Calling all Wish lawyers!

[CryptbornAkryea]

I need help putting together the appropriate legalese for a couple Wishes.

1: a belt with Sadism enchanted in it

2: a greathammer made of adamantine

3: an extra feat

The DM is the type to twist wishes if they are too big.

Thanks, giants!

[bjoern]

I need help putting together the appropriate legalese for a couple Wishes.

1: a belt with Sadism enchanted in it

2: a greathammer made of adamantine

3: an extra feat

The DM is the type to twist wishes if they are too big.

Thanks, giants!



Cast it into the fire!!!!
Destroy it!!


But seriously. Its impossible to make an ironclad foolproof wish. If the DM is making you take the wish have an agreement with him OOC that he won't screw you or you'll quit.
If you are the one seeking out the wish, then good luck.

Our group gave up long ago on wishes.

[Extra Anchovies]

3. Feats are an out-of-game abstraction of in-game abilities; thus, nobody in-game knows of feats as such. They might know that so-and-so is good at fighting with two weapons, but they don't know that the Two-Weapon Fighting feat is, let alone that so-and-so has it. I don't think there's any way for you to guarantee that you'll get a free feat from a wish while still keeping the wording of the wish understandable in-game (e.g. asking for the ability to take 10 on all skill checks is not understandable in-game, because the characters have no concept of "skill checks" or "taking 10"). You might be granted an ability similar to the feat you want, but the mechanical effects of whatever you ask for would be completely up to DM interpretation.

2. "A greathammer, constructed from adamantine but otherwise mundane and of proper size to be used in the normal fashion by the average [race of intended greathammer user]." Simple as that. It's an item costing less than 25,000 gp, so it explicitly falls under the list of things that a wish can provide, and if the DM twists long wishes, they'll appreciate the brevity of this one. If you want, add some sort of clarification that it is to appear on the ground in front of you in perfect condition and unmoving at the time of its creation.

1. Although the characters may not know of the sadism spell by that name, they will almost certainly know it by some name or another. Thus, "a belt which allows its wearer to, at any time they so choose, cast the spell which I know of as [name which you use for the sadism spell] as if they had cast it themselves" should work, maybe with the above on-the-ground-and-unmoving criteria.

ETA: The wish for the free feat is a really iffy one. The wishes for items are a lot more sensible both in- and out-of-game, so you shouldn't be too screwed over by those. Talk to the DM out-of-character about the free feat, and then you can agree on a feat that you want to have and that he will let you have.

[Gemini476]

1. and 2. are within the allowed "safe" wishes, but that's only relevant if your DM is actually playing the spell RAW.

If you want a feat then the only way to guarantee it is for it to be something that the DM wants you to have. You'd also need some serious wording toi make it both in-character and applicable only to the feat in question.

What kind of feat are you thinking of? And also, why on Earth are you wasting a 25,000gp Wish on an adamantine greathammer?

[bjoern]

3. Feats are an out-of-game abstraction of in-game abilities; thus, nobody in-game knows of feats as such. They might know that so-and-so is good at fighting with two weapons, but they don't know that the Two-Weapon Fighting feat is, let alone that so-and-so has it. I don't think there's any way for you to guarantee that you'll get a free feat from a wish while still keeping the wording of the wish understandable in-game (e.g. asking for the ability to take 10 on all skill checks is not understandable in-game, because the characters have no concept of "skill checks" or "taking 10"). You might be granted an ability similar to the feat you want, but the mechanical effects of whatever you ask for would be completely up to DM interpretation.

2. "A greathammer, constructed from adamantine but otherwise mundane and of proper size to be used in the normal fashion by the average [race of intended greathammer user]." Simple as that. It's an item costing less than 25,000 gp, so it explicitly falls under the list of things that a wish can provide, and if the DM twists long wishes, they'll appreciate the brevity of this one. If you want, add some sort of clarification that it is to appear on the ground in front of you in perfect condition and unmoving at the time of its creation.

