Scroll of Wish and Magic Item Creation Question

[kalos72]

So, if I understand this correctly, using a Scroll of Wish, I can create any magic item that requires less then 5000XP to create correct?

And creating the item requires 1/25th of the cost of the item in XP?

So really, you can make most any of the low/mid tier items really.

I am looking to find a way to reduce the XP cost of my Artificer creating magic items for my henchmen and realized wish bypasses it all together. I think...

I was going to go the Ambrosia line but that takes a long time at 2xp per day. Then I was going to try the Retain Essence line with draining Ironwood magic armor or something.

I know there are alot of topics on this but I am not finding anything that details the Ambrosia line or how its possibly effective when looking for 1000's of XP to create high end items.

[Curmudgeon]

So, if I understand this correctly, using a Scroll of Wish, I can create any magic item that requires less then 5000XP to create correct?
No, not correct.
A wish can produce any one of the following effects.
Create a magic item, or add to the powers of an existing magic item.
...
When a wish creates or improves a magic item, you must pay twice the normal XP cost for crafting or improving the item, plus an additional 5,000 XP. You've already got to pay 5,000 XP just for casting Wish (which would be included in the price of the scroll). To create or improve an item you have to pay an additional 5,000 XP, plus 2x the normal XP required to craft the item in the normal slow fashion.

There's no specification of how powerful an item you can create.

[kalos72]

How would a Scroll of Wish effect that concept then? If the XP for the Wish is already covered, how would I determine XP rules after that initial spell?

[Brookshw]

How would a Scroll of Wish effect that concept then? If the XP for the Wish is already covered, how would I determine XP rules after that initial spell?

Scroll of wish would just straight up give you the item at no cost, xp or otherwise. The cost of the item is distinct from the costs of the wish scroll. Note, while technically there's no cap on the value of the magic item many DMs will frown on wishing for something particularly extravagant. Unless you were going to use the scroll to start a wish chain you're only going to get one item which doesn't sound like it'll help you if the end goal is gear people. You might be better off wishing for straight up cash. Alternatively if you wanted to exceed the "safe" properties of wish you could try wishing for multiple items or bonus xp in your craft resiviour but what'll happen is up to your dm.

Check out artificer handbooks for alternative ways to offset crafting xp costs, there are some good tricks out there.

[Curmudgeon]

Scroll of wish would just straight up give you the item at no cost, xp or otherwise.
That's nonsense. Wish only creates a magic object when the required XP is paid. If you use a scroll and don't pay the additional XP needed, the standard spell failure rule applies.
Spell Failure

If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform, the casting fails and the spell is wasted.

[Cruiser1]

You've already got to pay 5,000 XP just for casting Wish (which would be included in the price of the scroll). To create or improve an item you have to pay an additional 5,000 XP, plus 2x the normal XP required to craft the item in the normal slow fashion.
Indeed, however you don't have to pay 5000 XP twice when creating or upgrading a magic item. The XP costs of casting Wish are variable, depending on what you're wishing for. For example:


Transporting travelers costs 5000 XP.
Duplicating a spell costs 5000 XP or the XP cost of the duplicated spell, whichever is more.
Creating a magic item costs 5000 XP plus twice the normal XP cost for crafting the item.

Scrolls can have different material or XP costs embedded within them. For example, a Scroll of Trap the Soul able to trap a 10HD creature or less is listed as costing 13000 gp (3000 gp for a level 8 spell + 1000 gp / HD material component). A Scroll of Trap the Soul able to trap a 20HD creature or less costs 23000 gp (3000 gp for level 8 spell + 20000 gp for 20 HD). The first scroll of Trap the Soul has 10000 extra gp of material costs within it, while the second has 20000 extra gp within it. Similarly, a Scroll of Wish must have at least 5000 XP within it to work at all, but you can pay extra XP when crafting the scroll to embed extra XP within it, to cover more expensive spells or magic item creation when the scroll is read.


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

[kalos72]

Cruiser1 - Are you saying then that I can get a Scroll of Wish(10kXP) and then use that to make the item?

Can you wish for straight XP?

[Sliver]

If you want to have the option to use an effect that costs xp, that xp needs to be paid when crafting the scroll and sets the upper limit of how much xp can be used in the wish. If you invest 10000xp in crafting the scroll, then you can wish for an item that costs up to 2500xp to craft. Of course, excess xp will be wasted.

Asking for straight up xp isn't a listed use, so the DM decides whether it's fine or a risky wish.

[Story]

Can you wish for straight XP?

You could wish for anything, but since it's not on the safe list, what happens is entirely up to the DM.

[kalos72]

My groups is at a point where we have found an imprisoned Efreeti and the group is thinking of getting Scrolls of Wish versus taking a wish outright for his release.

If we Wish for "scrolls of wish with 10kXP" we would be straight yeah? RAW agreeable?

[Brookshw]

That's nonsense. Wish only creates a magic object when the required XP is paid. If you use a scroll and don't pay the additional XP needed, the standard spell failure rule applies.

I stand corrected.

[Sliver]

My groups is at a point where we have found an imprisoned Efreeti and the group is thinking of getting Scrolls of Wish versus taking a wish outright for his release.

If we Wish for "scrolls of wish with 10kXP" we would be straight yeah? RAW agreeable?

It is technically legal. You could also wish for an 100k xp scroll of wish... You could also wish for a scroll containing 10 wishes with 10kxp each, if you convince your DM that a single scroll is a single item, regardless of how many spells are on it.

Though I doubt you could tell the efreet how much xp the wish should have, unless your DM doesn't care about that metagaming aspect.

[Brova]

That's nonsense. Wish only creates a magic object when the required XP is paid. If you use a scroll and don't pay the additional XP needed, the standard spell failure rule applies.

Technically, wish can also create magic items if it is cast by a mechanism which does not require XP costs to be paid. For example, a spell like or supernatural wish can create a magic item without paying any XP.

[kalos72]

Technically, wish can also create magic items if it is cast by a mechanism which does not require XP costs to be paid. For example, a spell like or supernatural wish can create a magic item without paying any XP.

So a bound Efreeti, or sim of one, could use his 3day/Wish ability to provide magic items at zero XP cost?

[Brova]

So a bound Efreeti, or sim of one, could use his 3day/Wish ability to provide magic items at zero XP cost?

Bound yes, although he might consider wishes like "I want a belt of giant strength +1,000,000" to be "unreasonable commands" and refuse, though you could just drop a dominate monster on him. A simulacrum is a somewhat dodgier case. It's not entirely clear what the progression of an efreet is, so your DM might rule that the wish 3/day ability is gained at 10 hit dice so a simulacrum will not get it. An ice assassin works. The least ambiguous strategy is to shapechange into a zodar and use it's 1/year supernatural wish to get whatever you want.

If you're considering this, I strongly recommend a limitation on the magic items that can be created. The simplest is a GP cap, such as the one suggested by Frank and K in (IIRC) Tome of Fiends. For a much more powerful option, you could require the items to be existing ones (as opposed to custom magic items).

[Bronk]

So a bound Efreeti, or sim of one, could use his 3day/Wish ability to provide magic items at zero XP cost?

The rules for Spell-Like Abilities state: "A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost."

The only limits are what you can get by your DM. At the very least, you could do better than three scrolls of 'wish'.

[kalos72]

Peeeerfect! Thank you!

[ShaneMRoth]

That's nonsense. Wish only creates a magic object when the required XP is paid. If you use a scroll and don't pay the additional XP needed, the standard spell failure rule applies.


The rules for Spell-Like Abilities state: "A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost."

The only limits are what you can get by your DM. At the very least, you could do better than three scrolls of 'wish'.

While the SLA rules allow for the efreet to ignore the cost of the XP for casting the wish spell...


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

The imperative language of the XP cost associated with using a Wish for the purpose of creating magic items, or duplicating XP dependent spells, indicates that these costs are not nullified by virtue of the SLA nature of an efreet's ability to grant wishes.

The first 5,000 XP might be free, but after that? XP costs must be paid by someone.

No free lunch, folks.

[Brova]

While the SLA rules allow for the efreet to ignore the cost of the XP for casting the wish spell...



