PDA

View Full Version : Rule Lawyers Help! (Crazy Player Wish Abuse)



KoDT69
2007-02-22, 08:39 AM
OK not sure who all read my post before about the players taking advantage of stuff, but here is a new issue. I got the stuff from before straight, so now my whacko player running the chaotic cleric thinks he has the system beat with his theoretic plan to abuse a Strand of Prayer Beads. It has a bead of summons on it. He is convinced that due to the namesake, whatever is summoned will be BOUND TO SERVE HIS WILL for 24 hours. He is also convinced he can choose the summoned creature among ANY creatures marked as OUTSIDER, which would include the Efreeti that grants 3 wishes per day. He plans to use a wish to with the Efreeti to bind a different Efreeti to his service for eternitygetting him 3 wishes every day. And the last delusion he has is that he claims the Efreeti wish is more powerful than the 9th level arcane version to the point where the Efreeti MUST fulfill his wish or suffer some consequence.
Let's examine the facts as I know so far.

Cleric - Chaotic Neutral, 12th level total (8 cleric / 4 fighter)

Bead of Summons - Summons a powerful creature of appropriate alignment from the Outer Planes (an angel, devil, etc.) to aid the wearer for one day. (If the wearer uses the bead of summons to summon a deity’s emissary frivolously, the deity takes that character’s items and places a geas/quest upon him as punishment in the very least.) (SRD) - This does not say "of the player's choice", it says OF THE APPROPRIATE ALIGNMENT, and the creature comes from the Outer Planes.

Efreeti - Alignment: Always lawful evil (SRD) which is not a match with the cleric's chaotic neutral alignment, Environment: Elemental Plane of Fire (SRD) which does not seem to me to be an "outer plane", and 1/day—grant up to three wishes (to nongenies only)

Wish - 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 duplicate spells, undo the harmful effects of many other spells, create a nonmagical item of up to 25,000 gp in value, create a magic item, add to the powers of an existing magic item, grant a +1 inherent bonus to an ability score, remove injuries and afflictions, revive the dead, transport travelers, undo misfortune
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. Duplicated spells allow saves and spell resistance as normal (but save DCs are for 9th-level spells).
To me I think that even a wish does not have the power to bind any creature to another creature's servitude at all, much less eternity.

I know this cheese attempt can not work based on my research, nor will I let him try to weasle any bullcrap in about 2nd edition rules, 3rd party splatbooks, or any other irrelevant excuses. What I want is a commity "tearing apart" of this concept and support from my fellow gamers and DM's so I can refer my disappointed player to this post and let him see he's just plain outnumbered by the gaming community. If you find ANY loopholes feel free to post it up. He will be as cheesey as he can, so let's see what this brings up. Thanks gamers!

NullAshton
2007-02-22, 08:46 AM
"(If the wearer uses the bead of summons to summon a deity’s emissary frivolously, the deity takes that character’s items and places a geas/quest (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasQuest.htm) upon him as punishment in the very least.)"

The cleric's deity slaps the player, takes the players items, and gives a geas/quest to the player.

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-22, 08:50 AM
He can only summon a Chaotic Neutral outsider, anyway, such as a Slaad.

InaVegt
2007-02-22, 08:51 AM
The beads can't be used to summon an efreeti, since no deity appropreate for a CN cleric would let a LE creature come (unless you're playing in ebberon, in which case I could see people argueing it could, as the deity itself could be LE). However, the efreeti can still cast wish as a spell like ability, only being more powerfull in that it has no experience cost and as such allows you to create magic items of insane power because of the create a magic item function which usually is balanced by the immense XP cost. (creating the infamous ring of infinite quickened wishes, there's a ring of infinite quickened wishes somewhere on these forums I created to prevent this abuse) Because of this you'd be better of to houserule that section of the wish spell to be limited (some reasonable ways: max cost caster level * 2000 (keep XP cost) or max cost 25,000 (Drop XP cost))

Hyfigh
2007-02-22, 08:52 AM
Efreeti wish are bound to the same rules as the spell. Hands down. This means that the wish can only be granted within the guidelines of the wish spell. This also means that if he has the Bead summoned Efreet summon another Efreet, the second Efreet will not be under his DIRECT control. Keep in mind that Efreet are quite malicious, so let him ask the second Efreet for a wish... Then warp that wish for all it's worth.

Raum
2007-02-22, 08:54 AM
He needs to gate (rather than summon) for Wish cheese to be remotely legal. From the SRD on summoning (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#summoning): "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."

And if he tries to use gate, I highly recommend twisting any wish to the worst possible outcome.

GolemsVoice
2007-02-22, 08:59 AM
Well, let him have his way. He summons his efreeti, and suddenly an angel appears, takes his stuff and hands hm a legal notice "If there are any complaints, please visit "Whatever plane you god is on". We are sorry if there is any discomfort." Otherwise, let the summoned creature attack him, or likewise. You are the DM, you decide.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-02-22, 09:31 AM
Environment: Elemental Plane of Fire (SRD) which does not seem to me to be an "outer plane"...
Indeed.

The Elemental Planes are quite the opposite. They are Inner Planes.

oriong
2007-02-22, 09:39 AM
Well the biggest bit of untruth of this plan is the fact that a wish can 'bind an effreeti to his service forever'. A Wish Spell cannot even duplicate the effects of a Dominate Monster spell, much less something that creates eternal slavery.

What's more, there's nothing that says the bead could summon an efreeti, even if it were of the appropraite alignment. The description of the 'prayer beads' says that it summons a 'powerful entity', by RAW it doesn't even allow the PC to pick what monster is summoned.

So yeah, your player is deluded. He needs to get himself a candle of invocation : P

Dausuul
2007-02-22, 09:56 AM
I got the stuff from before straight, so now my whacko player running the chaotic cleric thinks he has the system beat with his theoretic plan to abuse a Strand of Prayer Beads. It has a bead of summons on it. He is convinced that due to the namesake, whatever is summoned will be BOUND TO SERVE HIS WILL for 24 hours. He is also convinced he can choose the summoned creature among ANY creatures marked as OUTSIDER, which would include the Efreeti that grants 3 wishes per day. He plans to use a wish to with the Efreeti to bind a different Efreeti to his service for eternitygetting him 3 wishes every day. And the last delusion he has is that he claims the Efreeti wish is more powerful than the 9th level arcane version to the point where the Efreeti MUST fulfill his wish or suffer some consequence.

This is the point at which it stops even being a rules question and becomes a "No, you idiot, you can't do that in my game no matter what crazy rules-lawyer arguments you come up with" question.

D&D has many, many cheesy loopholes. One of the reasons for having human DMs is to address such loopholes. There's a lot of stuff that you can do by RAW that you cannot do in any actual campaign, because every DM will take one look at your proposal and say "Sh'yeah, right." See for example Candle of Invocation gate cheese.

Don't try to argue the rules on this one. You should never argue rules when a PC tries to do something as obviously munchkinish as this; it's a waste of time. Just say, "Look, I don't care what the books say, that's insane and you can't do it in my game. DM has ruled, case closed, end of story."

(Incidentally, I agree with the arguments posted by others about why the cleric's idea doesn't work even by RAW. I'm just saying that this is not a case for the Careful Parsing of Rules approach, it's a case for the DM Smackdown approach. Careful Parsing of Rules is for when players have a reasonable disagreement with the DM about how things ought to work in the game world. DM Smackdown is for when a player is blatantly trying to abuse the system.)

Hyfigh
2007-02-22, 10:02 AM
Yea, I second the Rule 0. If you run into cheese that you don't feel like arguing about simply say "No". If asked why or confronted with arguements as to how the player thinks it should work you can simply say "because I'm the DM and I don't want something like that ruining the game for the rest of the players".

Wikkin
2007-02-22, 10:10 AM
You have a serious Tool playing in your game. Going by the other thread and this one, it seems to be a trend. As a DM you have to put your foot down or find another player. Or you'll be back on here tomorrow with another thread.

Telonius
2007-02-22, 10:34 AM
I would allow the player to try it, and then have loads of fun with this clause.



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.)


Example: "I wish I had a +3 to my Int score!"
Wish spell effect: Ages the character three categories.

Enjoy! :belkar:

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 10:50 AM
In cases like this, Extreme measures need to be taken. We had a similar problem with a PC once. He tried to abuse wish and got exactly what he wanted.......as dropped from 30,000 feet. <SQUISH> take a ridiculous amount of damage with no save cuz your flat footed and don't mess with your dm EVER!!!

KoDT69
2007-02-22, 10:52 AM
Oh yah I forgot about the whole "evil monkey paw curse" type deal there. The Efreeti is evil and all. That might be the most fun for everyone but him :smalltongue:

Missing Shoe
2007-02-22, 11:02 AM
I don't think there is a need for Rule 0 or "rocks falls, everyone dies approach". Everyone has rules lawyered this one to death, it doesn't work the way he was hoping. He cant summon Efreets cuz they aren't of the same alignment, from the wrong plane, and even if he could, the wouldn't burn xp for him.

If you try just using Rule 0 or the insta-kill, he is gonna probably resent you more for it and say something like "God, I hate when the DM railroads us."

Zeb The Troll
2007-02-22, 11:11 AM
Bead of Summons - Summons a powerful creature of appropriate alignment from the Outer Planes (an angel, devil, etc.) to aid the wearer for one day. (If the wearer uses the bead of summons to summon a deity’s emissary frivolously, the deity takes that character’s items and places a geas/quest upon him as punishment in the very least.) (SRD) - This does not say "of the player's choice", it says OF THE APPROPRIATE ALIGNMENT, and the creature comes from the Outer Planes.

Efreeti - Alignment: Always lawful evil (SRD) which is not a match with the cleric's chaotic neutral alignment, Environment: Elemental Plane of Fire (SRD) which does not seem to me to be an "outer plane", and 1/day—grant up to three wishes (to nongenies only)Spot on on your analysis. There is no way this can work and why not is clearly spelled out in the SRD.

