.

2.

3.

:smallbiggrin:

RandomFellow
2009-03-24, 09:30 PM
I wish for you to summon another Efreeti as if by a Planar Binding Spell.
I wish for you to immediately Charm Monster the Efreeti you just summoned and instruct it to fulfill my wishes and then planeshift itself somewhere else.
I wish you to return to planeshift only yourself somewhere else.

Worth a shot. :P

Technically that is all within the 'safe limits' of a wish spell and I've got a decent chance of a Charmed Efreeti that is unlikely to harm me or intentionally corrupt my wishes.

Nomad Pangolin
2009-03-24, 09:32 PM
Actually, and maybe someone's already proven this wrong somewhere else, but it seems to me that a wish spell can not create a Candle of Invocation, under its ordinary effects, by RAW.

From SRD on magic item creation:

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to becreated. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item’s creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).

The wish spell is the item's creator in this case. And by the description of ordinary wishes, wish can supply any 8th level arcane spell and any 6th level divine spell. This means that wish can not supply gate which is the requisite spell for the Candle.

Thus, wishing for Candles, or poking 'ifrit / pit fiends / noble Djinn to do so, is making an extraordinary wish subject to DM fiat.

RandomFellow
2009-03-24, 09:35 PM
Even if I agreed with your interpretation, you can use the first Efreeti to summon others to do your bidding.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 09:37 PM
I wish for you to summon another Efreeti as if by a Planar Binding Spell.

Granted

First of all, I'm no longer under compulsion to obey you, so I kill you and leave. Alternately, I simply employ no protective provisions, and then summon an efreeti I am familiar with whose resources render him immune to charms and compulsions. Preferably a powerful, angry one. I then stick a sign on your back that says Kick Me and depart, since I'm under no obligation to stay.

Now you're both out of wishes and preoccupied, so...

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 09:40 PM
...

That's it.

"I wish that you immediately became and stayed altruistic towards anyone that makes an unselfish wish after summoning you."

If that doesn't work, "I wish I could cast three selfless wishes for anyone I want without any changes happening other than what I've just wished for."

If that one doesn't come close, "I wish that every time you corrupt, change or twist a selfless wise, you feel a lot of physical, spiritual and emotional pain."

And if THAT doesn't work, "I wish you would stop being such a jerk when granting my wishes." >_<

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 09:44 PM
And if THAT doesn't work, "I wish you would stop being such a jerk when granting my wishes." >_<

I... apologize? :smalltongue:

Sorry, but that is and remains the point of this exercise - that wish is harder to exploit than one might like.

Tiki Snakes
2009-03-24, 09:47 PM
I... apologize? :smalltongue:

Sorry, but that is and remains the point of this exercise - that wish is harder to exploit than one might like.

nono, I think we want an 'in character' response. :)

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 09:49 PM
nono, I think we want an 'in character' response. :)

This! I'm having more fun with this than you'd think. Keep it up. :smallbiggrin:

RandomFellow
2009-03-24, 09:49 PM
I... apologize? :smalltongue:

Sorry, but that is and remains the point of this exercise - that wish is harder to exploit than one might like.

Only if you ignore RAW and do RAI. :P

olentu
2009-03-24, 09:56 PM
Regardless of any other concerns on the RAW limits of the wish spell, due to the fact that the wishes come from a creature called with the gate spell it is a more reasonable idea to word the service that the called creature must preform in a way that would keep it from twisting the wishes. This keeps the first wish from being wasted.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 10:03 PM
"I wish that you immediately became and stayed altruistic towards anyone that makes an unselfish wish after summoning you."

Granted

Being hideously evil, I subsequently make some mean comment. When you ask why I was able to, I do a Hannibal Lecture (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HannibalLecture) to break your "unselfish" belief into dust and crush your spirit for all time. If I can legitimately perceive an ulterior motive, I win.


If that doesn't work, "I wish I could cast three selfless wishes for anyone I want without any changes happening other than what I've just wished for."

Not Granted

I cannot grant spellcasting ability at that level, and therefore cannot grant the wish. It's all in the phrasing. :smallamused:


If that one doesn't come close, "I wish that every time you corrupt, change or twist a selfless wish, you feel a lot of physical, spiritual and emotional pain."

Granted

Of course you realize, I'm going to crack your "selfless" veneer on every wish you make, so I get to be as big of a jerk as I like and never suffer so much as a stubbed toe off of it.

Don't know about you, but I'm cool with that.