1. Although the characters may not know of the sadism spell by that name, they will almost certainly know it by some name or another. Thus, "a belt which allows its wearer to, at any time they so choose, cast the spell which I know of as [name which you use for the sadism spell] as if they had cast it themselves" should work, maybe with the above on-the-ground-and-unmoving criteria.

ETA: The wish for the free feat is a really iffy one. The wishes for items are a lot more sensible both in- and out-of-game, so you shouldn't be too screwed over by those.

2. Attached to a Balor
1. Attached to a balor

You're playing with fire here. I know several DMs that get off on this stuff.


If your DM wants you to have it then it won't matter how you word it, you'll get it.


If he doesn't want you to have it then it won't matter how you word it, you won't get it

[jedipotter]

I need help putting together the appropriate legalese for a couple Wishes.

1: a belt with Sadism enchanted in it

2: a greathammer made of adamantine

3: an extra feat

The DM is the type to twist wishes if they are too big.

Thanks, giants!


1.A belt with the glowing word 'sadism'. You can have lots of lawyer fun here: magic items are not 'enchanted'(that is a hold over from 2E when you needed to cast the spell enchant an item to make a magic item) So what does 'enchanted' mean in 3E....muhhahaha

2. No problem here. It's a cheap item for a wish. You could make it a small or huge one, of course. Or a damaged one. Or a heave one.

3.The character grows a third foot out of one of their legs

[1pwny]

Let's do the easiest, 'ey?


2: a greathammer made of adamantine

"I wish for an unintelligent, unenchanted, uncursed, Medium Adamantine Greathammer in perfect condition to be created in the span of 6 seconds 5 feet in front of me, on the ground, made of materials that no other person cares about."

[bjoern]

1.A belt with the glowing word 'sadism'. You can have lots of lawyer fun here: magic items are not 'enchanted'(that is a hold over from 2E when you needed to cast the spell enchant an item to make a magic item) So what does 'enchanted' mean in 3E....muhhahaha

2. No problem here. It's a cheap item for a wish. You could make it a small or huge one, of course. Or a damaged one. Or a heave one.

3.The character grows a third foot out of one of their legs

Like this guy.......

Lol.....its hopeless

[bjoern]

"I wish for an unintelligent, unenchanted, uncursed, Medium Adamantine Greathammer in Perfect condition, and nothing but it."

You and your hammer are now in a vacuum and are pulled apart into nothingness

[Extra Anchovies]

1.A belt with the glowing word 'sadism'. You can have lots of lawyer fun here: magic items are not 'enchanted'(that is a hold over from 2E when you needed to cast the spell enchant an item to make a magic item) So what does 'enchanted' mean in 3E....muhhahaha

For every 10 damage the belt deals in a given round, it gains a +1 luck bonus on attack rolls, saving throws, and skill checks in the next round. Too bad it's an otherwise ordinary, nonliving, nonsentient belt.

3.The character grows a third foot out of one of their legs[/QUOTE]

Also, this, yes.

[bjoern]

Let's do the easiest, 'ey?



"I wish for an unintelligent, unenchanted, uncursed, Medium Adamantine Greathammer in perfect condition to be created in the span of 6 seconds 5 feet in front of me, on the ground, made of materials that no other person cares about."

Its fine sized

Its covered in contact poison

There is no facing rules in d&d . In front of you doesn't exist. And that's just where your hammer is. A place that doesnt exist .

A town is built using time stop repeatedly and over the course of six seconds walls, buildings, forges, etc . And when you appear you find yourself buried alive under the city that was founded for the sole purpose of crafting your hammer.

[gooddragon1]

I need help putting together the appropriate legalese for a couple Wishes.

1: a belt with Sadism enchanted in it

2: a greathammer made of adamantine

3: an extra feat

The DM is the type to twist wishes if they are too big.

Thanks, giants!