My view - let him try, then apply the thumbscrews to uncomfortable places. Don't let him off with "your character would know this wouldn't work". He's trying to get over on you he's not trying to accomplish something heroic in a cheesy way. In addition to your listed "why not's" I'd think there's no argument that this would qualify as a "frivolous use" and would immediately result in a deity smacking [at least loss of clerical powers, possibly loss of levels - a deity can do that if he wants] followed by an irate-summoned-creature smacking (not efreeti smacking because you've established solidly that an efreeti would not be summoned).

And hey, after that you've got a plot hook because someone is going to have some serious questing to do to make up for this.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 11:21 AM
I don't think there is a need for Rule 0 or "rocks falls, everyone dies approach". Everyone has rules lawyered this one to death, it doesn't work the way he was hoping. He cant summon Efreets cuz they aren't of the same alignment, from the wrong plane, and even if he could, the wouldn't burn xp for him.

If you try just using Rule 0 or the insta-kill, he is gonna probably resent you more for it and say something like "God, I hate when the DM railroads us."

Yeah, But squashing Munchkins is FUN!!
:biggrin:

Dausuul
2007-02-22, 11:23 AM
I don't think there is a need for Rule 0 or "rocks falls, everyone dies approach". Everyone has rules lawyered this one to death, it doesn't work the way he was hoping. He cant summon Efreets cuz they aren't of the same alignment, from the wrong plane, and even if he could, the wouldn't burn xp for him.

If you try just using Rule 0 or the insta-kill, he is gonna probably resent you more for it and say something like "God, I hate when the DM railroads us."

The reason I advocate using Rule 0 here is that the player needs to understand that this stuff just will not fly no matter what he does. If you answer his cheese with a rules argument, he'll simply go looking for more cheese. Eventually he'll come across the Candle of Invocation and the Titan, or something similar--cheese which actually does work by RAW. At that point, you'll just have to invoke Rule 0 anyhow, so why not cut to the chase?

Any player at my gaming table needs to understand that you cannot pull stunts like this, no matter what the rules say. Furthermore, I will not waste everyone's time arguing the fine points of the rules on matters such as this, because even if you win the argument on the RAW, I won't let you trash my game with munchkin cheese, so what's the point of having the argument to begin with?

Players who can't accept that we're here to game rather than to rules-lawyer are free to leave. Players who get whiny and resentful when I dismiss stupid exploits out of hand had bloody well better leave. It can be fun to discuss such things as thought experiments, but everyone ought to know that thought experiments are all they will ever be.

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-22, 11:23 AM
I don't think there is a need for Rule 0 or "rocks falls, everyone dies approach". Everyone has rules lawyered this one to death, it doesn't work the way he was hoping. He cant summon Efreets cuz they aren't of the same alignment, from the wrong plane, and even if he could, the wouldn't burn xp for him.

If you try just using Rule 0 or the insta-kill, he is gonna probably resent you more for it and say something like "God, I hate when the DM railroads us."

Nitpick: Efreeti don't burn XP when granting wishes. Only spells have components, and their ability to grant wishes is not a spell.

pedrokraemer
2007-02-22, 11:26 AM
First of all, i´m, sorry for my words, since english is not my first language.

Well: the sittuation might have two approaches:

1) You put your foot down and end with this hole story of Efeeti, Prayer Bids and all... You´re the DM, for christ´sake. Use the golden rule: you decide it (it is even on the 3.5 DM Guide, page 171).

2) in my games I also have a hard time with one (power)player... The thing is: if you call to yourself the campaign rules, sometimes the players might get it personal, or get frustated by the game... and your game goes lost.
Maybe it is a nice chance to use the very true rules to mess up with this cleric-player of yours and give him a hard time with this new Efreeti boundance...
Make him be chased by the ancient paladin church of the God of Light; put him in situations he might want to became evil-alignment... Make him loose his cleric powers for breking his believes in a chaotic god and go on search of an attonment...

and most important of all: make the hole party step away from him, making them enemies... that´s RPG...

headwarpage
2007-02-22, 11:30 AM
I agree with Dausuul. The problem isn't this particular trick, it's the player's attitude. There's more than enough working cheese in D&D that he'll find eventually. This trick doesn't work, as several people have pointed out. In fact, it doesn't work in a potentially catastrophic and spectacular fashion, which you could use to punish him IC. But if you do that, it'll just motivate him to look for better loopholes, along with convincing him that you're out to get him. You need to find a way to resolve this OOC, I think.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-22, 11:37 AM
Geez, people. "Punish him! Make him suffer!"

Have you considered, you know, TALKING to the player?

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 11:51 AM
Geez, people. "Punish him! Make him suffer!"

Have you considered, you know, TALKING to the player?

That's true, but it's not punishing the Player, it's punishing the Character. Sometime as Dm you just have to say NO. A player like this can take over the game in a heartbeat. Talking rules will just make him try harder to find loopholes. Give him every chance to not try a plan then at some point you just need to say "It doesn't work, it won't work, I won't let it work." Then If the Character still tries, smack him down.

As for talking OOC, If it's a recurring problem yeah discuss it, but ALWAYS make sure that game and life have specific boundaries. I have seen freindships lost B/C of in-game issues.

Dausuul
2007-02-22, 11:58 AM
Geez, people. "Punish him! Make him suffer!"

Have you considered, you know, TALKING to the player?

I'm not interested in punishing him or making him suffer. I am interested in making it clear that he doesn't get to do things like this. Admittedly, my attitude in the above posts is probably a little more confrontational than it needs to be.

I would say, "Look, I'm sorry, that would be a blatant abuse of the system and I'm not allowing it." If the player asked why not, I would expand to, "Because it would make the game pointless and no fun for me and the other players."

If the player then continued trying to argue, I'd say, "Sorry. This is how it is in my game world. Not open to further debate. If you want, we can discuss the exact details of how the Prayer Beads work, but you should know right from the get-go that I will nix any plan that results in you having an endless supply of wishes or anything similar."

ravenkith
2007-02-22, 12:03 PM
You are the DM. Take charge of your game.

That said, here are some pointers on how to handle the situation.

Let him do it.

Then make him wish he hadn't.

In front of the other players, tell him you are going to let him use the gate rules, since it's the spell used to create the item. Gate says you can call (through naming) a specific creature, or a else name a type of creature.

Make sure you tell him that you're giving him the alignment thing, because it's a one-shot item.

He gets one shot with the summons bead. Never include the item in the campaign again. Don't point out that you've banned it, just make it impossible to acquire.

Just remember these, quite possibly, eight sweetest words in the english language:

"I'm sorry, I've already used that ability today."

Followed by these:

"Just before you called me through, in fact."

So: he gets to sit around with an efreet for a day, at the end of which, he gets to make 1 wish, because the efreet can only be forced to grant one wish in those last six seconds before he's free.

If the wish he makes is particularly abusive, remember that these efreets are lawful EVIL beings from another plane of existence with an arseload of raw power at their disposal and the capability to level up via character class. They probably don't like being summoned here and summoned there, and would LOVE to get revenge on those individuals that think it's ok to do stuff like that. Maybe your boy got an efreet who knows a powerful mage in his dimension, who can arrange transport.

Before the efreet leaves have him say: "I'll be back".

Have him go home, call up his buddies, rustle up some willing non-genie minions, grant a few 'wishes' that turn the minions into combat machines, and then come a calling, with the express intent on killing the character in question.

After they incapacitate his allies and KILL him, have them leave, complete with a note attached to his chest that says, next time they'll make it permanent.

Make sure it's possible for the character to be raised, but not resurrected, by limiting available diamonds, if nothing else.

This way, he'll get the benefit of his one (abusive?) wish, but at a cost he won't be anxious to pay again, and it'll remind him that there are consequences to his actions within the world his character lives in.

Maybe he might even think twice about the next harebrained scheme he comes up with.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 12:04 PM
Another Thought occured to me. Do the other players enjoy this kind of game? cuz if so, let them have fun.

Or..

Let him do what he wants. It is a game, Just balance it with the other players by either
1. Making it incredibly difficult for him to actually use. Like Go through each wish with a fine tooth comb and find flaws or loopholes everytime so that he takes weeks to get even the smallest wish off (if he wants to rules lawyer , do it back)
2. Grant him EVERY WISH. "I want to go this way" and he flies off that way, wish granted. and use up his wishes each day rally quick. This could make for some really amusing situations, nothing too deadly, just everything even kinda like a wish, grant. You could even have the Efreet be pissed and have read thoughts up and grant even unspoken wishes to get them out of the way.
3.Give him ultimate power and everything he wants. Then explain his character is too powerful, he needs to retire.

These allow him to have the game he wants while letting your other characters enjoy thier game too.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-22, 12:06 PM
You are the DM. Take charge of your game.

That said, here are some pointers on how to handle the situation.

Let him do it.

Then make him wish he hadn't.


No, that's a crappy way of doing things. It causes needless antagonism, basically setting up a "player vs. DM" situation moreso than this one already is.

That is NOT the right thing to do.

Dausuul
2007-02-22, 12:13 PM
No, that's a crappy way of doing things. It causes needless antagonism, basically setting up a "player vs. DM" situation moreso than this one already is.

That is NOT the right thing to do.

Agreed. Getting into a war with your players is silly and destructive. The goal should be to settle the issue immediately, decisively, and with a minimum of hard feelings.

Personally, I am dubious about whether this player will work. It sounds like he's the worst kind of powergamer and has no interest in a game that would be fun for everyone. But there's no reason to drag the business out. Explain your position and why you won't allow this. If the player can live with that, great. If not, he's welcome to take his dice and go home.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 12:15 PM
No, that's a crappy way of doing things. It causes needless antagonism, basically setting up a "player vs. DM" situation moreso than this one already is.

That is NOT the right thing to do.

No, I agree. If anybody starts getting upset, take a step back and remember it's a game. EVERY TIME. IMMEDIATELY.

