Why do people play at epic? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Brova

2015-09-18, 07:33 AM

Because it is a powerlevel most P&P games won't even allow. And - get this - most people like being powerful. Sure, everything takes longer. But at epic levels your choices affect whole societies, nations, continents or depending on your class choice, even existence itself. I could really go for an extremely high level campaign in D&D/Pathfinder right about now.

I agree that it's a higher level of power, but I don't think you need to go epic to do that. I mean, consider the following characters:

1. Wizard 5/Incantatrix 3/Shadowcraft Mage 5. Improved Familiar (Mirror Mephit). High enough level that his simulacra have pet Mirror Mephits which can make their own simulacra. That alone is enough firepower to kill almost any printed monster. Layer on Necropolitan and Spell-Stitched for even more shenanigans.
2. Cleric 5/Dweomerkeeper 8. Repeatedly awaken yourself. Now you have (near) infinite Cha. Proceed to Persist all the spells. Also, limited wish for near limitless utility and the ability to abuse Supernatural Spell for a huge array of spells to use with permanency. You also get Initiate of Mystra shenanigans which are probably good enough on their own.
3. Druid 8/Hathran 5. A high enough caster level to kill anything that exists with word of balance. Also spontaneous casting, some new spells that are sweet, and possibly DMM shenanigans.
4. Artificer 13. Abuse magic device is sweet. Also crafting shenanigans. Also probably some stuff with infusions.

Any of those characters are probably enough to compete on the epic field, and they don't even have eighth level spells (well the Artificer sort of does). Once you get past 10th level or so, power is much more a function of allowed optimization than level.

For casters, epic magic comes into play. That's a whole minigame in itself. A judicious DM can make it work and, in doing so, creates a rather unique experience that just doesn't exist pre-epic.

Epic magic is at it's core just creating spells. That's something which is in the PHB. There are rules for it, but they are broken as hell and make it easier to use them the more you abuse them. Frankly, the only new thing which Epic Spellcasting offers is big ritual spells, which personally feels like a downgrade from just getting to cast your spells.

Finally, there's the gold. If your the more mercenary type just being able to consider thousands upon thousands of gp pocket change feels great. The awesome loot draws them.

There's no reason (in RAW D&D) for a character to care about gold past 9th or so. You can get wishes from Genies at that point, and they can give you all the gold. Now, by RAW they can also give you all the items, but that's obviously stupid broken,

Kurald Galain

2015-09-18, 07:53 AM

I just don't really get why you'd want to. Dnd can be a pretty complex game as is, and the higher level it is the more complicated it gets. Everything from preparing spells to shopping just takes longer. The martial/caster difference just grows as you level up to the point where martial characters get pretty pointless at high-level play. Epic and high-level play seem pretty much the same to me, a huge game of rocket tag. Any adventure at epic (and I struggle to see many good ideas for that) could be done better by scaling everyone down 10-20 levels.

3E / PF is one of the few commonly played RPGs that give player characters truly world-shattering abilities at epic levels. That is why.

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-18, 08:14 AM

There's no reason (in RAW D&D) for a character to care about gold past 9th or so. You can get wishes from Genies at that point, and they can give you all the gold. Now, by RAW they can also give you all the items, but that's obviously stupid broken,

If you want to get into TO nonsense this is doable by level 5; candle of invocation. This, however, will fly at very few tables and anything that relies on using or abusing NPC's is just begging to get shutdown anyway.

As for your example builds, none of them have even reached the non-epic peak of power (incidently, I'm pretty sure 2 isn't actually legal). Some of the real game changers are 8th and 9th level effects; Teleport circle, the most powerful callings (holy crap gate), genesis, true creation, programmed amnesia and mindrape, plague of undead, deathpact, awaken construct, etc. Massive damage and instant win effects are trivial next to the impact these can have. Granted there are more 9's than 8's there but still.

Epic magic is more than just spell creation. There are rituals and there are restrictions that just aren't the same as non-epic magic. Nevermind the origin of species spell.

Ossian77

2015-09-18, 08:31 AM

Less of a game mechanics answer (I am way behind on that) and more of a scope-answer. People love to at least try that scope. In my experience, if you have the "high school gamers" and keep them long enough and the story line develops cleverly you might make it to "epic" and still have fun, until you decide you need something more e6 (after playing Lord Beerus for a while, suddenly you feel the urge to play a gritty swordsman with a rusty blade and an eyepatch, doing mercenary s**t in a medieval warfare story...)