The imperative language of the XP cost associated with using a Wish for the purpose of creating magic items, or duplicating XP dependent spells, indicates that these costs are not nullified by virtue of the SLA nature of an efreet's ability to grant wishes.

The first 5,000 XP might be free, but after that? XP costs must be paid by someone.

No free lunch, folks.

Dude, stop. That is not how it works. That whole section is the description for the XP cost of wish, which SLAs and supernatural abilities don't pay.

[ShaneMRoth]

Dude, stop. That is not how it works. That whole section is the description for the XP cost of wish, which SLAs and supernatural abilities don't pay.

I find the argument that the efreet is exempted from paying the base 5,000 XP cost that attaches to all Wishes to be persuasive.

But XP costs beyond the base 5,000 XP are described with the word "must".

The word "must" is imperative language. Non-optional. Even in the case of SLAs.

The XP cost of magic item creation is specific, the initial 5,000 XP component of the Wish spell is general.

The SLA rule that waives the general XP costs for spells yield to the specific and imperative XP costs of magic item creation.

On the grounds that the general yields to the specific, and that the word "must" is clearly imperative, I find that the specific XP costs that extend beyond the initial 5,000 XP to fall outside of the bounds of the general rule that SLA spells are exempt from XP costs.

[Brova]

I find the argument that the efreet is exempted from paying the base 5,000 XP cost that attaches to all Wishes to be persuasive.

But XP costs beyond the base 5,000 XP are described with the word "must".

The word "must" is imperative language. Non-optional. Even in the case of SLAs.

The XP cost of magic item creation is specific, the initial 5,000 XP component of the Wish spell is general.

The SLA rule that waives the general XP costs for spells yield to the specific and imperative XP costs of magic item creation.

On the grounds that the general yields to the specific, and that the word "must" is clearly imperative, I find that the specific XP costs that extend beyond the initial 5,000 XP to fall outside of the bounds of the general rule that SLA spells are exempt from XP costs.

No. The whole clause is an XP cost (side note, is it "a XP cost" because XP begins with X or "an XP cost" because XP is short for experience which begins with E?), which SLAs do not pay. The efreet isn't "opting out" of paying the XP cost, he was just never asked to to begin with.

[ShaneMRoth]

No. The whole clause is an XP cost (side note, is it "a XP cost" because XP begins with X or "an XP cost" because XP is short for experience which begins with E?), which SLAs do not pay. The efreet isn't "opting out" of paying the XP cost, he was just never asked to to begin with.

Don't worry, someone will come along at any moment to tell us both how wrong we are.

[eggynack]

All XP costs are absolute. They are all also, however, bypassed by SLA's. You could add a must to the text of every other XP cost out there, and it wouldn't really change anything of their meaning. It's not like the XP cost for gate says, "You may have to pay 1,000 XP if you use the calling creatures function." You always pay it, no matter what, up until the exact point you start using an ability that specifically bypasses those XP costs. There is nothing extra imperative about the wish XP cost, and there is nothing there that stops a wish as SLA from bypassing that cost.

[ShaneMRoth]

All XP costs are absolute. They are all also, however, bypassed by SLA's. You could add a must to the text of every other XP cost out there, and it wouldn't really change anything of their meaning. It's not like the XP cost for gate says, "You may have to pay 1,000 XP if you use the calling creatures function." You always pay it, no matter what, up until the exact point you start using an ability that specifically bypasses those XP costs. There is nothing extra imperative about the wish XP cost, and there is nothing there that stops a wish as SLA from bypassing that cost.

There is a mechanical difference between the 5,000 XP cost that attaches to granting a Wish (which falls under the SLA exemption) and the XP cost that attaches to making a magic item (which is a separate XP cost that doesn't fall under the SLA exemption.)


A spell’s components are what you must do or possess to cast it.

The 5,000 XP for any given Wish is baked in. No matter what the Wish might be, that XP cost is accounted for before the spell is completed, even if that cost is waived entirely by virtue of the SLA rule.

SRD (Magic Item Creation)

The character must spend the gold and XP at the beginning of the construction process.

By mechanical necessity, this XP cost can't be paid until after the Wish spell is completed.

The Wish spell can't create a magic item until after the caster describes what magic item is to be created. That description is the verbal component of the Wish spell.

The 5,000 XP for the Wish spell can be paid (or waived) when the spell is cast.

The XP for magic item creation can't be paid until after the magic item is described. Later. After the fact.

Those XP costs aren't a component of the spell, they are a component of magic item creation. And according to the language must be paid. SLA or not.

Time is a flat circle.

[eggynack]

There is a mechanical difference between the 5,000 XP cost that attaches to granting a Wish (which falls under the SLA exemption) and the XP cost that attaches to making a magic item (which is a separate XP cost that doesn't fall under the SLA exemption.)



The 5,000 XP for any given Wish is baked in. No matter what the Wish might be, that XP cost is accounted for before the spell is completed, even if that cost is waived entirely by virtue of the SLA rule.

SRD (Magic Item Creation)


By mechanical necessity, this XP cost can't be paid until after the Wish spell is completed.

The Wish spell can't create a magic item until after the caster describes what magic item is to be created. That description is the verbal component of the Wish spell.

The 5,000 XP for the Wish spell can be paid (or waived) when the spell is cast.

The XP for magic item creation can't be paid until after the magic item is described. Later. After the fact.

Those XP costs aren't a component of the spell, they are a component of magic item creation. And according to the language must be paid. SLA or not.

Time is a flat circle.
First, I don't think the timing bears out your claim. There's little to indicate that you don't pay the cost at the exact instant you make the wish, and the rules for crafting magic items aren't particularly relevant there, as wishing doesn't follow traditional crafting rules. Second, it doesn't matter when it happens. SLA's specify that they don't have an XP cost. This is an XP cost, and it's listed in the XP cost section of the spell. Whether it happens before, after, simultaneously, or some combination, it's still an XP cost, and still doesn't exist. And yes, it is a component of the spell, because the XP cost is listed within the context of the spell.

[ShaneMRoth]

First, I don't think the timing bears out your claim. There's little to indicate that you don't pay the cost at the exact instant you make the wish, and the rules for crafting magic items aren't particularly relevant there, as wishing doesn't follow traditional crafting rules. Second, it doesn't matter when it happens. SLA's specify that they don't have an XP cost. This is an XP cost, and it's listed in the XP cost section of the spell. Whether it happens before, after, simultaneously, or some combination, it's still an XP cost, and still doesn't exist. And yes, it is a component of the spell, because the XP cost is listed within the context of the spell.


You can't start magic item creation before you identify the item, which can't happen until after you put the Wish spell into play. It's a wish spell from the moment it is cast, but it only creates a magic item after that specific function is described after the fact.

And the XP cost is clearly, and mechanically, attached to the creation of a magic item not for casting a Wish spell itself.

[Brova]

You can't start magic item creation before you identify the item, which can't happen until after you put the Wish spell into play. It's a wish spell from the moment it is cast, but it only creates a magic item after that specific function is described after the fact.

And the XP cost is clearly, and mechanically, attached to the creation of a magic item not for casting a Wish spell itself.

Uh, what? Casting the wish spell is the process of item creation. You set parameters for the wish, it checks them against the list of allowed effects, then it executes whatever is closest. That's what wish does, though certain effects incur additional costs. For example, if you want wish to produce the effect of "animate that corpse as a dread warrior" (per the animate dread warrior spell) it would require an additional cost of 250 XP per HD of the corpse. But that whole accounting is done before wish comes up with the XP cost. Various factors can raise that XP cost, but getting wish as an SLA ignores the whole cost.

[eggynack]

You can't start magic item creation before you identify the item, which can't happen until after you put the Wish spell into play. It's a wish spell from the moment it is cast, but it only creates a magic item after that specific function is described after the fact.