That having been said, keep it fun and try to work it out in game. I think you could make it fun and give him what he wants, or not, and still keep him happy, Just be clever.

valadil
2007-02-22, 12:24 PM
Personally I think you need to let him try it and then shut him up good.

"No, you can't do that. Nowhere does the item description say that you can pick and choose which outsider shows up. On top of that, the outsider needs to match your diety's alignment, which it doesn't. Even if that wasn't the case and the rules did allow you to summon an efreet I wouldn't allow it. Period. Furthermore, in running this game, I'm trying to tell a story that your characters can take part in. If all you're going to do is try and hijack the game by exploiting rules in the system to become overly powerful, then not only are you not contributing anything to the game, but you're disturbing it for me and the other players. So sit down, put the rulebooks away and enjoy my game for what it is or I'll have to ask you to leave."

If you only show him that his interpretation of the rules is wrong he is gonna keep trying till he finds an exploit that works. If you just tell him dm says no, you'll irritate him and I bet he'll respond in kind. You've got to do both and then belittle him a bit in front of the other players just to exert your dominance as game master.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-22, 12:33 PM
You've got to do both and then belittle him a bit in front of the other players just to exert your dominance as game master.

God, are you kidding me? "Exert your dominance as a game master"? It's like a bad parody.

No, you should not "exert your dominance as a game master". You don't HAVE any dominance as a game master. It's a cooperative game. You're running it FOR your players. If they walk away, you're gameless.

You need to explain that the rules are a means, not an ends; that you're running the game for fun, and him getting a bunch of wishes would interfere with everyone else's fun. If that's not the kind of game he wants, he should probably find a new game; if he wants to play in your game, he'll need to restrain himself a bit so everyone can have fun, because fun, after all, is the point.

The DM is not the freakin' king of the table. Seriously, "exert your dominance"? How macho can you get? Hopefully, this guy's a friend that you want to keep gaming with (otherwise, why are you gaming with him).

I'm not really sure where this whole "if the player steps out of line, whack'im!" mindset comes from, but it's hostile and counterproductive.

oriong
2007-02-22, 12:34 PM
Valadil, I have to say, no offense meant, that is the worst advice I have ever heard.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 12:34 PM
You've got to do both and then belittle him a bit in front of the other players just to exert your dominance as game master.

You don't want to belittle him. There's no reason to attack him personally. Remember, He is playing a type of game that he wants to play.

A Really good Dm can usually find a way to give each player what they want in a game. If he wants to play a munchkin-rules lawyer game, either just tell him no or play along and make it into a challenging game situation or humurous mistake.

Alternatively, OOC say "Hey that's a cool idea, but I really don't want anybody that powerful, could you not do it. Great Plan Though"

KoDT69
2007-02-22, 12:36 PM
The bunghole in question is still my best friend. I'm trying hard not to be mean or break up the game over it. The issue is that his logic says "hmm if an epic spell can summon 10 dragons why can't a wish give me a 50 year service from an efreeti?". I used everything here on a phone conversation about 12pm today. He got all mad saying that there were plenty of loopholes and epic characters can summon more than 1 efreeti if they tried and all this other crap. I just told him straight out he's trying to break the game and I don't want it going on. So now he's telling me to tell all of the rules lawyers here to kiss his butt because he's all mad he's being opposed. You know it wouldn't even be so bad if he were 30th level instead of 12th. A 30th level character is plenty able to do a lot of spectacular things, he's just in a hurry to be some legendary unstoppable force in the campaign.

oriong
2007-02-22, 12:38 PM
You don't want to belittle him. There's no reason to attack him personally. Remember, He is playing a type of game that he wants to play.

A Really good Dm can usually find a way to give each player what they want in a game. If he wants to play a munchkin-rules lawyer game, either just tell him no or play along and make it into a challenging game situation or humurous mistake.

Alternatively, OOC say "Hey that's a cool idea, but I really don't want anybody that powerful, could you not do it. Great Plan Though"

Honestly, I think this is too permissive. It's not a cool idea, it's not a great plan. Just because it's something the PC wants to do doesn't make it right or permissable (no matter what type of game you're playing) anymore than someone playing chess trying to treat his pawns as queens is okay.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 12:42 PM
The bunghole in question is still my best friend. I'm trying hard not to be mean or break up the game over it. The issue is that his logic says "hmm if an epic spell can summon 10 dragons why can't a wish give me a 50 year service from an efreeti?". I used everything here on a phone conversation about 12pm today. He got all mad saying that there were plenty of loopholes and epic characters can summon more than 1 efreeti if they tried and all this other crap. I just told him straight out he's trying to break the game and I don't want it going on. So now he's telling me to tell all of the rules lawyers here to kiss his butt because he's all mad he's being opposed. You know it wouldn't even be so bad if he were 30th level instead of 12th. A 30th level character is plenty able to do a lot of spectacular things, he's just in a hurry to be some legendary unstoppable force in the campaign.

Like I said earlier, Let him do it. Then have the Efreet Grant EVERY WISH. Make it not devastating, but humorous or just not beneficial. "I wish for a million gold peices" give him one million grains of gold sand. "I wish for +5 flaming burst longsword" give him one that is sized for a titan. or have it apear somewhere else.

There's no reason, if he is gonna get upset, you can't find a way to give him what he wants and still keep the party together.

Don't try to out argue him, try to work with him. You're both playing a game, just different parts of it. There are ways to keep it fun.

oriong
2007-02-22, 12:45 PM
But that's not working with him, that's working against him, and it'll just encourage him to be even more overly specific until the wish is the size of a legal contract and you give in and give him what he wants, or you take it away.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 12:46 PM
Honestly, I think this is too permissive. It's not a cool idea, it's not a great plan. Just because it's something the PC wants to do doesn't make it right or permissable (no matter what type of game you're playing) anymore than someone playing chess trying to treat his pawns as queens is okay.

It is posteed in every RPG I have ever played. The golden rule: HAVE FUN. If you don't like a rule, Change it.

No it's not a good plan, no, it wouldn't work in RAW, but sometimes you just need to backk off and play nice.

Sure this is being permissive, But the idea is to HAVE FUN. If everybody wants to PLAY Chess with the pawns as Queens, do it. Whatever makes the game interesting and exciting. IN fact there are hundreds of variant Chess Rules, I have even seen one where the pawns DO move as queens.

Dausuul
2007-02-22, 12:48 PM
But that's not working with him, that's working against him, and it'll just encourage him to be even more overly specific until the wish is the size of a legal contract and you give in and give him what he wants, or you take it away.

Yup. As I said, don't drag it out. Put a stop to it right away and let that be that.

(Oh, and quoting the authority of people on an Internet forum is maybe not the best policy. You don't need our authority, you're the DM. While you should certainly take your players' desires into consideration, if you're absolutely unwilling to allow something in your game, that's all there is to say about it. Rule 0 is there for a reason and this is it.)

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 12:49 PM
But that's not working with him, that's working against him, and it'll just encourage him to be even more overly specific until the wish is the size of a legal contract and you give in and give him what he wants, or you take it away.

Sure, but that seems like what this person enjoys. If he wants the type of game where he GETS to rules lawyer his wishes, let him. In a fantasy world, THere i always a loophole, so theres no danger of him achieving anything you don't want him to. Toss him some bone when his wishes are small and legit, and tie it up the rest of the time.

This keeps the game going and gives the player (who sounded upset at every other idea) what he wants.

jjpickar
2007-02-22, 12:50 PM
I'm really having a hard time understanding why he's so stubborn. A simple "that's cool but no" should usually work here. It sounds like the game is becoming too disruptive to your friendship. Maybe you both should take a break from it and really work out whats wrong before coming back to it. Friendships are worth far more than D&D.

oriong
2007-02-22, 12:51 PM
It is posteed in every RPG I have ever played. The golden rule: HAVE FUN. If you don't like a rule, Change it.

No it's not a good plan, no, it wouldn't work in RAW, but sometimes you just need to backk off and play nice.

Sure this is being permissive, But the idea is to HAVE FUN. If everybody wants to PLAY Chess with the pawns as Queens, do it. Whatever makes the game interesting and exciting. IN fact there are hundreds of variant Chess Rules, I have even seen one where the pawns DO move as queens.

This player is also very clearly interested in only his own fun. he does not care that he's breaking the game, he does not care that he is throwing everyone else's fun out the window and that is exactly what he is doing.

Yes, I know fun is the ultimate goal, but trust me when I say that this plan does not lead to anything fun. it just leads to this one player getting off on his own power while everyone else has to sit and watch until they get tired of it and kick him out or make him give it up.



Sure, but that seems like what this person enjoys. If he wants the type of game where he GETS to rules lawyer his wishes, let him. In a fantasy world, THere i always a loophole, so theres no danger of him achieving anything you don't want him to. Toss him some bone when his wishes are small and legit, and tie it up the rest of the time.

This keeps the game going and gives the player (who sounded upset at every other idea) what he wants.

No. Just no. This advice is almost as bad as Valadil's. If you're going to let the PC do whatever he feels like then you might as well just give him 20 divine ranks and be done with it. Letting him 'rules lawyer as he wishes' is not a good thing. It's a problem. Because it will almost always interfere with the enjoyment of the game by the DM and the other players.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 12:52 PM
I'm really having a hard time understanding why he's so stubborn. A simple "that's cool but no" should usually work here. It sounds like the game is becoming too disruptive to a friendship here maybe you both should take a break from it and really work out whats wrong before coming back to it. Friendships are worth far more than D&D.

That is by far the best idea I have heard so far.

I am just trying to help it in-game, but if tempers are flaring and people get upset, Time to put down the dice, go outside breath and shoot hoops or something else and LET IT GO.

It's just a game and it's there for fun.

Gamebird
2007-02-22, 12:56 PM
As fun as it to imagine ways to twist his Wishes, or foul his schemes, at the end of those roads is an angry parting of the ways. It's a cooperative game. And part of that cooperation is the admission that the DM has been agreed upon, by the players, as being the final arbiter of the rules. (arbiter? arbitrator?)