Other times you go through the groups, or the parties, you level up a bit, close the story-arc, moe on, make a new party (higher/lover level, try new combos etc...) and then at some point you decide you go for a self-contained Epic campaign. Roll new characters level 30, get it over with, rinse and repeat (back to gritty swordsman...).

Think about it, we grew up surrounded by fictional characters (though mostly martial artists, monsters, and swordsmen, that is a thing that kind of penalizes you in d20) who go toe to toe with universe-ending demons. Or when they have a go at each other (see Ken Vs Kaioh) they warp reality, make volcanoes explode, and split the heaven in two just by trading punches.

It is fun, a lot of fun if well organized (book-keeping optimization, solid knowledge of all rules, fights to the minimum) but it does not really last, because you cannot really relate to the new characters (not that I can relate a helluvalot to a gritty 1 eyed swordsman, but even less so to a Wizard that can force-yank Jupiter out of its orbit)

o.

Brova

2015-09-18, 12:30 PM

If you want to get into TO nonsense this is doable by level 5; candle of invocation. This, however, will fly at very few tables and anything that relies on using or abusing NPC's is just begging to get shutdown anyway.

Actually, if you patch the thing where you can get arbitrary items, the wish economy is incredibly healthy for the game. It lets you give people castles made of diamond or golden spelljammers without having them get hawked for a +2 sword.

As for your example builds, none of them have even reached the non-epic peak of power

That misses the point. The power you have isn't about what literal abilities are or aren't on your character sheet. It's about your ability to use those abilities to participate in and advance stories. Obviously giving these characters 8th or 9th level spells would provide additional power, but the characters as written are capable of confronting just about any imaginable challenge. And simply giving people high level abilities would only make them more effective than he characters presented if those abilities were used in a similarly optimized way. A character who used Persistent shapechange to stack immunities and offenses would be a greater threat than the listed characters, but one who simply used shapechange to turn into a big scary monster and smash things wouldn't be.

(incidently, I'm pretty sure 2 isn't actually legal).

How so? The Cleric only entry to Dweomerkeeper is pretty basic (Spell domain + Magic domain + Scribe Scroll or Rune domain + Magic domain + Initiate of Mystra). The awaken loop involves using polymorph to turn into an animal and then cast awaken on yourself. The spells can be emulated via greater anyspell and limited wish, both of which are options for the Spell domain.

Teleport circle,

The Artificer can proxy with magic items. If the Wizard is allowed to stack Spell-Stitched on himself and his simulacra he can proxy with simulacra ferrymen.

the most powerful callings (holy crap gate),

Gate has three basic modes. Making a portal, calling allies, and Free Vacation: No Save. The first is doable for the Artificer via magic items of greater plane shift. Calling allies is going to be good, but bear in mind that all of these characters have access to planar binding, and hence chain-binding to produce a volume of tokens able to overwhelm any given ally (if simply by IPing it to death). Free Vacation: No Save is a no save, just die ability capable of targeting anything anywhere. Honestly, that's probably better than anything these guys can pull off. The Wizard's simulacrum spam can take stuff out, though he has troubles with cross-planar travel.

genesis,

Other than time or magic traits + planar bubble, not much better than low level environment alteration spells provided they can be cast in sufficient volume. Those are hard to capture, although similar (if less dramatic) effects can be accrued using existing planes. However, all the characters have access to highly efficient metamagic reduction schemes already, so it's not much of a concern. The action economy can be captured with Far Realm planar bubble (IIRC).

true creation,

The Artificer can emulate that one straight out. wish from a bound Efreet will also have essentially the same effect (or actually the same effect as case may be).

programmed amnesia and mindrape,

The Cleric can invest a single rank in Diplomacy to instantly make any character they encounter Fanatic thanks to an arbitrarily large Cha score.

plague of undead,

I assume I'm missing something, as the big deal (over animate dead) appears to be that it is roughly free (hello Supernatural Spell) and gives max HP (hello repeated casting).

deathpact,

Craft Contingent Spell + revivify + heal. Doable by Artificer or Cleric.

awaken construct,

polymorph + awaken totally works for this.

Crux Argentum

2015-09-18, 01:07 PM

I don't understand why people do it either, TIPOT. As stated, it's overwhelming, confusing, and ultimately boring (imho). The martial/magic thing you mentioned stinks too. It's bad even before epic levels when you have someone in the group with vast knowledge and comprehension of magic that isn't afraid to use it and spoil all the fun for the rest of the group. Personally had a terrible experience with someone like that as a tabletop DM... Why people devote so much time to researching how to break the game, I'm sure I don't know and will never know.