And the XP cost is clearly, and mechanically, attached to the creation of a magic item not for casting a Wish spell itself.
Using wish isn't creating a magic item by standard item creation rules. It's creating a magic item by casting wish, which follows different rules, defined purely in the context of wish. You're never not casting wish, and the XP cost you pay is never not associated with wish. It wouldn't even matter if the cost were attached in some way to some separate magic item creation thing, which it isn't, because it is also absolutely connected to the casting of the wish spell, given that it's listed under the XP cost of wish, and SLA's ignore those. It's really as simple as that. Anywhere you see "XP cost", that stuff gets ignored, because that's what SLA's tell you to do.

[ShaneMRoth]

But that whole accounting is done before wish comes up with the XP cost. Various factors can raise that XP cost, but getting wish as an SLA ignores the whole cost.

The whole accounting isn't done before the Wish comes up with the XP cost.

The 5,000 XP cost of the Wish spell is an unambiguous material component that needs to be available before the Wish can be cast at all, except when that cost is waived, per the SLA rule.

The XP needed for magic item creation is not a material component of the Wish.

That XP is the material component for Magic Item Creation. That's not a component of the SLA, it can't be waived.

[Deadline]

The XP needed for magic item creation is not a material component of the Wish.

That XP is the material component for Magic Item Creation. That's not a component of the SLA, it can't be waived.

This is the part you need to prove. You won't have any luck, because it is unambiguously stated in the XP.component of the spell.

[ShaneMRoth]

This is the part you need to prove. You won't have any luck, because it is unambiguously stated in the XP.component of the spell.

True, I will not have any luck "proving" something to someone else's satisfaction.

The efreet's Wish is a spell-like ability.

Creating Magic Items is not an SLA.

So, since the XP costs associated with Magic Item Creation attach to the Magic Item, not the Wish... those XP are not subject to the SLA rule on XP costs for SLAs.

[eggynack]

This is the part you need to prove. You won't have any luck, because it is unambiguously stated in the XP.component of the spell.
Pretty much. There's really not all that much to this issue.

Edit:
True, I will not have any luck "proving" something to someone else's satisfaction.

The efreet's Wish is a spell-like ability.

Creating Magic Items is not an SLA.

So, since the XP costs associated with Magic Item Creation attach to the Magic Item, not the Wish... those XP are not subject to the SLA rule on XP costs for SLAs.
Creating magic items the normal way is not an SLA. Doing it with a spell, which explicitly makes the magic item through magic, specifically through an SLA, is an SLA. The spell says there's an XP cost associated with using a particular function of it. That cost is waived, because it's an XP cost of the spell. There's nothing to indicate that it's not part of the spell, and there's the fact that it's right there and part of the spell to indicate that it is part of the spell.

[ShaneMRoth]

Setting the efreet issue aside for the moment...

As to the point in the OP, it seems that use of a Wish granted from a scroll would require an additional XP cost to be paid if that Wish is used to create a magic item.

[Brova]

Setting the efreet issue aside for the moment...

As to the point in the OP, it seems that use of a Wish granted from a scroll would require an additional XP cost to be paid if that Wish is used to create a magic item.

Not quite. The wish on the scroll has a certain amount of XP "on it" so to speak. You can do anything with that wish that requires that much additional XP or less, but you can't do anything that requires more XP. So if the wish had 5250 XP, you could create a 1 HD dread warrior by using the wish to emulate create dread warrior. Or you could emulate greater planar binding and get an efreet that way.

[ShaneMRoth]

Not quite. The wish on the scroll has a certain amount of XP "on it" so to speak. You can do anything with that wish that requires that much additional XP or less, but you can't do anything that requires more XP. So if the wish had 5250 XP, you could create a 1 HD dread warrior by using the wish to emulate create dread warrior. Or you could emulate greater planar binding and get an efreet that way.

My point is that any XP that isn't... pre-paid, for lack of a more elegant term... would have to be paid by the person activating the scroll.

[Brova]

My point is that any XP that isn't... pre-paid, for lack of a more elegant term... would have to be paid by the person activating the scroll.

No, that is not correct. Any XP or material component costs are paid at the creation of the scroll. It's why you can wish for a scroll of ice assassin of a creature you've never encountered. The relevant text is:


If casting the spell would reduce the caster’s XP total, she pays the cost upon beginning the scroll in addition to the XP cost for making the scroll itself. Likewise, a material component is consumed when she begins writing, but a focus is not.

[ShaneMRoth]

No, that is not correct. Any XP or material component costs are paid at the creation of the scroll. It's why you can wish for a scroll of ice assassin of a creature you've never encountered. The relevant text is:

Bear with me here.

We are not talking about an efreet using an SLA. We are talking about using use of a spell completion magic item.

I don't see how the XP costs for magic item creation can be waived under these circumstances.

[Brova]

Bear with me here.

We are not talking about an efreet using an SLA. We are talking about using use of a spell completion magic item.

I don't see how the XP costs for magic item creation can be waived under these circumstances.

The aren't. It's just that the guy using the scroll doesn't pay them. The guy making the scroll does. The cost still has to be paid if you get a wish out of a scroll, but it is paid by the guy who makes the scroll not the guy who uses it.

[ShaneMRoth]

The aren't. It's just that the guy using the scroll doesn't pay them. The guy making the scroll does. The cost still has to be paid if you get a wish out of a scroll, but it is paid by the guy who makes the scroll not the guy who uses it.

Imagine that my character finds himself in possession of a scroll with a Wish on it.

Imagine further that he is able to safely activate the scroll.

The cost of a randomly generated Wish scroll is:


wish 28,825 gp*

*Assumes no material component cost in excess of 10,000 gp and no XP cost in excess of 5,000 XP.

It would seem that I would need to cover the XP costs in excess of 5,000 if I used that scroll to Wish for a magic item.

[Brova]

It would seem that I would need to cover the XP costs in excess of 5,000 if I used that scroll to Wish for a magic item.

Actually, that text you're quoting means nearly the exact opposite of what you assume. That scroll is good for a wish that does not incur any additional XP or material costs. There is nothing (to my knowledge) that can be done with that scroll to get anything that costs any (additional) XP out of it. It's like a scroll of summon monster VII created by a 13th level caster. No matter what you do, it lasts 13 rounds*. Not 12, not 14, but 13. Every time. Similarly, a scroll of wish that was not created with any additional XP in it cannot be used for anything that requires more than 5,000 XP to do with a wish. You can't emulate animate dread warrior or alter fortune and you can't create a healing belt or a +1 sword. And nothing you do will change that.

*: Yes, I'm aware that Artificers get metamagic spell completion and could extend the spell. Yes, you're very clever. Now shut up.

[ShaneMRoth]

a scroll of wish that was not created with any additional XP in it cannot be used for anything that requires more than 5,000 XP to do with a wish.
*: Yes, I'm aware that Artificers get metamagic spell completion and could extend the spell. Yes, you're very clever. Now shut up.

I couldn't care less about Artificers or Metamagic feats.

So, all of the XP would have to be "cooked" into the scroll spell before it could be used to create a Magic Item. That makes more sense. I'm assuming that detect magic, identify, or analyze dweomer could be used to get a sense of the precise capabilities of a given Wish scroll.

[Brova]

So, all of the XP would have to be "cooked" into the scroll spell before it could be used to create a Magic Item. That makes more sense. I'm assuming that detect magic, identify, or analyze dweomer could be used to get a sense of the precise capabilities of a given Wish scroll.

That's how the creation works. Presumably any spell or skill check capable of telling the difference between a +1 sword and a +2 sword can tell the difference between a wish scroll with zero "extra XP" and one with, say, 4,000 "extra XP".

[Bronk]

It would seem that I would need to cover the XP costs in excess of 5,000 if I used that scroll to Wish for a magic item.

That would work when aiding another person while creating a magic item, but is there a rule that allows this when using a scroll?

[ShaneMRoth]

That would work when aiding another person while creating a magic item, but is there a rule that allows this when using a scroll?

My only understanding is that the XP cost for magic item creation has to be accounted for. The trick is to figure out who is stuck with the bill.

[kalos72]

Maybe we should split the two lines of thought some.

Scroll - Creator of the scroll pays for the 5k and anything "extra" he wants to put in. The USER of the scroll will need to cover any difference based on what he wants from the scroll.

SLA - Efreeti "pays" for the XP to cast the "wish" and anything that comes from it. But since monsters dont have XP...its free.