1: Create a magic item, or add to the powers of an existing magic item. [SAFE]
2: Create a nonmagical item of up to 25,000 gp in value. [SAFE]
3: No. As in not defined and they can mess you up. Personally, I think there should have been something like inherent feats. So you can wish for up to maybe 3 extra feats for which you meet the prerequisites. And you can change them by retraining as normal. Would've been cool.

[CryptbornAkryea]

I love every answer you guys gave!

Many thanks, giants!

[amalcon]

Assuming that "homebrewed belt with sadism enchanted" is an item that exists in your game (e.g if your game for some reason treats the custom magic item guidelines as rules), you should just be able to wish for that and the hammer. They are within the enumerated capabilities, and therefore should just work. If your DM is liable to twist the wording on these wishes, you're better off just not using wishes at all.

If said belt does not exist, Wish is not necessarily a powerful enough spell to force a brand-new type of magic item into existence. Ask your DM if it is, first. If Wish is capable of this, then I'd expect that to be safe as well, but in case it isn't:

I wish that this existing belt I am holding become enchanted to continuously benefit the wearer as though he were under the effects of a Sadism spell, and have no other effects on the wearer or any other creature or object. The belt is not to physically change in shape or appearance as a result. This must be finished in the next six seconds, and this Wish is to have no other effects, including but not limited to moving the belt.

Re: "wishing for a feat", if custom item rules are in play, one option is to use the Transport Travelers option to go to a magical location that grants the feat in question. Do make sure that you can return after, and that the magical location is unguarded and unwarded.

If that's not acceptable, but custom item rules are in play, you should be able to wish for an ioun stone or other slotless item that grants the feat. Use similar wording to the belt if needed.

[(Un)Inspired]

3.The character grows a third foot out of one of their legs

Awesome! I think this is my favorite post I've ever seen you make. The key now is to actually wish for a third foot coming out of your leg. If the DM corrupts it then you avoid being a disfigured cripple. If the DM grants it then you win the game of Wish-Chicken the DM set up.

[bjoern]

Assuming that "homebrewed belt with sadism enchanted" is an item that exists in your game (e.g if your game for some reason treats the custom magic item guidelines as rules), you should just be able to wish for that and the hammer. They are within the enumerated capabilities, and therefore should just work. If your DM is liable to twist the wording on these wishes, you're better off just not using wishes at all.

If said belt does not exist, Wish is not necessarily a powerful enough spell to force a brand-new type of magic item into existence. Ask your DM if it is, first. If Wish is capable of this, then I'd expect that to be safe as well, but in case it isn't:

I wish that this existing belt I am holding become enchanted to continuously benefit the wearer as though he were under the effects of a Sadism spell, and have no other effects on the wearer or any other creature or object. The belt is not to physically change in shape or appearance as a result. This must be finished in the next six seconds, and this Wish is to have no other effects, including but not limited to moving the belt.

Re: "wishing for a feat", if custom item rules are in play, one option is to use the Transport Travelers option to go to a magical location that grants the feat in question. Do make sure that you can return after, and that the magical location is unguarded and unwarded.

If that's not acceptable, but custom item rules are in play, you should be able to wish for an ioun stone or other slotless item that grants the feat. Use similar wording to the belt if needed.

The belt can no longer change shape. Therefore can't be removed or even flex with you while you move. It is basically a solid object that has the flexibility of a stone. It is now unsafe for the wearer to change size or form via enlarge person, polymorph etc due to the risk of the new form growing larger than the belt and injuring itself on the belt.
Maybe somekind of constant -2 to dex or something to reflect the lost mobility.



Sorry not trying to be a nuisance . I'm just picturing myself asking for this stuff and how it would have blown up in my face.

[Zanos]

If your DM is a wish lawyer your first wish should be that all of your wishes are interpreted based on your intent.

Of course even with the best legalese a DM can always invoke the partial fulfillment clause.

[AuraTwilight]

Where are the wishes coming from, anyway? That can effect things considerably for the third wish, but the first two should be fine.

As for getting a free feat, you could always use the wish to call up a Devil and then make a Pact Certain...