The only way I'd even consider playing an epic level game would be in a low/no magic campaign.

SimonMoon6

2015-09-18, 01:40 PM

(1) As mentioned, why stop playing characters just because their levels become a specific number?

(2) For most PCs, character creation is based around the idea of "what will my character be at level 20?", so it seems utterly cruel to end a game at the point when a character is *finally* becoming what he wanted to be. After all that time dealing with pointless goblins and rats, finally my character is cool... so we stop playing? Bah.

(3) Power is cool. Unlike what others have said, I think *lots* of other games allow you to have world-shattering power and they do so in ways that are far better than D&D games do. Of course, most such games are superhero games, but there's no reason to be a genre snob. People want to play cool characters, but D&D doesn't really let you do that easily. The problem is that D&D is the game that most people play, so they're stuck having to play epic characters in D&D, when they might be better off playing a superhero in Mayfair's DC Heroes RPG, for example.

Kantolin

2015-09-18, 01:58 PM

It's bad even before epic levels when you have someone in the group with vast knowledge and comprehension of magic that isn't afraid to use it and spoil all the fun for the rest of the group.

Realistically, I think this is the real source of most problems, epic or otherwise - one person (or a subset) of a group who are out to spoil everyone's fun.

I most often see this as the guy who found a build on the internet and wants to wreck houses with it, but it sometimes also is the guy who insists on playing super far below the party and whines when people don't nanny him. Either way, regardless of starting level or ending level, that is the crux of the problem. Fell drain sonic snaps and level one scorching ray shenanigans are just as irritating to low level problems as chain gating solars is to high level problems (which is to say it /can/ be okay if your group is that highly optimized, but /probably/ isn't :P )

I've played some low-epic games, in my extremely low-optimization group, that were super fun for everyone involved. I've also played in a single high-optimization epic game, which was also fun, although optimization isn't my cup of tea. In both cases, the main advantage was the scope - the default becomes 'yes you can', and thus lots of awesome and creative ideas abounded.

Hecuba

2015-09-18, 02:07 PM

I just don't really get why you'd want to.

Personally, I like the mechanical structure of Epic spellcasting. True, it requires a very heavy-handed DM to arbitrate it well. But when it is arbitrated well, I like how the skill based casting works out.

That said, there are better systems for that. But I do have the occasional group who only plays D&D.

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-18, 05:28 PM

Actually, if you patch the thing where you can get arbitrary items, the wish economy is incredibly healthy for the game. It lets you give people castles made of diamond or golden spelljammers without having them get hawked for a +2 sword.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Something for nothing just doesn't grok with me or the people I know.

That misses the point. The power you have isn't about what literal abilities are or aren't on your character sheet. It's about your ability to use those abilities to participate in and advance stories. Obviously giving these characters 8th or 9th level spells would provide additional power, but the characters as written are capable of confronting just about any imaginable challenge. And simply giving people high level abilities would only make them more effective than he characters presented if those abilities were used in a similarly optimized way. A character who used Persistent shapechange to stack immunities and offenses would be a greater threat than the listed characters, but one who simply used shapechange to turn into a big scary monster and smash things wouldn't be.

Two responses to that:

You've missed the point because it very much -is- about the actual powers you gain at those higher levels. Being able to do more and more rarified things is part of the appeal.

There are stories you miss out on by eliminating these effects. I'll get into that in a sec.

How so? The Cleric only entry to Dweomerkeeper is pretty basic (Spell domain + Magic domain + Scribe Scroll or Rune domain + Magic domain + Initiate of Mystra). The awaken loop involves using polymorph to turn into an animal and then cast awaken on yourself. The spells can be emulated via greater anyspell and limited wish, both of which are options for the Spell domain.

Awaken replaces your int and gives you animal HD. When you have int 3 because of a bad roll and a bunch of useless HD that push your level out of whack, that's hardly a good thing. Besides, four times and you're epic. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of this exercise? Upon double checking, though, it does appear to be legal. My mistake.

The Artificer can proxy with magic items. If the Wizard is allowed to stack Spell-Stitched on himself and his simulacra he can proxy with simulacra ferrymen.