Remember its really the Efreeti thats "casting" the Wish spell, and he carries the XP cost, I am just telling it what to wish for.

That make sense?

[Curmudgeon]

That would work when aiding another person while creating a magic item, but is there a rule that allows this when using a scroll?
No, there isn't. The general rules for creating magic items satisfying the creation prerequisites piecemeal are on Dungeon Master's Guide page 215. If you're the designated item creator for purposes of the item creation feat, you pay the XP. If you're using Wish instead of an item creation feat, there is no mechanism in the game to supply any item prerequisite separately. You either have everything necessary for Wish to do the job, or the spell fails.

[ShaneMRoth]

Maybe we should split the two lines of thought some.

Scroll - Creator of the scroll pays for the 5k and anything "extra" he wants to put in. The USER of the scroll will need to cover any difference based on what he wants from the scroll.

SLA - Efreeti "pays" for the XP to cast the "wish" and anything that comes from it. But since monsters dont have XP...its free.

Remember its really the Efreeti thats "casting" the Wish spell, and he carries the XP cost, I am just telling it what to wish for.

That make sense?

In the case of the efreet, he doesn't pay or "carry" any experience point cost at all.

The argument is that efreet don't spend a single XP when granting any Wish.

Either experience points enter into an efreet's Wish, or they don't. I don't see how you can have it both ways.

If they don't, then it's difficult to see how an efreet could cover the XP cost of Magic Item Creation since the efreet never spends a single XP on a granted Wish at any point.

The notion that PCs, and PCs alone, require experience points to create items runs entirely contrary to my understanding of the Magic Item Creation system.

Magic items require experience points for anyone to craft them. Including demi-gods. Check out Deities and Demigods for yourself.

Everyone pays an XP cost for making magic items.

Including the God of Magic.

There is no mechanic that explicitly provides for monsters or any other NPCs to obtain a limitless supply of free magic items on the grounds that they don't "have" experience points.

An inability to spend experience points infers an inability to create magic items at all. Even when using a Wish. Even when that Wish is an SLA. Particularly when the Wish is an SLA.

No XP? No magic items.

[eggynack]

That stuff just doesn't match up with the rules. There's no crafting going on here. There's just a wish, and then there's an item, and if you use an SLA to get it, that item comes free of charge. Your assertion that there exists no mechanic that grants creatures limitless magic items is incorrect on the face of it, because this is a mechanic that grants creatures limitless magic items. One could argue that this is a circular argument, but the inverse is equally so.

[kalos72]

Not sure I follow you Shane, before you said if you cast a spell you need to pay any associated XP cost for that spell. Here the Efreeti is casting it, not me.

I am not creating a magic item, the spell is. I dont see how item creation rules play into this.

The question is, where does the XP cost lay for the outcome of Wish you desire. Since the Efreeti is using an SLA, and doesnt have XP to spend in the first place, he doesnt incur the cost.

By your position, he shouldn't even be allowed to cast Wish because there is an automatic 5k XP cost just for the casting, not even taking into consideration the outcome.

To the OP, the scroll idea is out unless I want to pay the XP cost. Sim'd Efreeti is the answer...

[Bad Wolf]

The user of a scroll doesn't pay the XP cost, its very clearly stated.

And Shane, do you only play as a DM in D&D? Or do you occasionally play as a player? Ive been wondering.

[ShaneMRoth]

Not sure I follow you Shane, before you said if you cast a spell you need to pay any associated XP cost for that spell. Here the Efreeti is casting it, not me.

I am not creating a magic item, the spell is. I dont see how item creation rules play into this.

The question is, where does the XP cost lay for the outcome of Wish you desire. Since the Efreeti is using an SLA, and doesnt have XP to spend in the first place, he doesnt incur the cost.

By your position, he shouldn't even be allowed to cast Wish because there is an automatic 5k XP cost just for the casting, not even taking into consideration the outcome.

To the OP, the scroll idea is out unless I want to pay the XP cost. Sim'd Efreeti is the answer...

My position has always been that there is no such thing as creating a Magic Item without incurring an XP cost. I haven't budged on that position at all.

Part of the reason is this...

SRD (Divine Ranks and Powers; Creating Magic Items)

If a deity has the item creation feat pertaining to the item it wishes to create, the cost (in gold and XP) and creation times are halved.

The gods themselves are entitled to half the normal XP cost.

A CR:8 Fire Elemental doesn't seem like he is entitled to a better discount than that, let alone a five-finger discount.

And the Gods? Well, many of them are Wish machines, too. Aren't they?

And many more of them are well equipped to dominate and press into service any number of Efreeti. Aren't they?

So, why would there even be a mechanic in place that requires them to spend XP on Magic Item Creation?

There is a Salient Divine Ability called Alter Reality:

This ability is similar to the wish spell. The deity merely thinks of something and then makes it so. Doing this requires at least a standard action.

Guess what it can't do?


This ability cannot create permanent magic items or creatures

My position is that the efreet is able to cast the Wish spell without paying the 5,000 XP cost, so if the Wish doesn't call for any more XP than that? Then it's all good. But beyond that? Someone has to pay for the XP that attaches to magic item creation... otherwise you have an entire race of 10 Hit Die mooks (each with all of 65 hit points) who are Magic Item PEZ Dispensers to a degree mechanically denied even to the God of Magic.

There's a single line that reads...


A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost.


And someone decided that the entire Magic Item Creation system can somehow be handwaved, or nullified, or be deemed "fluff" by virtue of that single line.

I read the same rules and conclude that since even the Gods (some of whom are Wish machines, and most of whom could easily dominate Efreeti) must pay XP to create magic items... it follows that Magic Items require XP for everyone... all the time... so, no XP means no Magic Items, because read the bolded part of this paragraph again.

But... I need to "prove" that somehow.



And Shane, do you only play as a DM in D&D? Or do you occasionally play as a player? Ive been wondering.

It's been a while, but I've played.

[Sliver]

In the case of the efreet, he doesn't pay or "carry" any experience point cost at all.

The argument is that efreet don't spend a single XP when granting any Wish.

Either experience points enter into an efreet's Wish, or they don't. I don't see how you can have it both ways.

If they don't, then it's difficult to see how an efreet could cover the XP cost of Magic Item Creation since the efreet never spends a single XP on a granted Wish at any point.

The notion that PCs, and PCs alone, require experience points to create items runs entirely contrary to my understanding of the Magic Item Creation system.

Magic items require experience points for anyone to craft them. Including demi-gods. Check out Deities and Demigods for yourself.

Everyone pays an XP cost for making magic items.

Including the God of Magic.

There is no mechanic that explicitly provides for monsters or any other NPCs to obtain a limitless supply of free magic items on the grounds that they don't "have" experience points.

An inability to spend experience points infers an inability to create magic items at all. Even when using a Wish. Even when that Wish is an SLA. Particularly when the Wish is an SLA.

No XP? No magic items.

It would be nice if your arguments weren't basically how you feel things should be, but how things are. The Deities and Demigods part? I checked it. Is completely irrelevant. Deities have specific mechanics for creating magic items, and none have Wish as a SLA. They spend not only xp, but also time and gold. Neither of which a Wish requires, but you are conveniently omitting that part.

The part about not paying xp because they don't have it is meaningless and irrelevant, as it is not the claim at all.

You know why your claim that the inability to pay the extra price doesn't hold up?


A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost

Let's see, where does a wish say you have to pay xp to create or improve a magic item?


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

Under the XP Cost! Which, when cast as a SLA, means that it doesn't have it. The line that allows creating magic items? Remains completely unchanged. If you were to rewrite the spell, but remove the XP Cost paragraph altogether, that would be how it plays out as a SLA. Well, you would also remove the Material Component paragraph...

How is the base 5000xp different than additional xp that you need to pay for magic items? Why that part can be waived when a Wish is cast as a SLA, but additional xp must be supplied or it isn't a legal use?


You already had an entire thread to yourself regarding Wish and your feelings on it. It was already locked up. We know how you feel, but it is not RAW. We know how you feel about the definition of RAW, and it's not RAW either. Can you please not lock up this thread again?