Ask him (with or without other players) if he agrees that you're the DM and your role requires you to make rules calls that further the enjoyment of the game for everyone - not just him. You've made your ruling. If he doesn't like it - that's fine. If he thinks it's totally bogus, that's fine too. If he refuses to honor your ruling, then say "Okay. The game's over until he leaves. Or we can play in [insert troublesome player's name]'s game."

It might help to ask him how he'd run this situation if he were the DM. And to ask him what sort of game he expects you to run, if you accepted his interpretation of the rules.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 12:56 PM
This player is also very clearly interested in only his own fun. he does not care that he's breaking the game, he does not care that he is throwing everyone else's fun out the window and that is exactly what he is doing.

Yes, I know fun is the ultimate goal, but trust me when I say that this plan does not lead to anything fun. it just leads to this one player getting off on his own power while everyone else has to sit and watch until they get tired of it and kick him out or make him give it up.

There are ways that he can have the game he wants, without giving him too much power. or let him have the power then retire his character and move on. The game is for everyone's enjoyment so just kicking him out or telling him no ruins his idea of the game. SURE if there is NO WAY to compromise, then majority rules, but try first to work it in if he's that adament about it.

headwarpage
2007-02-22, 12:57 PM
The bunghole in question is still my best friend. I'm trying hard not to be mean or break up the game over it. The issue is that his logic says "hmm if an epic spell can summon 10 dragons why can't a wish give me a 50 year service from an efreeti?". I used everything here on a phone conversation about 12pm today. He got all mad saying that there were plenty of loopholes and epic characters can summon more than 1 efreeti if they tried and all this other crap. I just told him straight out he's trying to break the game and I don't want it going on. So now he's telling me to tell all of the rules lawyers here to kiss his butt because he's all mad he's being opposed. You know it wouldn't even be so bad if he were 30th level instead of 12th. A 30th level character is plenty able to do a lot of spectacular things, he's just in a hurry to be some legendary unstoppable force in the campaign.

Why is he trying to compare what he's doing to epic spellcasting? He's nowhere near epic, he's not supposed to be able to do that stuff. If you can do epic-type things at level 12, what's the point of gaining the next 9 levels?

But if he's that angry at being opposed, there's not much you can do here. Whatever you do, though, don't try to resolve this in-game. Even if he rolls with it, all you've done is created a new game for him to play, where he spends all his time trying to sneak cheesy stuff by you. You'll have to spend all your time trying to stay a step ahead of him, and the actual game you're trying to run will suffer. You need to deal with this OOC, and if he doesn't care about your or anybody else's enjoyment of the game, then it's unlikely that he'll contribute much to your game.

Alternately, let him have what he wants. Exactly what he wants. He wins the game. Congratulations. Now, everybody rolls up new characters, because there's no point in playing a game where he has infinite wishes. Ok, this probably doesn't really accomplish anything, but nothing's going to change here until he gets over himself and realizes that the point is to have fun, not break the game. What exactly does he expect to do after he gets infinite wishes, anyway?

Douglas
2007-02-22, 01:02 PM
He got all mad saying that there were plenty of loopholes and epic characters can summon more than 1 efreeti if they tried and all this other crap.
Yes, there are indeed many ways to break the game that are RAW legal. None of them make for much fun outside of games that are intended to be silly exercises in exploiting the system just so you can laugh at how ridiculous things get. This is why DM fiat exists.

My response if I were DM in this particular non-RAW case: play it by the RAW. A non-efreeti outsider of appropriate alignment comes to his call. If he can't convince it he had a non-frivolous non-infinite-wish-cheese reason for calling it, he gets the RAW mandated deity smackdown. He also gets an OOC warning that attempts to break the game will never be allowed to work in this campaign.

If this exploit actually was RAW legal: "A kobold with a tiny viper on his shoulder steps through the gate. He stares at you for a moment and says 'nice try, but no. I'll let you off with a warning this time, but don't try it again.' He vanishes, the gate closes, and (if I'm feeling nice) the bead of summons reappears on the strand, its power fully restored."

KoDT69
2007-02-22, 01:03 PM
OK then we all have valid points. Let's say I go with it. I avoid argument and confrontation altogether and let him have his way. I twist many wishes and let some fly. I will house rule in that the efreeti's HD are being added to his for EL and XP considerations for him only. The group will progress to the epic levels he's so impatient to achieve, but he'll have his way, at a reduced level. Soon when the campaign matches the higher level PC's challenge requirement, he won't be able to keep up and fall to the wayside. Any other ideas along the cooperation lines?

oriong
2007-02-22, 01:06 PM
Just say no

This is not something that needs special consideration, or playing along, or even an in-game smackdown. It's against the rules and against sanity.

You have to just say NO.

rollfrenzy
2007-02-22, 01:11 PM
Just say no

This is not something that needs special consideration, or playing along, or even an in-game smackdown. It's against the rules and against sanity.

You have to just say NO.

That makes the game a lot of fun for KODT's BEST FREIND.

Honestly, KODT I reread your post about him getting all mad and stuff, and I really think you two should not play on your next day to game and have fun doing something else. People are starting to get real life mad and that's uncool. After that, talk to him. If he absolutely has to have this, work WITH him and say, what is it you want , and how can I give it to you while keeping your power in line with the other characters.

But AGAIN, take a break with him and work through this anger before telling/saying/demanding/punishing/talking about/working with/ anything to do with his Character.

Dausuul
2007-02-22, 01:12 PM
Alternately, let him have what he wants. Exactly what he wants. He wins the game. Congratulations. Now, everybody rolls up new characters, because there's no point in playing a game where he has infinite wishes. Ok, this probably doesn't really accomplish anything, but nothing's going to change here until he gets over himself and realizes that the point is to have fun, not break the game. What exactly does he expect to do after he gets infinite wishes, anyway?

This is another option, which might be necessary, if only to demonstrate why it's silly to allow this sort of thing. Say, "Okay, you have infinite wishes. What are you doing now?"

Presumably, he uses his wishes to wipe out all the obstacles and fulfill the plot in short order.

"Okay, nice job. Now what?"

He uses his wishes to become ruler of the multiverse.

"Yep, okay. The multiverse is yours. Now what?"

After a few more exchanges along these lines, he may start to get the picture.

Or not. In the end, if he absolutely refuses to be reasonable, there's not a lot you can do about it. A break for a few days to cool off is a good idea. I wouldn't permanently shut down the game over it, though. If you and the other players are having fun, he has no right to throw a temper tantrum and make you all stop.

Friendship is certainly worth more than D&D, but by the same token, if he'd actually stop being friends with you over a D&D ruling, then the friendship has problems that go beyond gaming. Being friends does not mean automatically going along with any whim the other person has.

headwarpage
2007-02-22, 01:15 PM
Don't give in on this, unless you intend for it to be an object lesson in how much less fun it makes the game. If you give this to him, the game is going to stop being fun very quickly. Maybe it'll be fun for him, but nobody else will enjoy it, including you. He'll walk right over encounters balanced for the rest of the party, and the rest of the party will be useless against anything that does challenge him (and probably get killed, but he'll just wish them back alive). And sooner or later, he'll think of using one of his wishes to bind another efreeti to his service, or maybe a solar or two, or a few dragons. You've already set a precedent of allowing it, so you'll have a hard time stopping further twisting of the rules. If you try to keep him in check by twisting the wishes, pretty soon the game devolves into trying to word the wishes just right, so that he can do whatever he wants. There's no way this ends well, trust me.

headwarpage
2007-02-22, 01:18 PM
That makes the game a lot of fun for KODT's BEST FREIND.

Honestly, KODT I reread your post about him getting all mad and stuff, and I really think you two should not play on your next day to game and have fun doing something else. People are starting to get real life mad and that's uncool. After that, talk to him. If he absolutely has to have this, work WITH him and say, what is it you want , and how can I give it to you while keeping your power in line with the other characters.

But AGAIN, take a break with him and work through this anger before telling/saying/demanding/punishing/talking about/working with/ anything to do with his Character.

Very good point. Once people start getting real-life mad, it's time to take a break for a little while.

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-22, 01:32 PM
OK then we all have valid points. Let's say I go with it. I avoid argument and confrontation altogether and let him have his way. I twist many wishes and let some fly. I will house rule in that the efreeti's HD are being added to his for EL and XP considerations for him only. The group will progress to the epic levels he's so impatient to achieve, but he'll have his way, at a reduced level. Soon when the campaign matches the higher level PC's challenge requirement, he won't be able to keep up and fall to the wayside. Any other ideas along the cooperation lines?

...What? You're 'giving in'?

But it doesn't work. The item doesn't let him summon what he wants, and he isn't anywhere close to the right alignment to summon an Efreeti. Wish can't be used to bind a creature into your service permanently; a few days, maybe half a month (emulating a Dominate spell), but that's about it.

Additionally, a summoned Efreeti won't use its Wish power anyway!

Caelestion
2007-02-22, 01:33 PM
Well, frankly, unless you're prepared to monkey's-paw the more-powerful wishes as allowed in RAW, then you have to flat-out refuse them. The Wish spell has always been the monkey's-paw idea after all.

headwarpage
2007-02-22, 01:39 PM
...What? You're 'giving in'?

But it doesn't work. The item doesn't let him summon what he wants, and he isn't anywhere close to the right alignment to summon an Efreeti. Wish can't be used to bind a creature into your service permanently; a few days, maybe half a month (emulating a Dominate spell), but that's about it.

Additionally, a summoned Efreeti won't use its Wish power anyway!

That's hardly a deterrent in this case, since the player in question seems unwilling to accept that fact. Besides, that's only a minor problem with the player's plan. Even if it doesn't work with the prayer bead, it probably would with a candle of invocation. And if you just use a wish every few days to wish for a few more days, you've gotten around the second obstacle. And if you don't get enough wishes per day, you start wishing a few more efreeti into your service.