[bjoern]

If your DM is a wish lawyer your first wish should be that all of your wishes are interpreted based on your intent.

Of course even with the best legalese a DM can always invoke the partial fulfillment clause.

Hmmm clever.

How could this go wrong.....

Upon asking your first wish (based on intent) the wish granting entity dominated your mind and makes your 2nd and 3rd wish for you. It was the only way it could be sure that what you wished for and what you wanted and what you got were the same thing, at least at the time you wished for them.

[AuraTwilight]

Bjoern, you're not really being very helpful so much as unnecessarily tinfoil hat paranoid. If the wish-granter (as opposed to it just being an artifact or the spell) is able to intentionally do malevolent things like mindcontrolling "I wish I was dead" or whatever, then there's no point in giving the OP advice. The implication the OP gave is that the DM will be what he thinks is fair unless he thinks the wish is too big. That's reasonable and possible to deal with meaningfully.

[bjoern]

Bjoern, you're not really being very helpful so much as unnecessarily tinfoil hat paranoid. If the wish-granter (as opposed to it just being an artifact or the spell) is able to intentionally do malevolent things like mindcontrolling "I wish I was dead" or whatever, then there's no point in giving the OP advice. The implication the OP gave is that the DM will be what he thinks is fair unless he thinks the wish is too big. That's reasonable and possible to deal with meaningfully.

All right all right . I'll behave.

Just wish for what you want. No special wording necessary. If you try to spell it out in a long winded , well written contract it will either be
A: unnecessary
Or
B: like shaking a steak at a lion daring it to chase you.

Also, lol at tin foil hat paranoid. That gave me a chuckle. And for myself, in my group, yeah I'm tin foil hat paranoid when it comes to wishes due to numerous past experiences.

[Zanos]

Hmmm clever.

How could this go wrong.....

Upon asking your first wish (based on intent) the wish granting entity dominated your mind and makes your 2nd and 3rd wish for you. It was the only way it could be sure that what you wished for and what you wanted and what you got were the same thing, at least at the time you wished for them.
Wish is not a divine spell. Wishes aren't granted by any entity. It's an arcane spell that rewrites reality based on the caster's will. Perversions happen for attempting to use the spell to attempt things beyond it's normal power. You can only overclock a computer so much before it overheats or becomes unstable.

Also, the first wish is still a wish, so wishing with your first wish that all wishes follow your intent would also apply your intent to the first wish. Having the caster dominated violates the wording of the first wish.

But yes, I generally agree that players should not try to cheese wish and go outside the listed bounds of the spell.

[(Un)Inspired]

Wish for a kinder and more open minded genie to grant the rest of your wishes.

[lsfreak]

But seriously. Its impossible to make an ironclad foolproof wish.

Just to be clear, this is not the case by RAW. There are a list of completely safe wishes that cannot be fooled with, listed in the spell description. The exception being if you're getting your wishes from a creature who is able to word the wish in such a way as to mess with you (i.e. efreet, intelligent ring of wishes). If your DM messes with the ones listed in the spell description, without it being cast by someone else, he's houseruling, and if he's houseruling without telling you ahead of time, he's pulling a **** move.

[Story]

I assume Bjorne was referring to trying to finagle a more powerful wish by using legalease to eliminate possible drawbacks. And it's true that that doesn't work.

If a wish is safe, it's safe and you don't have to worry. If it's not safe, no amount of wording is going to help you, because there's infinitely many things that could go wrong and natural language is wonderfully ambiguous, and even without that there's always the partial fulfillment clause.

[bjoern]

Just to be clear, this is not the case by RAW. There are a list of completely safe wishes that cannot be fooled with, listed in the spell description. The exception being if you're getting your wishes from a creature who is able to word the wish in such a way as to mess with you (i.e. efreet, intelligent ring of wishes). If your DM messes with the ones listed in the spell description, without it being cast by someone else, he's houseruling, and if he's houseruling without telling you ahead of time, he's pulling a **** move.