Unless you have text that isn't related to the crafting magic item rules, since they aren't relevant here, that suggests a SLA wish works otherwise, there is no point for you to argue further. You are free to pretend you agree with us and nod wisely when you tell us that it's your houserule, while not believing it's a houserule and only doing it to calm us. It's okay.

Edit: The fact that Deities need to pay XP for magic items has nothing to do with the argument at hand. They don't cast a wish as a SLA. The only thing it tells us is that you feel it should be otherwise. Good for you, but a poor argument. Yes, you need actual proof.

Edit2: You know why the crafting mechanic is ignored? Because it isn't crafting. You are ignoring it too. Why shouldn't a wish require time and gold? Why shouldn't it require the feats and spells? Why just xp is that you call as special and needs to be paid?

[Bad Wolf]

's been a while, but I've played.

As a player or a DM?

[marphod]

side note, is it "a XP cost" because XP begins with X or "an XP cost" because XP is short for experience which begins with E?

Neither, actually. It is 'An XP' Cost, because the abbreviation is pronounced as 'ecks pee', which starts with a vowel sound.

For more fun, consider the word 'Herb', which can be 'An Herb' using the American Standard pronunciation (er-b) or 'a herb' using the British Standard (her-b).

(and if an American English teacher has told you it should be "A Herb", because of the H and the pronunciation is irrelevant, I've got pretty much every major American style guide backing me up on this one.)

[eggynack]

It would be nice if your arguments weren't basically how you feel things should be, but how things are.
Basically just this. The rules are completely apathetic about how things should be. They don't give a crap about whether deities can make magic items for free. They don't think for even a second about the implications of a given rule. They just are, unto themselves. The rules say that an SLA wish can produce magic items at no XP cost. Therefore, that's how it works. If you think there's an actual claim to be made otherwise, then present it, but stop acting like pointing to the innate absurdity of a thing is an argument for its non-existence. It's not. In point of fact, absurdity is often a working premise for many of these things. The conversation is frequently, "Look at this absurd thing over here," and you're pointing to it and saying, "Nah, this can't work, cause it's too absurd."

[ShaneMRoth]

...
The Deities and Demigods part? I checked it. Is completely irrelevant. Deities have specific mechanics for creating magic items, and none have Wish as a SLA. They spend not only xp, but also time and gold. Neither of which a Wish requires, but you are conveniently omitting that part.

The part about not paying xp because they don't have it is meaningless and irrelevant, as it is not the claim at all.

That's not your claim, I was responding to a different member who staked a very different claim.



SLA - Efreeti "pays" for the XP to cast the "wish" and anything that comes from it. But since monsters dont have XP...its free.

That claim.


...
How is the base 5000xp different than additional xp that you need to pay for magic items? Why that part can be waived when a Wish is cast as a SLA, but additional xp must be supplied or it isn't a legal use?

Because spending XP to create magic items is an affirmative necessity.

Efreet aren't immune to spending XP on Wishes, they are unable to spend XP on Wishes. This quality of SLA Wishes is a limit on the power of those Wishes, not an enhancement.


...
Can you please not lock up this thread...

Unless you have text that isn't related to the crafting magic item rules, since they aren't relevant here, that suggests a SLA wish works otherwise, there is no point for you to argue further. You are free to pretend you agree with us and nod wisely when you tell us that it's your houserule, while not believing it's a houserule and only doing it to calm us. It's okay.

Yes, that was rough. I am being as mindful of my tone as I can. Really I am.

Text that isn't related to the Magic Item Creation rules? This is a thread about creating magic items. Those rules seem germane to this thread.

[marphod]

(For the Record, I house rule Wish works as Shane would like it to.

Actually, I house-rule Wish to have an XP Cost of 5000xp. An additional effect of Wish is that when it duplicates a spell costing more than 5000xp the wishing party pays the difference in XP, and when a wish is used to create a magic item, the wisher pays the difference between 1000XP and 2x the creating XP cost; which does, in fact, reduce the XP cost for wishing for items. I did this as it makes no sense to me as to why you can wish for 25,000GP of custom non-magical items but you can't do the same for magical items.

It also doesn't make sense to me that Gods have to pay XP for wishes, but quite frankly, they should probably be using Miracle anyways.)

[eggynack]

I agree that the argument for efreeti having free wishes from a lack of XP is illogical. At the same time though, that they cast it as an SLA does make the wishes free, whether they're wishing for something basic or for something incredibly expensive. And, while the wish is indeed creating a magic item, that doesn't connect wish to the magic item creation rules. Those rules are about crafting and the wish in question is not doing any crafting. It's just creating, out of magic, without any mechanical input.

[ShaneMRoth]

...
while the wish is indeed creating a magic item, that doesn't connect wish to the magic item creation rules. Those rules are about crafting and the wish in question is not doing any crafting. It's just creating, out of magic, without any mechanical input.

I can't reconcile that statement with this line in the Wish spell...


When a wish creates or improves a magic item, you must pay twice the normal XP cost for crafting or improving the item

The Wish spell does connect to the magic item creation rules, otherwise how does the DM adjudicate the normal XP cost?

[eggynack]

I can't reconcile that statement with this line in the Wish spell...



The Wish spell does connect to the magic item creation rules, otherwise how does the DM adjudicate the normal XP cost?
It connects to the normal magic item rules to that exact extent. Should've been more clear about that. That does not, however, imply any greater form of connection along the lines you're indicating. Once you've used the existing magic item rules to define the price, everything else is handled by the spell itself.

[ShaneMRoth]

Once you've used the existing magic item rules to define the price, everything else is handled by the spell itself.

The Wish spell doesn't fix a gold piece price limit on magic items created by the Wish spell. The only limit on Magic Item Creation regarding the Wish spell is a limit on experience points.

[Sliver]

I can't reconcile that statement with this line in the Wish spell...



The Wish spell does connect to the magic item creation rules, otherwise how does the DM adjudicate the normal XP cost?

This is how it works by RAW, when a wish is cast as a SLA: You choose an item. The XP cost of the wish becomes 5000+X, where X is double the usual xp required to craft it. That's the cost of the Wish, not the item.

The rules say that "A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost."

You delete the XP cost, proceed as usual.

It's not "you can't pay XP on a SLA" it's "you don't". Otherwise, Wish wouldn't be an option for a SLA, because it has a base XP cost.

Again, why is the modified XP cost any different than the base XP cost? Why do you insist that the Wish caster is forced to pay the added price?

Once the parameters of the wish are set, XP cost is one value, not 5000 and X, but 5000+X. The rules for SLAs don't distinguish between the two sources of the cost. They simply delete everything that is under XP Cost.

Take the spell, remove that part, and you have the SLA version. The line that allows you to create a magic item doesn't become broken without the XP cost. Unbalanced? Probably. Not broken.

[eggynack]

The Wish spell doesn't fix a gold piece price limit on magic items created by the Wish spell. The only limit on Magic Item Creation regarding the Wish spell is a limit on experience points.
Sure. Wish is defined by the magic item creation rules to the extent that it's stated to be defined by them. Which is not much. Doesn't really change the overall nature of things. You're not using wish to access the overall magic item creation rules or anything. It just sets the XP cost, and the XP cost stops existing once SLA's get involved.

[ShaneMRoth]

I'm back to my problem with approaching the Wish spell in the context of a passive, minimalist "by the book" referee.

The rules found in the Wish spell simply can't adjudicate themselves. At all.

Wish simply doesn't lend it self to the level of mechanical predictability that an authoritative RAW read demands.

The variables that go into the Wish spell are incompatible with a single, cut-and-dried, this-is-the-way-it-always-works ostensibly RAW read.

Each time the Wish spell is cast, it needs to be adjudicated. Actively.

[eggynack]

With regards to more complicated usages, outside the context of safe wishes? Sure. For safe wishes though, the rules are relatively simple. There are spells and effects that are hard enough to figure out that they don't really work without some adjudication, but wish, used in this way, is not on that list. Thing is, as I've pointed out in the past, "This thing is, as written, ambiguous," is a valid line of argumentation. You just haven't supplied ample support for that line's accuracy in this case. Typically, proving such a point has an even higher standard of proof, as you must show that there are two mutually exclusive yet entirely accurate readings of the text, and to be exact, those readings must rely entirely on the text rather than on outside sources. So, you say that wish doesn't allow a single reading? Prove it. Simple as that.