Not the same. Not even close. A ferry isn't the same as a bridge. It's a less efficient, higher cost method that just can't handle the same volume of traffic. For a different analogy: you can fill a pool a lot faster with a hose on your spigot than a bucket under it.

Gate has three basic modes. Making a portal, calling allies, and Free Vacation: No Save. The first is doable for the Artificer via magic items of greater plane shift. Calling allies is going to be good, but bear in mind that all of these characters have access to planar binding, and hence chain-binding to produce a volume of tokens able to overwhelm any given enemy (if simply by IPing it to death). Free Vacation: No Save is a no save, just die ability capable of targeting anything anywhere. Honestly, that's probably better than anything these guys can pull off. The Wizard's simulacrum spam can take stuff out, though he has troubles with cross-planar travel.

G. Planeshift can only move a handful of people with accuracy. Gate can move whole armies. Gate can call extraplanar creatures of all types while planar binding can't and it also binds creatures of dramatically greater power. Chain-calling creatures is, and always has been, laughably TO in a way that even wish-SLA abuse can't compete with. Like I said last post, using and abusing NPC's, as oposed to working with them, is just begging to be shut down.

Other than time or magic traits + planar bubble, not much better than low level environment alteration spells provided they can be cast in sufficient volume. Those are hard to capture, although similar (if less dramatic) effects can be accrued using existing planes. However, all the characters have access to highly efficient metamagic reduction schemes already, so it's not much of a concern. The action economy can be captured with Far Realm planar bubble (IIRC).

This is just laughable. The security of a demiplane is dramatically greater than any other option available both in terms of information and real access. The trait manipulation isn't even a consideration, especially given that it's RAW legality is questionable.

The Artificer can emulate that one straight out. wish from a bound Efreet will also have essentially the same effect (or actually the same effect as case may be).

So the options here are be an artificer, pay 2.5 or more times what I could've for the item I need, or call up an Evil outsider who can refuse outright or pervert my request. That's not quite the same degree of availability as simply knowing it as an 8th level spell through any of the various methods of getting off-list spells.

The Cleric can invest a single rank in Diplomacy to instantly make any character they encounter Fanatic thanks to an arbitrarily large Cha score.

That you think that's even remotely the same is absurd. Subtlety is a thing.

I assume I'm missing something, as the big deal (over animate dead) appears to be that it is roughly free (hello Supernatural Spell) and gives max HP (hello repeated casting).

The clue's in the name. Control's not an issue when you're trying to plague a city/nation/principality. Nothing moves armies like a good old fashion undead horde.

Craft Contingent Spell + revivify + heal. Doable by Artificer or Cleric.

1/9th the gp cost and ten minutes prep vs two days prep and a feat. Hardly the same. We don't all play with infinite wealth loops and a reversible con loss is hardly the same opportunity cost as a feat.

polymorph + awaken totally works for this.

Polymorph requires a living target. Constructs and undead don't count.

Brova

2015-09-18, 05:56 PM

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Something for nothing just doesn't grok with me or the people I know.

I don't understand why you would reject something that allows you to have dragon hoards and golden castles without breaking the game. Especially given that the "cost" is that PCs stop doing accounting for low level crap when they turn into world conquering demigods.

You've missed the point because it very much -is- about the actual powers you gain at those higher levels. Being able to do more and more rarified things is part of the appeal.

So describe some plots that you could solve with gate and shapechange but not simulacrum and word of balance.

Awaken replaces your int and gives you animal HD. When you have int 3 because of a bad roll and a bunch of useless HD that push your level out of whack, that's hardly a good thing. Besides, four times and you're epic. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of this exercise? Upon double checking, though, it does appear to be legal. My mistake.

The character in question is a Cleric. He's only going to be running around with even an 18 Int if he rolled stats and was extraordinarily lucky. As he wants to execute the loop as many times as possible, he can simply stop when he happens to roll an 18 for Int.

You get wights for the (actually magical beast) HD. You need to because otherwise you can't make the save to awaken yourself unless you do something with metamagic.

Not the same. Not even close. A ferry isn't the same as a bridge. It's a less efficient, higher cost method that just can't handle the same volume of traffic. For a different analogy: you can fill a pool a lot faster with a hose on your spigot than a bucket under it.

A trap (or use activated item) of teleport is going to work the same as a teleport circle. As far as the simulacra go, I can't imagine a situation where "infinite number of people with teleport" is going to be notably worse than teleport circle.