Well considering that he's wanting a big ole hammer I'm guessing that he's getting something else to give him the wish . In which case , the "something else" would grant the wish according to the rules. However nothing is stopping the "something else" from doing whatever it wants apart from.the wish to suit its twisted sense of irony.

But well assume for a minute that he finds a being able to be summoned to grant wishes and is friendly and wakes up each morning eager to go to the material plane to grant some schmuch his wish.
First you need the creature. Cast gate for a solar that aught to do it.
Now, per the rules of gate, well command it to use its Su ability to cast our wish.
And our wish will be for......of course a staff of gate with 50 charges. Legal per the rules of the wish spell.

This loophole is so simple that every 17th level wizard in the history of the world has tried it or at least thought of it.

Now these planar beings that are periodically summoned to cast wishes are probably quite annoyed by the paradox of the fact that they are basically angels and bordering on divinity (more of less let's not get caught up on semantics) and yet they can be called to heel like a dog to some bug of a mage who demands obedience and compliance and the creature has no willpower to deny the bug (somehow??)

That would make me upset . And I'd try to retaliate anyway I could. And since the mage has the creature by the family jewels, the only way he can retaliate is to use its own wits to turn the demands of the "all knowing master " back onto it.

In the end the solar just gains a small victory and slinks back to its home to await another iresistable call from the next schmuck.


But a caster casting wish can just get what he wants with no risk so long as he's within the limits.

Using an item should also be safe unless its intelligent.

[CryptbornAkryea]

One last question, could a wish allow a spell to be permanencied? Ie, arms of plenty.

[bjoern]

One last question, could a wish allow a spell to be permanencied? Ie, arms of plenty.

As written, wish could easily be used to simulate a permancey spell. However arms of plenty isnt a valid target for a permancy spell. You're best bet would be to use one wish to make arms of plenty a valid target. And then use a second wish to make it permanent.

Of course you could roll it all into one wish but you run the risk of overreaching the limitations of the wish spell.

But well just assume that its all good since the consensus is that wish tampering by the granter isn't something that happens.....

[Beardbarian]

The DM is the type to twist wishes if they are too big.

2 can't be twisted. The Wigh description says that every wish above the limits can be twisted. But if the DM try to twist this, well, leave the game.

3 is impossible to get.

1 is all DM fiat

[Barstro]

1: a belt with Sadism enchanted in it
2: a greathammer made of adamantine
3: an extra feat


I'm not the most D&D knowledgeable person in the world, and I'm not a wish-lawyer, but I am a real lawyer;

Any equipment wishes allow for incorrect size, extra curses, the aforementioned Balor.
Any metagame stuff requires a kind DM

1) Get the belt you want and request that Sadism be enchanted onto it with no other alterations.
2) Same as above; request that all the iron/steel/stone be replaced with adamantine
3) I'm having trouble coming up with wording that would not open a loophole to get rid of one of your current feats in the process.

Just wish for a turkey sandwich and hope that it isn't too dry.

[Extra Anchovies]

3) I'm having trouble coming up with wording that would not open a loophole to get rid of one of your current feats in the process.

Just wish for a turkey sandwich and hope that it isn't too dry.

Getting a turkey sandwich that isn't too dry is already quite a feat in itself! :smalltongue:

[Segev]

Personally, when I DM, I try to first take whatever my players Wish for, and see if there is a valid way to grant the wish within the "safe" limits of the spell. If there is, I usually go with that, and that's the most "twisting" I do to it. I will invoke "partial fulfillment" as needed if the "safe" solution winds up curtailing some aspect of their desire. For example, I once had a party dithering for 90 minutes OOC (and refusing to go IC and talk to the wish-granting NPC (an efreeti who kept asking them to make their darned wishes so he could go home). One of the players got a phone call and had to go deal with that. Half an hour later, he returned and saw they were still dithering, so had his character just blurt out the three wishes she wanted.