Which isn't to say it should be allowed, because it's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. But the player needs to understand why this is a problem, not just that the combo in question doesn't work.

KoDT69
2007-02-22, 01:41 PM
Why would a summoned efreeti NOT use his wish ability? It does not burn XP for him.

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-22, 01:42 PM
A summoned creature (as opposed to a called creature) does not use any spell-like ability that would cost XP if it were a spell. Wish is such an ability.

KoDT69
2007-02-22, 01:46 PM
Then what's the RAW differance between summoned and called creatures? How does a lamp of genie summoning work then?

oriong
2007-02-22, 01:46 PM
Why would a summoned efreeti NOT use his wish ability? It does not burn XP for him.

Because the efreeti doesn't want to? The prayer bead says 'aid' not 'do whatever the character wants'

This is really the least relevant point.

The magic item doesn't do what he wants it to do. And more importantly: wish cannot do that. The capabilities of the wish spell are spelled out quite explicitly in the spell description. Permanent enslavement is not something it can do. At. All. You can't even Dominate the efreeti with a wish spell, let alone summon and permanently enslave it.


Then what's the RAW differance between summoned and called creatures? How does a lamp of genie summoning work then?

A summoned creature is one that is summoned by a conjuration (summoning) effect. A Called creature is one brought by a conjuration (calling) effect. And there is no lamp of genie summoning.

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-22, 01:51 PM
A summoned creature isn't really there, and can't escape until you dismiss it or if the spell ends. If a summoned creature is killed, it reforms on its home plane later.

A called creature is actually there, physically; it's completely left its home plane. A called creature isn't always under your control, and often needs some sort of bargaining to get it to work for you. Most spells that call creatures grant them a one-use ability to return home after you're done with them. If a called creature dies, it's actually dead.

ravenkith
2007-02-22, 01:58 PM
Oy vey.

People see my post, and think its about player vs. dm.

It's not.

It's about Action, Reaction.

Do you really think that an efreeti is going to sit still for this kind of abuse?

Hell no!

He's intelligent, he's got friends back where he came from (if not, then at least allies), they'll come to get him, or they'll come for revenge.

In the real world, people don't do stupid things because of the consequences of their actions: I'm not going to jump out a plane without a parachute, because, when I hit the ground, I'll die.

I'm not going to go buy a gun and start shooting everyone I'll see, because, even if I don't get shot, I'll still go to jail.

Well, that and I'm not predisposed to killing anyone right now :smallbiggrin:.

Literally thousands of exploits exist within the system: the only way for you to stop the abuse is for the player to figure out that shortcuts to power are invariably dangerous and often, quite fatal.

Bottom line is: It's the DM's world, the players are just living in it. Inside the game, the DM is, essentially, the same as Ao in the forgotten realms. If the DM decides it doesn't work, guess what? It doesn't work. Up to and including Gods.

Learn to say no and mean it, people, or you will get trampled by your players.

If a no isn't good enough, teach your players not to **** with the universe: the universe ****s back. Just remind them before they attampt anything questionable, that there are always consequences for people's actions. Give them an opportunity to change their mind, or else, be less abusive.

If they THEN choose to continue to abuse/cheat/whatever...anything (logical) goes.

Action...reaction, within the world of the game. It's really that simple.

Oh, and for the record: you need to hit this guy with the NO CUSTOM ITEMS! stick asap. Restrict him to stuff thats in the DMG, or he's going to spank you.

The player's acting like a horse's rear and you all know it...and so does he.

He's taking advantage of the situation, he's pushing to see what he can get, and since the DM has been extremely permissive up to this point, he figures he can get anything. I, for one, sincerely doubt that his understanding of the EL rules were as screwed up as he's making out.

jono
2007-02-22, 01:59 PM
The bunghole in question is still my best friend. I'm trying hard not to be mean or break up the game over it. The issue is that his logic says "hmm if an epic spell can summon 10 dragons why can't a wish give me a 50 year service from an efreeti?". I used everything here on a phone conversation about 12pm today. He got all mad saying that there were plenty of loopholes and epic characters can summon more than 1 efreeti if they tried and all this other crap. I just told him straight out he's trying to break the game and I don't want it going on. So now he's telling me to tell all of the rules lawyers here to kiss his butt because he's all mad he's being opposed. You know it wouldn't even be so bad if he were 30th level instead of 12th. A 30th level character is plenty able to do a lot of spectacular things, he's just in a hurry to be some legendary unstoppable force in the campaign.

Gawd. First off he's not an epic level character. he's a level 12. Epic levels work on a completely different formula to the regular ones, and the argument that "I'm over half way to epic'ness, therefore i should be able to do half as much as an epic level character can," doesn't hold. All that aside, he might by some loophole be able to grant himself unlimited wishes (though as we've seen, even by RAW his argument doesn't hold). By the same standard he could technically find and wield the mace of St. Cuthbert. Possible, but it throws the ECL and such into dissaray, and breaks the game.

This is one thing that gets to me about rules lawyers; they might know the rules as read, but they're completely blind to the spirit of them! The rules for the game exist so that a DM can build an interesting and vibrant (or not) adventure for his players. They are the scaffolding which holds up the entire world your characters exist in. At the end of the day, if you twink, all you're doing is weakening this structural support, and that just serves to weaken the game as a whole. When it gets down to it, no one outside of that game gives a flying futz what level you are, and if those gains are ill gotten, no one in the game cares either!

EvilElitest
2007-02-22, 02:32 PM
That makes the game a lot of fun for KODT's BEST FREIND.

Honestly, KODT I reread your post about him getting all mad and stuff, and I really think you two should not play on your next day to game and have fun doing something else. People are starting to get real life mad and that's uncool. After that, talk to him. If he absolutely has to have this, work WITH him and say, what is it you want , and how can I give it to you while keeping your power in line with the other characters.

But AGAIN, take a break with him and work through this anger before telling/saying/demanding/punishing/talking about/working with/ anything to do with his Character.

So. He is a being a rules lawyers who is not even a good one. He is obsessed with a selfish need to be epic and is willing to ruin the other players and the DM's game to acheive that. You do say taht it is ok to have fun, but only for him. IT is fine not to follow the rules of a game, but only when everyone wants to. If the game we are currently talking about is based after RAW (as is surspect) then everyone started playing under the pretence that is what they would be playing. If you don't want to play RAW and all your players agree, then don't play a RAW game, but if you start to play a RAW game, and one player starts to play selfishly and defey the DM, then he is helping others have fun, he is CHEATING. The rules lawyer idea he claimed is a cheat, and the DM is allowed to say
No
Because that would ruin the game.
Just say that it does not make anysence acording to the rules and you will not allow it because it would ruin the game. And it is cheating. Giving anyone unlimitied wishes, is chreating.
As for rollfrenzies idea of going along with his wishes and breaking the rules
1. You will have to spend more and more time trying to find the loophole in his wishes.
2. If you give in to him, he will get the impression that he can win with those loopholes and only try more, and he will find the loopholes in RAW and use them
3. It is unfair to the other players. I imagine that most of them wanted to play the game according to the rules, and simple having one of them have unlimited wishes ruins that. I mean come on, he can boss them around. If everyone in your group wants to play an epic game then find, but as it is
a game where everyone is about 12 level and it needs to be followed as such.
From,
EE

Matthew
2007-02-22, 02:59 PM
I think you need to have a conversation with this player as to whether you are going to play by the RAW or not. Currently, his proposition is illegal and potentially game breaking. Ask him whether he would allow you to do it in his campaign.

Dausuul
2007-02-22, 03:10 PM
I think you need to have a conersation with this player as to whether you are going to play by the RAW or not. Currently, his proposition is illegal and potentially game breaking. Ask him whether he would allow you to do it in his campaign.

Whoa, there. Claiming that you're going to play strictly by RAW is the last thing you want to do here. Because there are plenty of exploits that are 100% legal under RAW, but are also 100% game-breaking, and this player is obviously going to set out to find them all.

If you explain how this one exploit is illegal, you've solved this problem, but you've also set the precedent that such issues will be decided on their legality rather than whether they will ruin the game. That will come around to bite you if the player comes up with a legal exploit. If you invoke Rule 0 on the basis of this being game-ruining cheese, then the problem is solved much more simply and a precedent is set for solving all future cheesiness the same way.

KoDT69
2007-02-22, 03:12 PM
The issue with that is that ever since he got the Epic Level handbook, all of his campaigns are solely run to become Epic, and he does allow bucket upon bucket of cheese. When I was a player at his table last, it was 5 years ago in 2nd edition which was nowhere near as bad as epic 3E. :smallconfused:

oriong
2007-02-22, 03:13 PM
That's not an issue.

Those are his games, not yours.

KoDT69
2007-02-22, 03:14 PM
But his DM style is why he's pulling this crap in my game, he's done nothing but DM epic games for the 5 years that book's been in print (or however long).

Runolfr
2007-02-22, 03:16 PM
What I want is a commity "tearing apart" of this concept and support from my fellow gamers and DM's so I can refer my disappointed player to this post and let him see he's just plain outnumbered by the gaming community. If you find ANY loopholes feel free to post it up. He will be as cheesey as he can, so let's see what this brings up. Thanks gamers!

You seem to have hit most of the problems with your munchkin's plan.

1) The bead will summon something of chaotic neutral alignment, like a Slaad. The Efreet is not a candidate.

2) What he proposes would almost certainly regarded as "frivolous use" by his deity.

3) The effect has far more in common with a "Call Planar Ally" spell than a summoning spell; the Outsider comes to assist the character, not to obey the character. It has no obligation to do what the character says if it thinks it can put its abilities to better use.

But by all means, let him invoke the bead, then apply consequences appropriately.

oriong
2007-02-22, 03:17 PM
Yes, but that's not an excuse for him to do it, nor a reason why you should accept it. You are running the game, at the level you want, not how he wants it. If he simply cannot play without hordes of efreeti servants then he should not be playing in this game.