G. Planeshift can only move a handful of people with accuracy. Gate can move whole armies.

Magic traps. Also multiple items. Interestingly, the simulacra can have plane shift (as the only requirement for Spell-Stitching is being of the appropriate level and an acceptable school).

Chain-calling creatures is, and always has been, laughably TO in a way that even wish-SLA abuse can't compete with. Like I said last post, using and abusing NPC's, as oposed to working with them, is just begging to be shut down.

I think we're talking past each other. Saying that X thing is "begging to be shut down" is rejecting the premise of power gain from higher optimization rather than higher level.

This is just laughable. The security of a demiplane is dramatically greater than any other option available both in terms of information and real access. The trait manipulation isn't even a consideration, especially given that it's RAW legality is questionable.

What security? You live in a game with 9th level spells. If people want you dead, they don't break into your house. They gate you to the Negative Energy Plane and require you to spend the next couple dozen rounds doing interpretive dance as their friends stab you to death.

So the options here are be an artificer, pay 2.5 or more times what I could've for the item I need, or call up an Evil outsider who can refuse outright or pervert my request. That's not quite the same degree of availability as simply knowing it as an 8th level spell through any of the various methods of getting off-list spells.

An Artificer with power surge who can generate free charges.

Also, this whole "but Efreet are evil" thing is dumb as hell. Efreet are also geniuses and incapable of granting themselves wishes. You really think they'd object to a deal where they give you a wish, you make a wish they ask for, then they summon up another Efreet for you?

That you think that's even remotely the same is absurd. Subtlety is a thing.

The Cleric in question makes every single person he encounters Fanatic. Why would he need subtlety?

The clue's in the name. Control's not an issue when you're trying to plague a city/nation/principality. Nothing moves armies like a good old fashion undead horde.

You mean like the plague of shadows you could unleash at sixth level with rebuking? Clearly, I care at all.

1/9th the gp cost and ten minutes prep vs two days prep and a feat. Hardly the same. We don't all play with infinite wealth loops and a reversible con loss is hardly the same opportunity cost as a feat.

Yes, not all people play with infinite wealth loops. Not all people play with Incantatrixes either.

Polymorph requires a living target. Constructs and undead don't count.

Fair. Still doable with polymorph any object if you're willing to bump to 15th level, bind an Efreet, or use the Artificer.

Curmudgeon

2015-09-18, 06:00 PM

There are some things you simply can't accomplish below level 20. Lots of Epic skills DCs are ridiculously high: DC 120 to Balance on a cloud, for instance. Monk fighting styles have ridiculously long feat chains. For instance, Black Panda style requires all of the following:

Combat Expertise
Death Blow
Dodge
Extra Stunning Attacks
Falling Star Strike
Freezing the Lifeblood
Distant Touch
Improved Unarmed Strike
Mobility
Pain Touch
Stone Monkey
Stunning Fist
Superior Expertise
Black Panda Mastery I
Black Panda Mastery II
How is a Monk supposed to get all of those without going into Epic levels?

Brova

2015-09-18, 06:07 PM

There are some things you simply can't accomplish below level 20. Lots of Epic skills DCs are ridiculously high: DC 120 to Balance on a cloud, for instance.

Alternatively, a 3rd level spell. That's not needing to go epic, that's not having magic making you blow. Hell, isn't there even an 8th level stance called "Balance on the Clouds" or something?

Monk fighting styles have ridiculously long feat chains. For instance, Black Panda style requires all of the following:

Combat Expertise
Death Blow
Dodge
Extra Stunning Attacks
Falling Star Strike
Freezing the Lifeblood
Distant Touch
Improved Unarmed Strike
Mobility
Pain Touch
Stone Monkey
Stunning Fist
Superior Expertise
Black Panda Mastery I
Black Panda Mastery II
How is a Monk supposed to get all of those without going into Epic levels?

Obviously with the power of shenanigans. Notably, heroics and mirror move. Possibly embrace the dark chaos and shun the dark chaos as well.

Eldan

2015-09-18, 06:30 PM

Items, too. I'm pretty sure you can at least get Mobility from items.

Hmm. Human Monk, 7 feats from levels. 4 bonus feats from monk. That still leaves 4 feats to be cheesed in. Yeah, Dark Chaos Shuffle. Or ask your DM if you can drop some of the pointless ones.

Mordokai

2015-09-18, 06:50 PM

(2) For most PCs, character creation is based around the idea of "what will my character be at level 20?", so it seems utterly cruel to end a game at the point when a character is *finally* becoming what he wanted to be. After all that time dealing with pointless goblins and rats, finally my character is cool... so we stop playing? Bah.