Actually, for bonus spite, I'm also going to tell you you just made a vindictive wish, wasting the opportunity to employ a wish for altruistic purposes. :smallwink:


And if THAT doesn't work, "I wish you would stop being such a jerk when granting my wishes." >_<

Granted

I will now be slightly more of a jerk when granting your wishes. I am no longer "such" a jerk, as I am no longer an adequate example of that particular level of jerk-ishness.


Only if you ignore RAW and do RAI. :P

Untrue. RAW states that many wishes are supposed to bite you in the bum. And where you specified planar binding, whose casting time is longer than gate's "immediate service" provision, I was well within RAW to take a hike. :smallbiggrin:

Paramour Pink
2009-03-24, 10:17 PM
XD

I really didn't think you'd be able to get the first one. The others were attempts at shoring up random cracks. D:

What about, "I wish that you immediately find yourself put into a deep level of introspection that makes you find a personal, altruistic reason not to corrupt wishes that are made with good intent from now until the end of your existence." Gotcha now. :smallamused:

lsfreak
2009-03-24, 10:19 PM
"You are talking of being selfless. If you are being selfless, than this means you are not taking into account any of your own desires - or dare I say, wishes - including the desire for these wishes to be granted. If you do wish these wishes to be granted, you are not being selfless."

Tiki Snakes
2009-03-24, 10:20 PM
"I wish for Cake. You can have some too, if you want?"

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 10:21 PM
What about, "I wish that you immediately find yourself put into a deep level of introspection that makes you find a personal, altruistic reason not to corrupt wishes that are made with good intent from now until the end of your existence." Gotcha now. :smallamused:

Looks an awful lot like the mindrape spell. Which I'd be exempt from replicating. :smallamused:

But let's play.

Granted

I realize that those of evil intent, such as the woman who has attempted to deceive me, could exploit my powers secretly for evil ends, and so I burn away my ability to grant wishes out of a personal, altruistic desire to not grant a wish that I believe to be made with good intent which is in fact of malicious origin.

That done, I go back to being evil, and then kill you.

Nomad Pangolin
2009-03-24, 10:33 PM
Even if I agreed with your interpretation, you can use the first Efreeti to summon others to do your bidding.

Two quick points.
1. You say "even if." Please explain the implied disagreement.

2. I'd suppose by a planar binding spell, accepting the fact that you'd only get one efreeti. But you need three spells or wishes: magic circle against evil, (greater) planar binding, and dimension anchor (or lock.) The circle is required as a prerequisite of casting the bind, and the dim anchor prevents the efreeti from plane shifting back to Fire.

The cast sequence is circle, bind, anchor - if you want diagrammed circle, anchor, bind, you have to wish for the circle (due to the 10 minute diagramming time.) Good luck.

RandomFellow
2009-03-24, 10:35 PM
Untrue. RAW states that many wishes are supposed to bite you in the bum. And where you specified planar binding, whose casting time is longer than gate's "immediate service" provision, I was well within RAW to take a hike. :smallbiggrin:

We'll have to agree to disagree I think.

Wish, like Shadow Conjuration or any other 'mimic' or 'duplicate' spell, doesn't have its casting time increased just because the spell duplicated takes longer to cast normally.

None of those effects were greater than the 'safe limits' of Wish.

RandomFellow
2009-03-24, 10:42 PM
Two quick points.
1. You say "even if." Please explain the implied disagreement.

I don't agree...duplicating a magic item worth less than 25,000gp is well within the 'safe limits' of the spell in my opinion.



2. I'd suppose by a planar binding spell, accepting the fact that you'd only get one efreeti. But you need three spells or wishes: magic circle against evil, (greater) planar binding, and dimension anchor (or lock.) The circle is required as a prerequisite of casting the bind, and the dim anchor prevents the efreeti from plane shifting back to Fire.

The cast sequence is circle, bind, anchor - if you want diagrammed circle, anchor, bind, you have to wish for the circle (due to the 10 minute diagramming time.) Good luck.


Incorrect.

You are assuming I want to make a secure trap, which is optional.

That would not be correct. You are also assuming that I can't get access to a 3rd level spell by the time I have a candle of invocation, which is unlikely.

It is not specified that the a magic circle has to be cast by the calling creature, merely that one must be used.

If the Charm fails (due to the summoned creature acting first, successful save, etc.), the creature immediately escapes or attacks. Hence the term 'decent chance'. As in, there is a chance it will fail due to the lack of proper precautions.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 10:44 PM
We'll have to agree to disagree I think.