Matthew
2007-02-22, 03:20 PM
Heh, I didn't mean to imply he only play by the RAW, rather the conversation should be about what degree he is going to deviate from the RAW.

Anyway, I think, given what you are saying about his play style, that this is a play style issue. He wants to play game X and you want to play game Y. You are running the game, not him, and you are running it for more players than just him. Don't let him force his play style on you if you don't want to play that way; the more you give him, the more he'll take anyway.

Runolfr
2007-02-22, 03:33 PM
Did this guy have no understanding of the sort of campaign you meant to run when you started? Some people (beginning munchkins, I suppose) might enjoy a Monty Haul campaign for a while, and that's fine, but if you had already established that you weren't running that sort of game, he shouldn't be trying to force you to play differently.

If this is not the sort of person to whom you can explain this problem, then I seriously doubt he will be able to enjoy the game, and you should probably ask him to consider bowing out.

Gamebird
2007-02-22, 04:07 PM
But his DM style is why he's pulling this crap in my game, he's done nothing but DM epic games for the 5 years that book's been in print (or however long).

Seriously now, would he allow this sort of thing to work in his game? If you can do it once, after all, there's no reason why you can't do it again and again, having not one Wish a day but 10,000. I suppose he could equip every bad guy with a custom epic spell or item that grants Spell Immunity to Wish and spell-like Wish abilities.

Even if does allow a lot of cheese, what's the point of his games? I've only seen two types of Epic games:
1. Where the players make overpowered nonsense, the DM makes up other overpowered nonsense, and then they fight each other in poorly scripted battles for supremacy with the plot line of a video game. Lots of Gotchas! as one person "out-cools" another by thinking of something the other didn't think of, because it was simply too absurd.
2. Where the PCs have great influence over institutions, like kingdoms or religions and the DM crafts elaborate plots of move and counter-move with various other epic-level NPCs. It's essentially a game of Thrones or the Courts of Amber, with very few combats between the epic level characters themselves.

I would guess his campaigns fall into category 1.

In neither case should his gaming style dictate yours. That's as silly as playing chess and insisting that you be able to move your guys about using the rules for the computer game of Civilization.

Wikkin
2007-02-22, 04:12 PM
3 pages!? How hard is it to just say no!?

Black Hand
2007-02-22, 04:16 PM
:smallamused: OOH! Let him do that!!!

If you have him getting wishes from an Efreet...let alone many, the poor guy's screwed!!

Wishes from an Efreet are corrupt in some sort of manner, and as a DM you can have fun with that... You could also take this along the line for wishing for more wishes...the result is the same.

Either way a granted wish from an Efreet should essentially make the poor character consider spending the other two wishes trying to cancel out the first wish. Think of the quagmire the poor fellow can get into with 10000 now?? And in the end if he wants to undo anything *Poof* he's 15 years old again and level 1....well if you felt the need to do so.

Darion
2007-02-22, 05:58 PM
The answer (as said by several other posters) is simple. When he uses "uber-game-breaking trick #14" you pause, count to three, turn to him and say:

"Congratulations, you've 'won' this campaign. All my plots fall before your collossal power and all the villians in the world quake before your awesomeness. Meanwhile, in the alternate reality of the new campaign I'm now starting, where everything is exactly the same except your character died in his sleep last night (turn to the other players), what are you all doing? Oh, and Bob, feel free to make a new character to replace your cleric, and we'll talk about how to work him into the game on our first break."

Proceed to run the game for the players who aren't trying to break it.

If neccessary, repeat the above when New Character tries UGBT#15.

Jack_Simth
2007-02-22, 05:59 PM
Suggestion:

"Well, let's see....

First off, it doesn't work RAW because of XYZ (you've seen enough of how it doesn't work to fill that in).

Even if it did, it doesn't work at my table because it's fundamentally unbalanced.

Ignoring balance, you're trying to enslave a member of a race famous for cunning, cruelty, and hatred of servitude. And they're Lawful, so they work together well, make and follow through with mutual protection agreements, and so forth. And they have high Intimidate and Bluff scores to use on the weak-willed Fire Memphits native to their plane to get whatever they want to happen by granting Wishes to them when they are essentially told exactly what it is they need to Wish for (by the Efreeti). Seriously, in no way would your character survive the in-game consequences of such abuse.

Ignoring that, the campaign world has an actual history to it. There have been npc's with higher Int and Wis scores than your character has. Which means that if by some bizzare circumstance, it did work, do you really want your NPC opponents pulling these kinds of tricks?

I mean, really, it's a nice thought expiriment and all. But really, any one of those is enough for me to say 'no, not at my table'.

So don't try such things at my table, okay?"

Tekren
2007-02-22, 08:57 PM
Simple advice for a DM whose player ruins any attempt to create a fun and engaging game.

Take your ball and go home.

Tell him he is no longer welcome. Kill his character if you have to. Explain EXACTLY why you are doing this. It's not about player vs. DM. It's about a challenging, engaging game being destroyed by arguments over loopholes in the rules of said game.

Bring up every rule he probably knew about but 'forgot' to mention to you, the new DM. Every thing that has made you post on this board. And ask him what he would do in his game to maintain balance, challenge and fun. To wit:

"+5 thundering flaming longsword being made at lvl 6"
"3 CR 8 creatures is the same as a CR 24"
"Level 12 chars are half as powerful as level 24 characters"
"Infinite wish loop"

The player gets to go home, where he can munchkin all he wants.

Arbitrarity
2007-02-22, 09:46 PM
I occasionally tell my Dm about such things, and we have a laugh over them.

Luckily for me, I don't follow through :).

But this is inane. If he uses such abuse (I did a thought experiment in such a manner with another player), then your options are manyfold.

It doesn't work. By RAW.

Smited by t3h Gods!

Punted. Out.

You win. Now what?

EEvil twisting of wishes...

Laesin
2007-02-22, 11:17 PM
Heh Heh. This reminds me of a game i recently played in. We had a Lyre of building and two characters with high performance so we couldn't fail our DC's. Couple this with a researched spell that allowed us to stay awake for several days, the other party being willing to cast a DR giving spell each day (To avoid bleeding fingers) and a druid who could landscape, and we took 5 years downtime in the construction industry. End of the day we each had 5 million gold each (calculated based on man hours of work done with a slight boost for speed and the typical artisan pay) I spent all of it and still had things I wanted to buy the other two players ran out of things to spend it on. Worst thing; it was the DM's idea in the first place although I must admit I did 'improve' the concept.

P.S. Funnily enough the campaign ended after our next encounter where we took down a great wyrm gold dragon in three rounds. We also utterly drained the country's economy.

Draz74
2007-02-22, 11:36 PM
Geez, people. "Punish him! Make him suffer!"

Have you considered, you know, TALKING to the player?


People were giving answers while operating under the assumption that the DM had already tried this, and it hadn't worked.

Good assumption? I don't know. The OP didn't really tell us whether he had already tried this. If he hasn't, he definitely should, before trying any of the other tactics mentioned in this thread.

... This sort of thing happens a LOT on forums ...

Miles Invictus
2007-02-23, 12:14 AM
KoDT69:
Normally, I'd tell you to burn his character sheet, kick him in the balls, and call his mother a filthy name...but you said you're friends with this guy. So, how about this instead?

"Rules as written, your plan doesn't actually work. Even if it did work, I think it's game-breaking, so I wouldn't allow it anyway. And I'm not going to allow anything else I think is game-breaking, either."

You don't need a team of rules-lawyers backing you up, or three pages of people doing nothing but agreeing with you. You need to stand your ground, and let this player know that you are not going to be forced into allowing something you don't want into the game.

BCOVertigo
2007-02-23, 12:38 AM
KoDT69:
Normally, I'd tell you to burn his character sheet, kick him in the balls, and call his mother a filthy name...but you said you're friends with this guy. So, how about this instead?

"Rules as written, your plan doesn't actually work. Even if it did work, I think it's game-breaking, so I wouldn't allow it anyway. And I'm not going to allow anything else I think is game-breaking, either."

You don't need a team of rules-lawyers backing you up, or three pages of people doing nothing but agreeing with you. You need to stand your ground, and let this player know that you are not going to be forced into allowing something you don't want into the game.

Well said, along with the previous posts it echoes.

I think this is the best advice, after all if he is your friend then it shouldn't matter. My friends and I have fun no matter if we play high powered campaigns or level one because it's a social game and we enjoy hanging out together.

KoDT69
2007-02-23, 08:32 AM
Well as far as not needing 3 pages of Rule Lawyers agreement, no it was not needed, it was just nice to have. I used this post and it's content to show him that legitimately his plan is flawed and I'm not the only one who thinks that. It helps when a situation may become personal conflict if there are outside unbiased opinions as backup.
Now the whole ordeal is over, and here is how it ended. I went over to my friend's house yesterday after work and had a little chat with him, his father, and 2 of the other players that happened to be there hanging out. I slapped down the forum posts I printed out and here is the transcript of the conversation:
ME - Dude your plan has been disproved by a legion of fellow gamers, quite literally all day while I was at work. (Yes I do most of my forum posts froom work when I have downtime)
HIM - No that's crap, I don't care what a bunch of 13 year old kids say about OUR campaign, it has to be possible. Genies are ALWAYS getting bound into slavery to be little wishmongers for mortals.
ME - NOT by 12th level characters, especially ones with a whopping 8th level casting ability. And yes in the vast multitude of your delusions of epic grandeur, you overlooked some basic rules about summoned creatures, your prayer bead of summons, and the limitations of a wish.
*** Insert long heated debate about the summoned vs. called creature rules, ending in my favor with the DMG 2 inches from his nose with the page bookmarked, and a few game balance issues as a coup de grace ***
HIM - Well you still can't give me that crap about liimitations of a wish, in 2nd edition a properly worded wish was a campaign changing event in most cases.
ME - Yah dude, 2nd edition, as in the one we're NOT playing, in which a casting of the wish spell took 5 YEARS to prepare. The 3rd edition wish is less powerful for the simple fact of balance. A 17th level sorcerer will waste them frivilously. If you want to do that legit, fine. Earn your level and do it right, but I'm not having some cheap crap about capturing a creature that can outsmart your character, if anything just from sheer cunning and 10,000 years of experience avoiding mortals like you.
HIM - So ASIDE from your campaign it IS possible?
ME - If Titania can turn her bag of holding inside out, wrap it around herself, and walk through the dungeon walls, then yes. In some reality it is possible to abuse that cheese by the RAW, as long as I'm not the DM. Rule 0 will be invoked on your a$$.
HIM - Fine, but I was still right in some manner, even if I can't do it exactly to my plan. And it's not cheese, it's using game mechanics to get what you want.
ME - Yah ok, we both know there are loopholes in every game. It IS cheese because using the rules in a way not intended by the creators to artificially get ahead of the game is cheese. So now we're going to roll-back last adventure's wild abuse of my crafting leniency, and go back to the guidelines I gave before. I'll still let you keep the XP but the CR 24 loot is getting re-rolled.
HIM - Yah I guess the others can't be too attached to items they never used, so that should be fine.
ME - Good, if you disagreed, Pun-Pun was going to come for you.
HIM - What is Pun-Pun? *DOH*
ME - Your REAL father, bunghole.
HIM - OK I'm hungry, wanna get some pizza?
ME - Hells yah!