Her first wish was plot-related and why the wishes were there at all, so is unimportant to this tale. I forget her second wish. Her third wish was to be "more beautiful than her sisters." (She was technically half-fey, but took so strongly after the human parent that she mechanically was a human with a "mere" 15 Charisma; her sisters were actually half-fey templated and had Cha in the 18-20 range.) Partial fulfillment of that wish gave her a +1 inherent bonus to Charisma. And a certain amount of self-confidence she'd previously lacked.

If a player wished for some ability or effect, they might get a magic item that gives it to them.

Unless the granting entity is a jerk, IC, then it's generally best to just treat Wish as doing what it can to meet the desires of the wish-maker. You'd be surprised how many wishes wind up still having unfortunate consequences, even without deliberately twisting the intent. No need to deliberately be an antagonistic DM over it.


....strangely, my players always treat wishes as the most terrifying thing to have available to them, despite the fact that I've not once twisted it into any sort of "gotcha."

[Zanos]

....strangely, my players always treat wishes as the most terrifying thing to have available to them, despite the fact that I've not once twisted it into any sort of "gotcha."
Probably because of all the stories in threads like this on boards like this of jerk DM's twisting fairly innocuous wishes into horrible curses or just player death.

"You want wealth? Okay, you get a letter that your entire family has died and left their wealth to your in a will."
"Okay, the wish teleports you on top of a dragon's hoard. The dragon breathes fire on you."
"...Raze your intelligence? Certainly."

etc.

[Jermz]

Probably because of all the stories in threads like this on boards like this of jerk DM's twisting fairly innocuous wishes into horrible curses or just player death.

"You want wealth? Okay, you get a letter that your entire family has died and left their wealth to your in a will."
"Okay, the wish teleports you on top of a dragon's hoard. The dragon breathes fire on you."
"...Raze your intelligence? Certainly."

etc.

Yeah, I don't really understand this and why some DMs act this way. If the players are clearly overstepping the bounds of the wish spell, or if they are granted this wish from an entity which is forced to give it to them (AND they overstep the bounds), I can see the DM having some fun with this.

But in general, if the caster makes a perfectly reasonable wish, like the first two that OP requested, I really don't see any reason why the DM would twist the wish into something to the detriment of the caster. Why give a character the option for the wish in the first place if the intention is to screw around with the player?

I see this same attitude here sometimes with regards to 'making the paladin fall'. A player has made a sub-optimal character choice, with relatively stringent standards that gimp him compared to other characters, and then the DM goes out and intentionally tries to mess with this guy? Leave the poor paladin alone and let him make his own decisions on if/when/how to fall. But to set things up deliberately that he has to fall, that's just bad and in my opinion, immature, DMing.

[Barstro]

But in general, if the caster makes a perfectly reasonable wish, like the first two that OP requested, I really don't see any reason why the DM would twist the wish into something to the detriment of the caster. Why give a character the option for the wish in the first place if the intention is to screw around with the player?

You assume that a DM is there to help create the story and keep things entertaining? Interesting.

Were I DM for wish #2; I'd give the player a miniature sized hammer and, off the top of my head, have a reason for the party to fight things really small where suddenly that hammer is the most useful thing in the world, or else have a skill check reveal that it is the work of a master artisan and easily worth five times as much as a real hammer.

[EnglishLanguage]

You assume that a DM is there to help create the story and keep things entertaining? Interesting.

Were I DM for wish #2; I'd give the player a miniature sized hammer and, off the top of my head, have a reason for the party to fight things really small where suddenly that hammer is the most useful thing in the world, or else have a skill check reveal that it is the work of a master artisan and easily worth five times as much as a real hammer.

See, interesting subversions like this could be fun to do. Make it seem like a **** move, but then turn out that he still gets what he wished for, even if not exactly how he planned on it.

To go back to the "lol you teleport to a dragon hoard and die" thing...

"I wish for wealth!"
"You and the party are warped into a dragon's lair."
"OH DM YOU FUUU-"
"The dragon notices you and was conveniently just looking for someone to go run an important errand for it, and hints that you'd be well compensated for it."