Wish, like Shadow Conjuration or any other 'mimic' or 'duplicate' spell, doesn't have its casting time increased just because the spell duplicated takes longer to cast normally.

None of those effects were greater than the 'safe limits' of Wish.

I could not find a ruling in my cursory search of Google's first seven or so pages.

But it hardly matters, because your wish told me to perform the summoning as if I were performing a planar binding spell. So, your wish told me to take 10 minutes before completing the summoning.

You didn't tell me to planar bind an efreeti, which would be the correct method of doing so.

RandomFellow
2009-03-24, 10:46 PM
I could not find a ruling in my cursory search of Google's first seven or so pages.

But it hardly matters, because your wish told me to perform the summoning as if I were performing a planar binding spell. So, your wish told me to take 10 minutes before completing the summoning.

You didn't tell me to planar bind an efreeti, which would be the correct method of doing so.

Like I said, I think it falls under the category of 'matter of opinion' and therefore can't effectively be argued. :P

Either you agree that things within the listed 'safe limits' of the wish SLA and that 'service' requires the Efreeti not to actively pervert a wish it knows can be properly fulfilled or you don't.

afroakuma
2009-03-24, 11:00 PM
Well, I certainly do concur that there are safe limits to a wish.

But I also believe the efreeti has every right to subvert a wish.

Waspinator
2009-03-24, 11:50 PM
"I wish for Cake. You can have some too, if you want?"

The cake is made of antimatter.

chiasaur11
2009-03-24, 11:53 PM
The cake is made of antimatter.

But it's honest antimatter.

Also, the stupid efretti dies too.

Nomad Pangolin
2009-03-25, 12:45 AM
I don't agree...duplicating a magic item worth less than 25,000gp is well within the 'safe limits' of the spell in my opinion.

If a 9th level spell weren't involved, I would agree. But based on SRD for item creation and for wish, I can not agree: the process of item creation entails "triggering the spell," which considering the consumption of M/X spell components is equivalent to casting.

And wish still cannot cast gate. (Should we simply accept that the same wish that is unable to *cast* gate can create a scroll of gate which, well, casts gate? If so, wherefore the limit?)


Incorrect.

You are assuming I want to make a secure trap, which is optional.

Perhaps I should have been a bit clearer then, because I did not make that assumption: my emphasis was that if you intend to use planar binding as you stated, you need the circle, and you need a dimensional anchor spell. "The cast sequence is circle, bind, anchor" - the circle has to be laid down, the binding spell cast or wished for on the next round, and the dimension anchor applied before the second efreeti can escape.

The secure trap just raises DC's and lets you pre-load the anchor spell (along with fixing the anchor's duration to the trap's rather than its own.)

In any case, nothing is preventing the first efreeti from freeing the second. And if you manage to get the second to give you a planar-binding wish for a *third,* then nothing stops the second and third 'ifrit from freeing each other, nor the first from freeing the other two. Wily creatures, those flaming genies.

Heliomance
2009-03-25, 04:16 AM
Now who's grasping at straws? :smallwink:



Not Granted

Effect would replicate a spell of effective level higher than arcane 8th. I cannot grant the wish.

It's as simple as that. Except that I don't think I have to tell you that. So what you'll actually hear is, "Your second wish?" followed by some tedious request of yours and then me impaling you.

You're forgetting the "it is possible to use Wish to produce effects greater than this" clause.

Also, which spell does it replicate?

Myou
2009-03-25, 04:37 AM
I did in fact see your original post (though I rarely pay attention to (or can't remember :smallannoyed: ) who said what in a thread). And it does address the problem. I was addressing the idea that the candle - on it's own - is the problem. And it's not (although whoever thought allowing an 8400 gp item to cast gate ought to think twice about their design philosophies). The same thing, for example, can be accomplished at a higher level with a dweomercheater build.

Ahhhh. I just say that they don't exist in my setting, they were a pretty weak concept to begin with.

Also, my rule on (Su) and (Sp) abilities means the Dweomerkeeper can't get around XP costs either.

Killer Angel
2009-03-25, 05:16 AM
Well, I certainly do concur that there are safe limits to a wish.

But I also believe the efreeti has every right to subvert a wish.


I (as a DM) once planned an invasion on the Material Plane, passing through a natural gate in an immense solforous mine set aflame... the main "allies" of the Efreeti were salamanders. The genies gives suggestions to the salamanders, then the salamanders ask "wishes" to the efreeti, which graciously agreed and grant said wishes, without trying to "pervert" them.