So in the end, the community support I asked for made this a non-personal, non-conflict. We're back to normal for this week's game and I'll even leave out the rust monsters... for now! Bwahahaha! :smallbiggrin:

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-23, 08:38 AM
Wait, he doesn't know who Pun-Pun is?

Nerd-o-rama
2007-02-23, 08:53 AM
Wait, he didn't think he was cheating?

I only read the first page of this thread, and the last two posts, if that clarifies my question. I passed over most of the rest of the stuff echoing all the three hundred things wrong about the idea.

ravenkith
2007-02-23, 09:05 AM
Yeah normal.

Where he is repeatedly scribbling and erasing on his character sheet so he can cheat some more. :smallannoyed:

Jayabalard
2007-02-23, 09:06 AM
Let him try to use the item; have it summon a CN outsider of some type instead of an Efreeti; it doesn't really matter what type, as long as it's diety and alignment appropriate. Have that outsider introduce himself as "Efreeti" (as his actual name, not type of creature) and be pretty much useless. When he objects, point out how by the RAW his scheme wouldn't have worked.

Later pull them aside privately and explain why the sort of cheese that he's trying to pull off is bad for the game, and ask him to stop; warn him that even if he does find one of the cheese methods that work according to the RAW, you're going to disallow it.

NEO|Phyte
2007-02-23, 09:18 AM
HIM - No that's crap, I don't care what a bunch of 13 year old kids say about OUR campaign, it has to be possible. Genies are ALWAYS getting bound into slavery to be little wishmongers for mortals.
Hahah, oh wow, this guy is deluded. The RAW which states how and why his scheme won't work doesn't matter? Infinite Wish combos have to be possible? I'd love to play a game he DMs, I've got this idea for a kobold Egoist 12...

Incidently, how old is he?

rollfrenzy
2007-02-23, 09:33 AM
KODT, Glad all worked out for ya.

KoDT69
2007-02-23, 09:44 AM
He's 25 years old, and convinced that if it's legal by the RAW, it's not cheesey. He is also convinced that there is a loophole for everything by the RAW, and everything is possible. And he was not so jaded before 3E we had lots of great campaigns. The damage/stat/level caps were removed with 3rd edition and I believe this removed the cap from his logic as well. No you really don't want to play one of his 3E campaigns. The other players in my group run another campaign in which he DM's. After 3 weeks they were all 55th level or higher, magically had stats in the hundreds, and were hunting gods. That is not fun, legit, or sensible. 3 weeks does not equal 55th level by any stretch of the imagination. I found out too, that after reaching 55th level, the half vampire paladin stated he was going to take over hell in an attempt to reach level 500. It was just handed to him with the comment "Well since nothing in the book can oppose you, make yourself level 500 so we can save some game time". I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this sick mockery of the game I love :smalleek:

Douglas
2007-02-23, 10:12 AM
Ok, here's what you do: join his game, make Pun-Pun, and proceed to conquer the multiverse in 5 minutes (or less, depending on how much explanation of how it works you need to give). Then ask him what's next.

Alternatively, if you don't want to reveal Pun-Pun to him (might be too late given your transcript), have that level 500 guy do it. Since "nothing in the book" can oppose him, he'll be overdeity in as little time as it takes to say it and in a perfect position to bring up "what's next?" to demonstrate the non-fun of such ridiculous abuse.

BCOVertigo
2007-02-23, 10:27 AM
He's 25 years old, and convinced that if it's legal by the RAW, it's not cheesey. He is also convinced that there is a loophole for everything by the RAW, and everything is possible. And he was not so jaded before 3E we had lots of great campaigns. The damage/stat/level caps were removed with 3rd edition and I believe this removed the cap from his logic as well. No you really don't want to play one of his 3E campaigns. The other players in my group run another campaign in which he DM's. After 3 weeks they were all 55th level or higher, magically had stats in the hundreds, and were hunting gods. That is not fun, legit, or sensible. 3 weeks does not equal 55th level by any stretch of the imagination. I found out too, that after reaching 55th level, the half vampire paladin stated he was going to take over hell in an attempt to reach level 500. It was just handed to him with the comment "Well since nothing in the book can oppose you, make yourself level 500 so we can save some game time". I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this sick mockery of the game I love :smalleek:

So....he's not even capable of making up a legal infinite combo, actually UNDERSTANDING RAW, or playing a normal power level game? And on top of this he played a half-vampire? As a paladin?? Does he not understand that A. a level 55 paladin would not be more than a hiccup for an equal level epic spellcaster? B. If nothing can oppose him HE ISN'T OVERCOMING A CHALLENGE AND GETS NO XP. His lame attempt at godhood fails, and more importantly he isn't even going by the spirit of the game. This is reminiscent of an anime I was shown called Bastard, in which the main character throws so many fire spells at a fire elemental it magically dies. Even though everyone in the room was yelling "FIRE DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY" at the TV.


No that's crap, I don't care what a bunch of 13 year old kids say about OUR campaign, it has to be possible. Genies are ALWAYS getting bound into slavery to be little wishmongers for mortals.

HAHAHAHAHAHAOGODMYBRAINHURTS :smallbiggrin:

Seriously go watch the movie Wishmaster and be silent. Also, tell him to look up what RTFM means. Whew....:smalltongue:

KoDT69
2007-02-23, 10:55 AM
So....he's not even capable of making up a legal infinite combo, actually UNDERSTANDING RAW, or playing a normal power level game? And on top of this he played a half-vampire? As a paladin?? Does he not understand that A. a level 55 paladin would not be more than a hiccup for an equal level epic spellcaster? B. If nothing can oppose him HE ISN'T OVERCOMING A CHALLENGE AND GETS NO XP. His lame attempt at godhood fails, and more importantly he isn't even going by the spirit of the game. This is reminiscent of an anime I was shown called Bastard, in which the main character throws so many fire spells at a fire elemental it magically dies. Even though everyone in the room was yelling "FIRE DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY" at the TV.

Yah and oddly enough the player with said Paladin character, barely can stand the game. The DM gives them no other option than to play massively epic/retarded campaigns. I'm the only other DM they know, in which case I am the one trying to make my $30 books worth the investment again. After our chat he agreed to not try to bullcrap up my campaign because incidentally all of the players are really getting into the setting, and actually creating their own goals as opposed to being told what to play and what level god they will be in 3 weeks. :smallconfused:

Gamebird
2007-02-23, 11:21 AM
Also, tell him to look up what RTFM means. Whew....:smalltongue:

Um... :smallredface: ... what's RTFM mean? Rolling on The Floor... More?

NEO|Phyte
2007-02-23, 11:26 AM
Um... :smallredface: ... what's RTFM mean? Rolling on The Floor... More?
Read the [censored] manual

ravenkith
2007-02-23, 11:27 AM
I would like to play in a high level game at some point.

Of course, by high level, I mean 15th level plus.

I played 1 elf archer to level 17 before the campaign ended.

I played 1 mystic theurge to 17 before the campaign ended.

Why? Because my fellow players get tired of winning with ease.

If it isn't a challenge, it isn't fun.

500 levels of paladin? :smallyuk:

For gods sake, why?

Although, that'd probably be just about equal to 50 levels of anything else, now that I think about it.

Oh, and vampires are automatically lawful evil...wouldn't he fall?

There are so many things wrong with your friend's games, it's just not funny.

Gamebird
2007-02-23, 11:33 AM
If someone handed me an extra 445 levels, I wouldn't take it in paladin. After 220 levels to be level 21 in all other base classes, and thus Epic, I figure I'd do a Pun-Pun and grab some divine ranks and infinite powers. Then I think I'd start working on my pantheon of undergods and grant them the extra 200 or so levels. After that, I'd start my own game pitting the followers of the gods under me against each other for amusement, while I watched (ie, I'd become the DM!)

KoDT69
2007-02-23, 11:33 AM
It's not funny, but it is. Every time we gather for my campaign or just hang out they are all compelled to fill me in on the campaign I opted out of playing... like I'm missing out on something special. I mean seriously, he gives Divine Ranks for heroic (in his opinion) feats of epic proportions. That translates into - the player had an original (to them) idea that the DM hadn't seen coming, so they get a Divine Rank in return... ???!!!???!!! WTF!

ravenkith
2007-02-23, 12:14 PM
Dude. Just be glad you missed it, I guess.

I mean, if I set up to powergame, we powergame, but, y'know, we don't turn it into a freeform "i can do this because I want to" type thing.

That's not d&D - it's just wish fulfillment.