Edit: As an example of text I consider ambiguous, my usual go-to is polymorph. Polymorph is stated to inherit the text of alter self except where said otherwise, and one of the ways polymorph says otherwise is to say that, "You can’t cause a subject to assume a form smaller than Fine." The core question at work is whether that's an exception to the entirety of the size limitations of alter self, which are, "The new form must be within one size category of your normal size," or if they are merely an exception to the minimum allowable size. I'm of the opinion that the text is ambiguous, that either perspective is supported by the semantics at play, though I veer a bit towards the interpretation that says that it replaces the whole text. There's a whole argument there, but the point is, that's what a claim towards ambiguity and the need for DM adjudication would look like. Just saying that you think DM adjudication is needed is not sufficient.

[DarkSonic1337]

No, the wish spell is very clearly defined.

When wishing for a magic item, the XP cost for wish BECOMES 5000+(2x the XP cost of creating the magic item). This is clearly stated in the XP cost of wish.

The XP cost of creating a magic item is 1/25th the gold piece value of a magic item. This is defined by the item creation rules.

To adjudicate what happens when someone uses wish to create a magic item, simply calculate the gold piece value of the item (using the item creation rules or referring to the printed price of an already existing item), divide that by 25, multiply that by 2, and add 5000XP to determine the XP cost of the wish. Then they cast the spell with the associated XP cost and poof, the spell creates the magic item.

If they are casting it as a spell like ability (or supernatural ability), simply delete the XP cost portion of the wish as normal for SLA's and Su abilities. This changes NOTHING ELSE about the spell's function.

This requires absolutely no adjudication whatsoever (unless you're wishing for a item not listed in a book, in which case you need a DM to determine the item's cost and only that). The caster picks an item to create, which sets the XP cost of wish, which is then eliminated per the rules of SLA's, and then wish creates the item. The fact that Wish's XP cost is variable does not change the fact that it is an XP cost.

[ShaneMRoth]

Perhaps I can illustrate my dilemma as follows:

What is the most powerful magic item that can be granted with one SLA Wish from an Efreet?

If the matter is as cut-and-dried as I'm expected to believe, then this should be a fairly simple question to answer.

[eggynack]

Perhaps I can illustrate my dilemma as follows:

What is the most powerful magic item that can be granted with one SLA Wish from an Efreet?

If the matter is as cut-and-dried as I'm expected to believe, then this should be a fairly simple question to answer.
What's the most powerful/expensive item that exists? By the rules, it is that one. Don't personally know the item lists well enough to cite the exact magic item, but that doesn't seem all that important.

[ShaneMRoth]

What's the most powerful/expensive item that exists? By the rules, it is that one. Don't personally know the item lists well enough to cite the exact magic item, but that doesn't seem all that important.

So, a character could use an SLA Wish to procure a Relic or an Artifact or a deities' signature weapon?

[eggynack]

So, a character could use an SLA Wish to procure a Relic or an Artifact or a deities' signature weapon?
Maybe. Don't know if those qualify as magic items per the rules, and more importantly, they don't tend to have their own price to my knowledge. That wish defines its parameters by price, and that these items lack that price, indicates to me that they fall outside the parameters of wish. But, for anything that can absolutely be said to be a magic item with a defined price, you're fine wishing for it, and even for things without that defined price, it looks like it could be plausible. But, y'know, you don't just have to produce ambiguity in general. To find ambiguity that makes your case, you have to find that ambiguity as applies to this very specific issue.

Edit: To give a better defined answer, while the efreeti gets to ignore the XP cost, I think that cost still has to exist on a fundamental level. If that aspect of the spell just returns a null, then I'd think the wish would fail, or otherwise fall outside the parameters of a safe wish. That existent price definitely seems like the only limitation though, if it's a limit that exists.

[Deadline]

So, a character could use an SLA Wish to procure a Relic or an Artifact or a deities' signature weapon?

There is a limit mentioned in the spell itself you know. Artifacts are treated differently than normal magic weapons in the rules (i.e. no creation rules, special destruction methods, etc.), and Wish makes no exception to this:


You may try to use a wish to produce greater effects than these, but doing so is dangerous. Such a wish gives the DM the opportunity to fulfill your request without fulfilling it completely. (The wish may pervert your intent into a literal but undesirable fulfillment or only a partial fulfillment.) For example, wishing for a staff of the magi might get you instantly transported to the presence of the staff's current owner.

So I'd say any magic item short of an artifact would fall under the purview of Wish. Keep in mind that I haven't scoured the Epic-Level Handbook, so there may be something in there that specifically limits with to any non-epic magic item.

The XP Cost of the Wish spell clearly states that the 5,000 xp is the minimum xp cost for the spell. It then lists two ways that the XP Cost of the spell can be higher than 5,000 xp. It's pretty straightforward. I'm not sure where you are seeing that the XP cost paid isn't part of the spell (especially because the spell states that the xp cost is doubled, so it's not even the same as normal Magic Item creation rules).

[ShaneMRoth]

...
So I'd say any magic item short of an artifact would fall under the purview of Wish. Keep in mind that I haven't scoured the Epic-Level Handbook, so there may be something in there that specifically limits with to any non-epic magic item.

The Epic Level Items require Epic level crafting Feats. Since no Feats come into play for the Wish. Beyond that, it's Gold pieces and experience points.

This ostensibly RAW read allows for an efreet to grant a character a magic item worth literally millions of gold pieces. Instantly.

Bracers of Relentless Might
4,384,000 gp;

Rod of Epic Might
4,293,432 gp;

+20 Armor enhancement Bonus
4,000,000 gp;

+20 Weapon enhancement Bonus
4,000,000 gp; 8,000,000 gp;

Instantly. With no XP cost.

And it wouldn't be difficult to sell any of this stuff to a wealthy NPC. Edit: Or a head of state.

That alone strikes me as game breaking.

SRD (Epic Magic Items; Epic Magic Armor)

There is no limit to the enhancement bonus of epic magic armor or shields, to the market price modifier of epic magic armor or shield special abilities, or to the total enhancement bonus and market price modifier of epic magic armor or shields.


And in the absence of any gold piece or XP limit, there is no mathematical limit on the enhancement bonuses one could Wish for, as described. +100, +1,000,-- + one trillion.

That's not game breaking. That's game shattering.


...
The XP Cost of the Wish spell clearly states that the 5,000 xp is the minimum xp cost for the spell. It then lists two ways that the XP Cost of the spell can be higher than 5,000 xp. It's pretty straightforward. I'm not sure where you are seeing that the XP cost paid isn't part of the spell (especially because the spell states that the xp cost is doubled, so it's not even the same as normal Magic Item creation rules).

The Curmudgeon summed up this entire situation better in one post than I did in a dozen...


...
If you're using Wish instead of an item creation feat, there is no mechanism in the game to supply any item prerequisite separately. You either have everything necessary for Wish to do the job, or the spell fails.

I submit that XP are a prerequisite for Magic Item Creation, even if a Wish is used to create that magic item.

[Deadline]

The Epic Level Items require Epic level crafting Feats. Since no Feats come into play for the Wish. Beyond that, it's Gold pieces and experience points.

I'm not going to dig into it, but I know Epic items are treated differently than normal magic items. Again, there may be something in the Epic Level Handbook that specifies a limit on Wish, but I have no interest in looking it up at this time. You could actually have pretty solid footing denying an Epic item to a Wisher on the basis that Epic items are different than standard magic items (even if that difference is simple terminology), just as Artifacts are.


That alone strikes me as game breaking.

Even restricted to just Magic items that aren't Epic, this is a true statement. It doesn't change the RAW at all, but it's plenty game-breaking. Situations like this one are why Houserules can absolutely be necessary (and there are plenty of places the rules produce hilarious results without modification). It's also why there are plenty of DM's who are more than happy to throw a wrench into Wish and make it spectacularly less useful (it's still a solid 9th level spell if you removed the Magic Item granting entirely, or just moved it to the non-safe list). I myself houserule it so that you can only wish for standard (i.e. written in one of the books) magic items, so you wouldn't even be able to use it to create a custom item with my houserule. The alternative is something you may have heard folks talk about here: The Tippyverse.