Could also be an interesting way to throw a plot hook at the party.

[Jermz]

You assume that a DM is there to help create the story and keep things entertaining? Interesting.

Were I DM for wish #2; I'd give the player a miniature sized hammer and, off the top of my head, have a reason for the party to fight things really small where suddenly that hammer is the most useful thing in the world, or else have a skill check reveal that it is the work of a master artisan and easily worth five times as much as a real hammer.

Without a doubt, players have a responsibility to keep the game moving and help create the story, but the far larger responsibility, in my opinion, lies on the shoulders of the DM. He's got the final say, he's the story-weaver who ties everything together, and he can directly impact whether each and every PC is having fun.

That being said, your uses of the wish spell are actually quite good, as are the uses outlined by the poster above me. These aren't examples of a DM arbitrarily screwing over the player who made the wish just because he can. These are examples of taking the wish and turning it into a plot hook, a device, which moves the players forward in the campaign, and aren't just simple pettiness on the part of the DM.

[jedipotter]

Yeah, I don't really understand this and why some DMs act this way. If the players are clearly overstepping the bounds of the wish spell, or if they are granted this wish from an entity which is forced to give it to them (AND they overstep the bounds), I can see the DM having some fun with this.



For Fun!

Look at it this way: a wish is cheating at life. The way the world works is that you must get the stuff you want through work. So the Powers That Be or Fate have rigged wishes to have nasty side effects.

And everyone knows this! Everyone!

After all the bad wish can only be found in thousands of stories. There are plenty of genie stories. You have stories like The Monkey's Paw, by Edgar Allen Poe. And plenty of modern ones too. The x-files has a great one Je Souhaite where two brothers have a less than helpful genie who grants their wishes with disastrous consequences. Or Charmed ''I dream of Phoebe''...and that one was five years after ''Be Careful What You Witch For''...and they are still making wishes.

Wishes are a great way to ''break'' the normal flow of the game. The person would never make it into the dragon horde without the wish. And they could get a whole round or two to grab some treasure....before having to run.

And even ''bad'' things are not ''so bad'' to adventurers. Oh, so the powerful monster wants it's magic item back...oh, well, ok.....lets fight! Or start a nice plot arc...

[Killer Angel]

Just to be clear, this is not the case by RAW. There are a list of completely safe wishes that cannot be fooled with, listed in the spell description. The exception being if you're getting your wishes from a creature who is able to word the wish in such a way as to mess with you (i.e. efreet, intelligent ring of wishes). If your DM messes with the ones listed in the spell description, without it being cast by someone else, he's houseruling, and if he's houseruling without telling you ahead of time, he's pulling a **** move.

that depends. For example, devils are evil beings and they enjoy to screw you. Unless forced by magic (candle of invocation, and so on), a wish granted by such a being (after a bargain or similar), could be unsafe even if you ask for a "safe condition", without houseruling.

[Story]

A hostile being with the ability to grant wishes could just emulate Trap The Soul (or wish them to the negative energy plane, or cast a Twinned Orb of Fire or whatever, though Trap The Soul is probably the nastiest option if they can't reliably pass will saves).

So the only reason for the granter to screw with the wish instead of just killing them is amusement.

[ahenobarbi]

3. Feats are an out-of-game abstraction of in-game abilities; thus, nobody in-game knows of feats as such.

No problem. Rules don't say anywhere a character has to describe wish in any way for it to happen. Character casts a spell, player says to DM what's desired effect and character receives it. If the wish is on the safe effects list DM doesn't get to mess with it (without breaking rules of the game).

So 1) and 2) should be no problem. 3) however is not on safe effect list (and IMHO shouldn't be - getting arbitrary feats for a wish is way to powerful effect in my opinion).

[Heliomance]

Personally I'd be fine with allowing a Wish to grant a feat that the Wisher meets all prerequisites for. If they Wish for one they don't have the prereqs for, I think I'd invoke Partial Fulfillment and give them one of the prereqs instead. Preferably the least useful one.