Black Hand
2007-02-23, 01:07 PM
Him....13 year old kids say about OUR campaign...


:smallbiggrin: Say, last time I checked, I was 32 and have been DM'ing since '92. I'm not needing to dredge up 2E ways to deal with this for a 3E problem...you should still be able to "twist" the wish efreet-style, but personally if you're going to try leave the wish as it's worded for 3E for game balance then let him get his unlimited wishes...essentially it would give him godlike powers, and unfortunately the gods probably wouldn't like a new guy on their Turf...They are more powerful than a wish, and it's not needing to take up much game time, since the Gods & time are interchangeable any retribution could take place before he could even blink after finalizing the wish, so what happens if the gods make him lose his voice?

KoDT69
2007-02-23, 01:56 PM
Interesting concept dude. And for that matter the efreeti could just cast a persistant spell silence 15' radius each day on himself so he doesn't have to hear greedy mortal crap. :smallyuk:

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-02-23, 05:12 PM
No that's crap, I don't care what a bunch of 13 year old kids say about OUR campaign, it has to be possible.

He's 25 years old...
:confused:

That... does not compute in any fashion whatsoever.

And since when does someone jump to the conclusion the people saying, "No," are thirteen? I thought the thirteen year olds were supposed to be the whiny little munchkins.

crazedloon
2007-02-23, 05:21 PM
Im sorry if this is bit off topic but couldnt you just wish for a ring of three wishes indefinatly each time netting 2 wishes?

Douglas
2007-02-23, 05:28 PM
By RAW you could get a ring of three wishes from an Efreeti's Wish because the XP cost is negated by it being a spell-like ability. Just like wishing for a ring of infinite wishes, however, this is clearly broken and should be forbidden by the DM. Using the ring's wishes to get more rings wouldn't work even by RAW, though, because Wishing for that item has an XP cost of 36836 and each Wish only has 5000 XP available.

Gamebird
2007-02-23, 05:29 PM
Im sorry if this is bit off topic but couldnt you just wish for a ring of three wishes indefinatly each time netting 2 wishes?

No, because a Wish spell will grant you an item with a maximum value of 25,000 gp. Read the spell.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-23, 05:30 PM
No, because a Wish spell will grant you an item with a maximum value of 25,000 gp. Read the spell.

That's nonmagical item. There is no cap on magic item value.

ravenkith
2007-02-23, 05:33 PM
Wish specifically prohibits wishing for more wishes, per the spell.

It can't reproduce the effects of 9th level spells.

Unless you open yourself to the dm shafting you, which any dm is going to do, rather than hand you godhood.

Gamebird
2007-02-23, 05:41 PM
Yeah, going beyond the stated limits for the Wish spell is stupid, unless you're doing it to save the campaign or otherwise allow the DM an opportunity to deux ex machina and help everyone out. Exceeding the recommended wish limits as a combat manuever or to enrich yourself is dumb.

crazedloon
2007-02-23, 05:42 PM
That's nonmagical item. There is no cap on magic item value.

as he says you pay the xp once and then get to wish for anything you want becuase the ring is payed for. and thus the next ring will not incure a penalty becuase you have already payed for it in the first ring and so on and so on.


Wish specifically prohibits wishing for more wishes, per the spell.

It can't reproduce the effects of 9th level spells.

Unless you open yourself to the dm shafting you, which any dm is going to do, rather than hand you godhood.

Well you arent recreating a spell you are getting a magic item which is in its limited powers so as far as RAW i believe you can do it.

Now no DM will let you but you could do it this way unless there is a loop hole I do not see.

ravenkith
2007-02-23, 05:53 PM
Fact 1. Wish can only duplicate the effects of any spell level 1-8 without provoking DM wrath.

Fact 2. A ring of three wishes duplicates the function of a ninth level spell (up to 3 times)

Fact 3. Duplicating the function of a ninth level spell is essentially the same thing as casting the spell.

Fact 4. Creating a ring of three wishes with a wish invites the dm to rape you and eat your soul.

At least, that's the way I see it. :smallbiggrin:

Alternatively, simply create a spent ring of three wishes.

Douglas
2007-02-23, 06:03 PM
It is correct that Wish cannot duplicate itself even once, much less multiple times. Wish can, however, create a magic item that grants Wishes provided you pay the XP cost, which will be very much higher than just casting the Wishes you actually want. This only gets broken when you bring in some other rule that removes the XP cost, such as creatures with Wish as a spell-like ability. Without that, you can either Wish for a Ring of Three Wishes and pay 36836 XP or just Wish three times and pay 15000 XP. If a player in one of my campaigns wanted to do such a thing, I would have no problem at all with allowing him to spend over twenty thousand XP just to get two additional single-use 9th level spell slots.

Zeb The Troll
2007-02-23, 06:07 PM
Without that, you can either Wish for a Ring of Three Wishes and pay 36836 XP or just Wish three times and pay 15000 XP. If a player in one of my campaigns wanted to do such a thing, I would have no problem at all with allowing him to spend over twenty thousand XP just to get two additional single-use 9th level spell slots.Don't forget that wishing for an item with an XP cost to create it incurs an additional 5000 xp penalty (on top of the doubling). So to wish for the ring would actually cost over 41K xp.

Douglas
2007-02-23, 06:08 PM
The figure I stated included that 5000. A Ring of Three Wishes takes 15918 XP to craft, so 15918*2 + 5000 = 36836 is the cost to Wish for one.

crazedloon
2007-02-23, 06:57 PM
understandably gettting the ring is a little rediculous however once you have 1 ring you can wish for another without an xp cost. At least as far as my understanding goes becuase magic items with spell ability that normaly have a xp cost do not need that to be payed becuase the xp is considered payed for when you make the wish. Now with 1 ring you can make 2 wishes and 1 more for another ring and continue. So you have an endless number of wishes.

Douglas
2007-02-23, 07:16 PM
Take a look at the footnotes at the very bottom of the table of scrolls (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/scrolls.htm). In particular, the one for a scroll of Wish states "Assumes no material component cost in excess of 10,000 gp and no XP cost in excess of 5,000 XP", those being the limits of a minimum-cost Wish.

Any and all XP and material component costs of a spell cast by a magic item must be paid during the crafting of that item. For a Wish from a Ring of Three Wishes to be able to create a standard Ring of Three Wishes, that additional 31836 XP cost of such a Wish would have to be added to the normal crafting cost of the item. A Ring of Three Wishes with enough XP to have just one of its three Wishes create a standard RoTW would cost 47754 XP to craft. Wishing for it would therefore take 100508 XP. So, for the cost of a mere 100508 XP, you could get a Ring of Three Wishes that could grant two normal Wishes and create a normal Ring of Three Wishes with the third. Congratulations, you just spent 75508 XP just to save yourself four spell slots.

Edit: For a more general source, see the table Summary of Magic Item Creation Costs near the top of creating magic items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm).

Edit2: Or read the 6th paragraph on that page, which says "In addition, some items cast or replicate spells with costly material components or with XP components. For these items, the market price equals the base price plus an extra price for the spell component costs. Each XP in the component costs adds 5 gp to the market price. The cost to create these items is the magic supplies cost and the base XP cost (both determined by the base price) plus the costs for the components."

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-02-23, 07:20 PM
understandably gettting the ring is a little rediculous however once you have 1 ring you can wish for another without an xp cost. At least as far as my understanding goes becuase magic items with spell ability that normaly have a xp cost do not need that to be payed becuase the xp is considered payed for when you make the wish.
That is true to a certain extent.

There's a footnote to the scroll of wish in the table of arcane scrolls (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/magicItemsSSW.html#table-arcane-spell-scrolls) in the SRD. Referring to the scroll's price, it says, "Assumes no material component cost in excess of 10,000 gp and no XP cost in excess of 5,000 XP." Similar footnotes accompany scrolls of permanency, limited wish, simulacrum, and other similar spells. This implies that an item containing a spell with a variable XP cost must have any additional XP included in the item upon its creation.

So if a ring of three wishes just contains a standard wish with no additional XP price beyond the 5,000 that accompanies every wish, we can assume that the ring cannot be used to wish for any magic items whatsoever. There is not enough XP in the item to cover the cost.

You would have to apply an additional 31,836 xp into at least one of the wishes to be allowed to wish for another ring of three wishes. (And this second ring would be unable to generate a new one, because I took that from the base ring of three wishes price. I'm too pressed for time to figure out the price of the infinite loop variety right now. (EDIT: Okay, got back. Should it just effectively be quadruple the normal ring of three wishes xp cost? So it would be 63,672 xp?))

In short, if crafted through the normal means, a caster must be such a high level that he can afford to cast wish as often as he likes to begin with before he can create self-replicating rings of three wishes.

Of course, the efreeti doesn't have to worry about the XP cost, so we're back where we started anyway.

Dausuul
2007-02-23, 07:21 PM
understandably gettting the ring is a little rediculous however once you have 1 ring you can wish for another without an xp cost. At least as far as my understanding goes becuase magic items with spell ability that normaly have a xp cost do not need that to be payed becuase the xp is considered payed for when you make the wish. Now with 1 ring you can make 2 wishes and 1 more for another ring and continue. So you have an endless number of wishes.

Yup, this is how it works by RAW. The cost to create the ring includes the amount of XP for three "standard" castings of wish; consequently, you don't have to pay the XP cost when you activate the ring--even if the effect you choose to produce would cost more than the "standard" cost.

Of course, this relies on an extremely narrow reading of the RAW. It would be entirely logical and reasonable to apply the scroll footnote mentioned by the previous poster to items such as a ring of three wishes, or require the user to provide any XP or material components in excess of those used in the item's creation. But the rules don't specifically say that footnote applies to non-scroll items...

Douglas
2007-02-23, 07:26 PM
If you only pay the XP for a "standard" Wish when you create the ring, then only "standard" Wishes can be made with it. A non-standard Wish has a higher XP cost which, as per the paragraph quoted in my post above, is added to the crafting cost.