The Curmudgeon summed up this entire situation better in one post than I did in a dozen...

Was Curmudgeon arguing that the xp cost for a Wished magic item wasn't part of the xp component of the spell? I didn't get that from his post. Curmudgeon, could you clarify?

Also, Curmudgeon tends to argue RAW, so I'd be surprise if your reading of his post was correct. I'd guess he's saying that if you want to successfully Wish for, say, a Darkskull, you'd need to be at least CL 9, be Evil, and also provide a casting of Unhallow.


Edit - Ah, found his post. He was responding to someone suggesting that you might be able to use the cooperation bit on page 215 of the DMG to create a magic item with a Wish scroll, specifically. It looks like Curmudgeon was arguing that you could not do that. The cooperation bit is below.


It is possible for more than one character to cooperate in the creation of an item, with each participant providing one or more of the prerequisites.

[ShaneMRoth]

I'm not going to dig into it, but I know Epic items are treated differently than normal magic items. Again, there may be something in the Epic Level Handbook that specifies a limit on Wish, but I have no interest in looking it up at this time. You could actually have pretty solid footing denying an Epic item to a Wisher on the basis that Epic items are different than standard magic items (even if that difference is simple terminology), just as Artifacts are.

I did dig into it.

The Epic feats are the only substantial mechanical difference. The Epic Handbook is silent on the matter of Wishing for Magic Items. It calls the Core Magic Item Creation system.

Also, I don't see how a refusal to look up a rule is an affirmative defense for sustaining a position.



Situations like this one are why Houserules can absolutely be necessary (and there are plenty of places the rules produce hilarious results without modification). It's also why there are plenty of DM's who are more than happy to throw a wrench into Wish and make it spectacularly less useful (it's still a solid 9th level spell if you removed the Magic Item granting entirely, or just moved it to the non-safe list). I myself houserule it so that you can only wish for standard (i.e. written in one of the books) magic items, so you wouldn't even be able to use it to create a custom item with my houserule. The alternative is something you may have heard folks talk about here: The Tippyverse.

I could not care less about the Tippyverse.

You and I don't have the same idea of what constitutes a house rule.

[Brova]

I could not care less about the Tippyverse.

Uh, so? The Tippyverse is the result of RAW. Well, if you patch the biggest excesses of wish abuse. And assume that people who can create demiplanes and summon literal sex fiends will act to protect a society full of people who have literally nothing to offer them.


You and I don't have the same idea of what constitutes a house rule.

A house rule is any rule that cannot be directly inferred from the text, particularly any rule that functions differently at different tables. Those can be clarifications (for example, how do bonus feats work?) or entirely new rules (for example, you may only wish for items worth less than 15,000 GP). Note that even if there exists a rule that calls for you to make new rules (i.e. the suggestion that DMs create their own PrCs), the rules created by that process are house rules as they cannot be predictably derived from the text.

Now as far as the main discussion seems to be going, I think Shane and Curmudgeon are missing a key point. The rules for "scribing scrolls" or "brewing potions" describe a process for creating magic items. If you are to use that process, you have to follow all the steps (i.e. expend time, have spells available, burn XP). But wish describes an entirely different process for creating magic items. Namely, you wish for it, burn twice the normal XP cost plus five thousand, and then get an item. Just as the scroll creation process requires you to have scribe scroll but not craft wondrous item, the wish creation process requires you to have a large pile of XP but literally nothing else.

[eggynack]

This ostensibly RAW read allows for an efreet to grant a character a magic item worth literally millions of gold pieces. Instantly.
Sure. Seems supported by the rules well enough.


That alone strikes me as game breaking.
Absolutely. When combined with things that grant early access especially, because game breaking is really par for the course when you actually have 9th level spells.


I submit that XP are a prerequisite for Magic Item Creation, even if a Wish is used to create that magic item.
And no, this doesn't follow from that. That a rule leads to a ludicrous result does not in and of itself mean that said rule does not exist, and neither does it strictly imply that there is some second rules accurate reading that doesn't break the game. The only prerequisites for a magic item created through wish are those explicitly stated in the text of wish, and there are no such prerequisites. The same goes for costs, and while there is such a cost, that cost is bypassed by this methodology. You can submit anything you like, but without ironclad rules support, what you submit is rather pointless.

[Deadline]

Also, I don't see how a refusal to look up a rule is an affirmative defense for sustaining a position.

It's not, and I never made the claim it was. I was making my lack of knowledge clear to you. As I said, Epic items are a specifically named subset of Magic items, much like Artifacts. A solid case could be made that Wish doesn't let you create Epic items as a "safe" choice (you could still wish for one just like you can wish for an Artifact, it just wouldn't be a "safe" choice).


I could not care less about the Tippyverse.

Ok, so? Was there a point here, or is this a random thought?

In case it wasn't clear from the context of my previous post, the RAW rule works just fine (it's a main feature of the Tippyverse). I don't use it that way, because I find that use to be easily prone to abuse.


You and I don't have the same idea of what constitutes a house rule.

Well, what is your definition of a house rule? (I feel like we've gone over this particular ground before in a different thread, so if we have I apologize.)

[ShaneMRoth]

...
Just as the scroll creation process requires you to have scribe scroll but not craft wondrous item, the wish creation process requires you to have a large pile of XP but literally nothing else.

The position with which I am dissenting is the position that an SLA Wish requires no XP at all to create a magic item.


...
You can submit anything you like, but without ironclad rules support, what you submit is rather pointless.

Presenting a viewpoint that differs from yours is not inherently pointless.



It's not, and I never made the claim it was. I was making my lack of knowledge clear to you.

Fair enough. I apologize for suggesting otherwise. I was wrong.



In case it wasn't clear from the context of my previous post, the RAW rule works just fine (it's a main feature of the Tippyverse). I don't use it that way, because I find that use to be easily prone to abuse.

This particular RAW read of this rule doesn't work fine at all. And describing it as being "prone to abuse" is a powerful understatement.



Well, what is your definition of a house rule? (I feel like we've gone over this particular ground before in a different thread, so if we have I apologize.)

My understanding of a house rule (speaking only for myself, mind you) is a mindful deviation from the Rules As Written. Illustrative examples include:


If the referee adds a mechanical element that wasn't in the rules at all. (such as a critical failure table); or

If the ref adjudicates a rule in a manner explicitly and mechanically contrary to the text (such as requiring a ranged touch attack before a Magic Missile hits a target); or

If the referee doesn't make any mechanical changes to a rule but substantially modifies how that rule comes into play in that particular campaign. (such as allowing players to create Evil PCs, or to play non-standard characters such as drow or kobolds.)


A referee exercising prudent judgment to adjudicate a rule? That's not a house rule. That's the referee's job.

Take 100 Wishes, phrased exactly the same way, and have those Wishes play out at 100 different tables where each of the 100 referees is adhering as strictly as they can to the Rules As Written... and you will likely get 100 different adjudications. Because there will be factors in play at each of those tables that can't be anticipated that the referee must take into account. And the notion that all 100 of those referees are resorting to a house rule... on the grounds that any exercise of referee discretion is somehow a violation of the Rules As Written... is a bridge too far for me.

[eggynack]

The position with which I am dissenting is the position that an SLA Wish requires no XP at all to create a magic item.
Sure, but it's not on any apparent basis. The XP cost is explicitly associated with the spell. SLA's get rid of XP costs. That's just about it.


Presenting a viewpoint that differs from yours is not inherently pointless.
Not inherently, no. But if you don't support your point, then it is kinda pointless. As the example I often use for this, if I were to claim that fighters don't get bonus feats by the rules, and just said that with nothing in support, then would that not be somewhat pointless to you? I guess you'd get some insight into how I see the game, but it wouldn't really change the way you see the game. That's pretty much where I am here. I can see that this is a thing you think, for some reason, but the objective facts are against you.