[ahenobarbi]

Personally I'd be fine with allowing a Wish to grant a feat that the Wisher meets all prerequisites for. If they Wish for one they don't have the prereqs for, I think I'd invoke Partial Fulfillment and give them one of the prereqs instead. Preferably the least useful one.

Some feats seem to be way to powerful (for example you can get extra 9th level spell slot)(not that there aren't other, cheaper RAW methods to get extra feats).

[falloutimperial]

Is there a specific free feat that you want? Because you would need to wish for the ability to do whatever the wish grants you, as:

"I wish to be able to create magically-imbued scrolls exactly as a wizard does, with the same costs, limitations, and capabilities of a wizard with my magical abilities."

[beforemath]

One last question, could a wish allow a spell to be permanencied? Ie, arms of plenty.

(As per magic item creation)

Arms of Plenty -- 3rd level wizard spell cast at 5th level, use activated or continuous -> 3 x 5 x 2000gp = 30,000 gp

This is a special ability, so it has no space limitation -> 30,000 gp x 2 = 60,000 gp

Assuming that it must be under 25,000 gp for the wish to work (I know this is called out as the "mundane item" price and that the "magic item" price doesn't necessarily have such a limit)

2 charges per day -> (60,000 gp)/(5/2) = 24,000 gp



Congratulations! You now have your wish: You can activate Arms of Plenty 2 times per day at 5th caster level.

[Segev]

See, interesting subversions like this could be fun to do. Make it seem like a **** move, but then turn out that he still gets what he wished for, even if not exactly how he planned on it.

To go back to the "lol you teleport to a dragon hoard and die" thing...

"I wish for wealth!"
"You and the party are warped into a dragon's lair."
"OH DM YOU FUUU-"
"The dragon notices you and was conveniently just looking for someone to go run an important errand for it, and hints that you'd be well compensated for it."

Could also be an interesting way to throw a plot hook at the party.

Could be especially fun if it turns out that the Dragon was expecting you precisely because HE just made a Wish for a solution to said problem for which he wishes to hire you.

[afroakuma]

I need help putting together the appropriate legalese for a couple Wishes.

1: a belt with Sadism enchanted in it

Depending on the particulars of what you desire, this should be a wish within the bounds of the spell's regular effect. A charged, use-activated belt of sadism with even four charges per day comes in under the spell's threshold for magic item cost. It's not an outrageous effect, really.


2: a greathammer made of adamantine

See above.


3: an extra feat

This is the only one where I would worry and suggest that a specific feat is more reasonable than an extra feat slot.

Honestly, this calls for an out of game discussion with the DM about the Wish spell and what should reasonably be expected from it. Together you should be able to agree, before the game, what it is that you will be getting, and that you will in-character word an appropriate wish. The rest of the party should have the gist of the arrangement as well, out-of-character. If the DM refuses to consent to a safe, reasonable wish without tampering, that becomes a different kind of problem.

Too often, wish is used as an opportunity for DMs to try to out-clever players. Make it into a reasonable OOC process instead. If he's not willing to be reasonable, don't accept the wish.

[ArqArturo]

Want a wish done right, but the DM likes to throw low punches?.

http://www.garuyo.com/web/media/images/images/better_call_saul-620x350.jpg

[ahenobarbi]

Is there a specific free feat that you want? Because you would need to wish for the ability to do whatever the wish grants you, as:

"I wish to be able to create magically-imbued scrolls exactly as a wizard does, with the same costs, limitations, and capabilities of a wizard with my magical abilities."

Nope. Wish spell description doesn't say you have to word your wish. It says your wish is granted (if it's on "safe wish" list or DM decides it's "similar") or twisted/partially granted (if it's not on "safe wish" list and DM decides to twist/partially grant it).

As "getting a feat" is not on "safe wish" list (it requires more than one spell to get (heroics + chaos shuffle)) it's up to DM if/how the wish will be granted, no matter what wording you (player) use to describe the wish to DM.