It was an interesting campaign...

Killer Angel
2009-03-25, 05:27 AM
To summon, sure, but they can only grant wishes to those that capture them. Gate is a limited duration compulsion effect, so it doesn't validate the wish clause.


Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not even sure you can summon a NOBLE djinn.
Gate let you call a kind of creature... the creature is a genie, the kind is a Djinn... but a noble one? ther's only a 1% possibility.
An extraplanar being can summon a human, i don't think they can summon a count or a king.

afroakuma
2009-03-25, 07:06 AM
You're forgetting the "it is possible to use Wish to produce effects greater than this" clause.

And you are forgetting the "The wish may pervert your intent into a literal but undesirable fulfillment or only a partial fulfillment" clause of that clause.

Since that perforates whatever powerful wish you try to make, I subsequently perforate you.


Also, which spell does it replicate?

Closest analogue would be mindrape or dominate monster without the "actions against its nature" clause.

Heliomance
2009-03-25, 07:11 AM
I didn't forget the perversion clause, that's why I took the effort to make the wording airtight.

Talya
2009-03-25, 07:12 AM
The real problem is Wish, not the candle. There really needs to be two limitations put on Wish's ability to make magic items:

"There are a few provisos, addendas, a couple of quid pro quos..."

afroakuma
2009-03-25, 07:21 AM
I didn't forget the perversion clause, that's why I took the effort to make the wording airtight.

Ah, but the wording cannot be airtight if you push for a more powerful effect, because you may still get a partial fulfillment. Based on the experiment I just performed with this Ziploc bag, "partially airtight" means jack all.


"There are a few provisos, addendas, a couple of quid pro quos..."

:smallbiggrin:

Heliomance
2009-03-25, 08:14 AM
If you're not pushing for a more powerful effect then you don't need to try and make the wording airtight as the spell will go off without a hitch.

afroakuma
2009-03-25, 08:21 AM
If you're not pushing for a more powerful effect then you don't need to try and make the wording airtight as the spell will go off without a hitch.

Certainly, provided you cast it. When you're having an intermediary do it for you, they can twist it however they please. If your wish to a pit fiend is "make me an ice cream," then even though it's within the parameters of a safe wish, you still know you're going to be melting on the ground in a few seconds.

Waspinator
2009-03-25, 09:47 AM
Basically, just assume it'll work out about the same as if you had asked Jafar to grant the wish.

Thane of Fife
2009-03-25, 10:04 AM
Or rather, as if The Monkey's Paw (http://www.scaryforkids.com/the-monkeys-paw/) had granted it.

You want a Candle of Invocation? Sure. Your arch-nemesis finds a stash of them and drops one in a place where you'll find it.

A wish doesn't need to be perverted in order for it to absolutely screw up your life.

Darthteej
2010-12-22, 10:09 PM
I couldn't resist this little bit of necromancy, anyone who wants, see if they can do it, and remain alive :smallamused:

"Wait until I have indicated to you the terms of the wish: I Wish that you stay in place and do not perform any action that is not caused by a granting of the Wish spells to be that you have promised to me; the only thing you are allowed to perform by the completion of this sentence and your spell is breathing, and use of your Wish.You may now enact the wish."

"I wish that, in addition to continuing to abide by my first wish, you swear absolute fealtyNOT in a magical manner of enchantment or compulsion(You're clever, and you're using the most powerful spell in existence, figure it out)] to me and the next wish that you grant, even on pain of your own death and/or removal from existence. You swear this oath with only your mouth and magic, no other movement is allowed by the parameters of the first wish.You may now enact the wish"

"I wish that you spontaneously magically transport yourself to, without bringing any matter that does not compose your being, the singularity of a collapsed star;henceforth known as a "black hole"; at the same time canceling any contingency, supernatural effects, magical/supernatural effects, extraordinary effects, spells, spell-like-abilities, and/or compacts with other beings meant to protect, resurrect in the event of your death and/or removal of your existence, transport you away in the event of your death and/or removal of your existence, teleport you away in the event of your death and/or removal of your existence, plane shift you away in the event of your death and/or removal of your existence, and/or any of the above for similar circumstances that are meant to protect in similar events of harm. You may now enact this Wish."

The Glyphstone
2010-12-22, 11:01 PM
Great Modthulhu: Necromancy.