My understanding of a house rule (speaking only for myself, mind you) is a mindful deviation from the Rules As Written. Illustrative examples include:
Yeah, but that's what you're doing. The rules say that the game works a certain way, and you're saying you'd do it otherwise.


A referee exercising prudent judgment to adjudicate a rule? That's not a house rule. That's the referee's job.
And this is not what you're doing. The rule has clear meaning. It could be considered prudent to create a house rule, but a house rule is what you're creating.


Take 100 Wishes, phrased exactly the same way, and have those Wishes play out at 100 different tables where each of the 100 referees is adhering as strictly as they can to the Rules As Written... and you will likely get 100 different adjudications. Because there will be factors in play at each of those tables that can't be anticipated that the referee must take into account. And the notion that all 100 of those referees are resorting to a house rule... on the grounds that any exercise of referee discretion is somehow a violation of the Rules As Written... is a bridge too far for me.
If all the wishes are unsafe, leaving behind the list of safe wishes? Then yes, I would expect a great deal of variance, because adjudication is explicitly expected so as to subvert the effect of the wish. For a simple magic item gaining wish? Where the DM has good enough rules understanding to recognize how things work? I would expect every DM to rule identically. You can see an effect like that here, if you'd like. Start a thread, asking how a DM, playing completely by RAW, should rule on a wish for some magic item. Perhaps a ring of three wishes, because that's the standard. People here are experts on RAW, or many are, so I would expect identical answers, and you would expect widely divergent ones. Or, you can just look at this thread, where everyone but you agrees that this is how the wish works, and see that a number of RAW understanding folk independently came to the conclusion that the game works this way, and see that this extends out into the RAW understanding populace.

[ShaneMRoth]

...
People here are experts on RAW, or many are, so I would expect identical answers, and you would expect widely divergent ones. Or, you can just look at this thread, where everyone but you agrees that this is how the wish works, and see that a number of RAW understanding folk independently came to the conclusion that the game works this way, and see that this extends out into the RAW understanding populace.

You and I are now revisiting some pretty familiar territory.

I've seen where this goes if it persists too long, and where it goes is no place good.

If I can come up with words that are somehow not a rephrase of what I've already said on this thread, I'll post it.

Til then, I'm stepping aside.

[Brova]

The position with which I am dissenting is the position that an SLA Wish requires no XP at all to create a magic item.

Here is what the actual rules have to say on the issue:


A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability’s use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

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

There is zero provision in wish's XP cost for an exception to the general rule that SLAs ignore XP costs. Game, set, match.

[eggynack]

You and I are now revisiting some pretty familiar territory.

Well, yeah. You have a tendency to "interpret" the rules in a way that leads to the end result you want to reach, and it causes you to ultimately be in conflict with RAW.

[kalos72]

So to throw a curve ball here....

If the Wish SLA was used to make a "Scroll of ..." that had an XP cost UNDER 5k, would the SLA still cover the cost?

IE "Scroll of Simulacrum" and use it to make 10HD Efreeti for example?

[Brova]

So to throw a curve ball here....

If the Wish SLA was used to make a "Scroll of ..." that had an XP cost UNDER 5k, would the SLA still cover the cost?

IE "Scroll of Simulacrum" and use it to make 10HD Efreeti for example?

First of all, the actual answer is yes. That is a thing you can do, because SLA wish costs zero XP.

But the 5000 XP cost (if you were casting wish or using it as an Archmage SLA) doesn't actually cover anything. If you want to directly emulate a spell that costs XP (such as simulacrum) or create a scroll at all, you will need some additional XP.

Interestingly, I was fairly sure that efreet advanced by class levels, and the simulacrum thing wouldn't actually work, but they advance by HD. So you could in theory wish for a scroll of "simulacrum of a 20HD efreet". I say in theory, because a DM could arguably claim that 20HD efreet don't exist.

[Sliver]

Here's a simple tip when arguing RAW with Shane:

Look at his signature. Do you accept it? If not, then don't argue with him. Don't bother. He doesn't accept your definition of RAW and you will not be able to change his, as many before you have tried. Present your information to whoever asked the question, and let it go.

Shane has a different set of assumptions when he discusses the rules of the game than almost everybody in the forum. I haven't seen anyone to agree with him, but I won't deny the possibility that it exists. If you argue with him for the purpose of changing his mind, you will get nowhere. If you aren't trying to convince him, then it's pointless to devote more than one post to it.

So please, can we stop flooding every other thread Shane posts in with the same pointless arguments?

(the existence of Rule 0 is RAW, but any application of Rule 0 is a house rule, Shane, simply because it can be different at every game. Some rule X, others rule Y. Even if both are only a minor interpretation of the same rule, they are house rules merely by the fact that it is not as written by the rules, but as interpreted by the DM.)

[Deadline]

Well, yeah. You have a tendency to "interpret" the rules in a way that leads to the end result you want to reach, and it causes you to ultimately be in conflict with RAW.

It's worth noting that few if any folks here are saying that the above is a bad thing at the table, by the way. RAW isn't some inviolate thing that DM's should never alter for their games (in some cases it is practically a necessity). It is, however, usually important to note such differences to your players if they are unaware.

That said, folks tend to stick to making either RAW arguments around here, or at least making it clear that "this is how I rule it at my table." That can often be jarring to folks who aren't used to that sort of discussion, so I do try to take that into account with my posts. My apologies if that wasn't clear in any of my posts.

[kalos72]

First of all, the actual answer is yes. That is a thing you can do, because SLA wish costs zero XP.

But the 5000 XP cost (if you were casting wish or using it as an Archmage SLA) doesn't actually cover anything. If you want to directly emulate a spell that costs XP (such as simulacrum) or create a scroll at all, you will need some additional XP.

Interestingly, I was fairly sure that efreet advanced by class levels, and the simulacrum thing wouldn't actually work, but they advance by HD. So you could in theory wish for a scroll of "simulacrum of a 20HD efreet". I say in theory, because a DM could arguably claim that 20HD efreet don't exist.



Thank you. Or I guess I could go Ice Assassin and avoid the XP cost all together while making a fully powerful, SLA enabled Efreeti regardless of HD.

[eggynack]

It's worth noting that few if any folks here are saying that the above is a bad thing at the table, by the way. RAW isn't some inviolate thing that DM's should never alter for their games (in some cases it is practically a necessity). It is, however, usually important to note such differences to your players if they are unaware.
Sure. It's mostly just problematic in the context of these RAW discussions. And, actually, it's rather problematic as applies to argumentation as a whole. Whether you're arguing for a RAW perspective, or proposing a house rule, you shouldn't start with your conclusion as iron clad and find evidence to support it. That's a surefire way to reach the wrong conclusion a good amount of the time (y'know, in those situations where you were wrong to start off with). Not investing yourself in your perspectives too much can be difficult, but it's critical to putting forth good arguments. Because, even if you're right, understanding the opposing point of view in a manner which can only be fully reached by recognizing the possibility that you're wrong lends a claim a robustness that's difficult to obtain otherwise.

[Bad Wolf]

Here's a simple tip when arguing RAW with Shane:

Look at his signature. Do you accept it? If not, then don't argue with him. Don't bother. He doesn't accept your definition of RAW and you will not be able to change his, as many before you have tried. Present your information to whoever asked the question, and let it go.

Shane has a different set of assumptions when he discusses the rules of the game than almost everybody in the forum. I haven't seen anyone to agree with him, but I won't deny the possibility that it exists. If you argue with him for the purpose of changing his mind, you will get nowhere. If you aren't trying to convince him, then it's pointless to devote more than one post to it.

So please, can we stop flooding every other thread Shane posts in with the same pointless arguments?

(the existence of Rule 0 is RAW, but any application of Rule 0 is a house rule, Shane, simply because it can be different at every game. Some rule X, others rule Y. Even if both are only a minor interpretation of the same rule, they are house rules merely by the fact that it is not as written by the rules, but as interpreted by the DM.)

And based on the vampire thread a while back, its sorta obvious he views D&D as DM against player.

[ShaneMRoth]

And based on the vampire thread a while back, its sorta obvious he views D&D as DM against player.

I don't view D&D as a zero sum game. On any level.