For me at least, this one covers most of it. Personally, I'm none too inclined or predisposed towards epics. However, there was one character(the one you see in my avatar and in my signature). She started as lowly bard in Sasserine and that was in 4E, because our DM had some ideas for Savage Tide and wanted to convert it to 4E. That never came to life, but I managed to play her briefly in 3.5 on these boards.

Over her career, she has seen many things and while she started as an optimistic and cheerful person, all the taint and horror she has seen and battled have slowly but surely convinced her that battling Demogorgon as mere mortal simply wouldn't cut it. So, as her Epic destiny, she choose arc lich.

In 3.5, she was a bard/virtuoso/sublime chord, simply because I didn't want to deal in lich shenanigans and because I'm pretty sure our DM would be none too happy about it. But now that I think about it, it would be a great character concept and one that would really come to fore in epic. Some exploring of her morality, her soul(does she still have it?) and some proper battles where she would search for how much she has sacrificed and if what she has gained because of it was really worth it.

Hell, if any of you optimizers are willing to help me with this... send me a PM. I'd love to flesh this out a little more, but I'm terrible at optimization.

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-18, 07:19 PM

I don't understand why you would reject something that allows you to have dragon hoards and golden castles without breaking the game. Especially given that the "cost" is that PCs stop doing accounting for low level crap when they turn into world conquering demigods.

Because it -does- break the game. Infinite money -is- infinite power when it can be traded for magical items. The alternative is to toss the purchase of magic items out altogether and then you're in a completely different game. Not everyone wants that.

So describe some plots that you could solve with gate and shapechange but not simulacrum and word of balance.

If you're solving plots with a single spell then those plots suck. I'm not talking about solving plots. I'm talking about making them.

The character in question is a Cleric. He's only going to be running around with even an 18 Int if he rolled stats and was extraordinarily lucky. As he wants to execute the loop as many times as possible, he can simply stop when he happens to roll an 18 for Int.

You get wights for the (actually magical beast) HD. You need to because otherwise you can't make the save to awaken yourself unless you do something with metamagic.

There's no limit to "as many times as possible" so where you stop is where you arbitrarily decide -or- where the DM stops you via proactive antagonist. As for HD draining, there will be days you spend at 3 int where a minion making undead can exploit your stupidity and/or that proactive enemy will have a distinct advantage. If your risk/reward estimates are okay with that, so be it. Finally, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Anything your cleric can do, so can an enemy cleric.

A trap (or use activated item) of teleport is going to work the same as a teleport circle. As far as the simulacra go, I can't imagine a situation where "infinite number of people with teleport" is going to be notably worse than teleport circle.

A) greater teleport unless you want people being scattered to the winds.

B) There is a finite amount of space in the world and if every caster is making arbitrarily large groups of minions it's going to fill up quick.

C) Only the trap option doesn't require an action or interaction for the lay person so it's the only option that doesn't slow traffic and traps are easier to damage/destroy/steal than high CL permanent spell. It's also the only option that doesn't require travellers to know exactly where they're going.

Magic traps. Also multiple items. Interestingly, the simulacra can have plane shift (as the only requirement for Spell-Stitching is being of the appropriate level and an acceptable school).

You need -greater- plane shift to move with accuracy and this runs into the same logistical problems as the mass teleport options you listed above.

I think we're talking past each other. Saying that X thing is "begging to be shut down" is rejecting the premise of power gain from higher optimization rather than higher level.

It's not begging to be shut down because it's high op. It's doing so because it relies on NPC's; characters under the DM's control. They only work if the guy that's supposed to be presenting you with challenges chooses not to do so in these instances. To take it as a given that they'll not only work but work flawlessly is the absolute height of hubris.

If the PC can't do it directly with his own power, you cannot rightly presume that he can do it at all.

What security? You live in a game with 9th level spells. If people want you dead, they don't break into your house. They gate you to the Negative Energy Plane and require you to spend the next couple dozen rounds doing interpretive dance as their friends stab you to death.

Wish, not gate. Gate can be blocked. Wish can be countered via contingency. If you're so foolish as to leave those vulnerabilities you deserve what you get. Nevermind that the DM's interpretation of "unique" in regards to gate's description may preclude anything with class levels.

An Artificer with power surge who can generate free charges.

So now I have to buy two items from the artificer at an dramatically greater cost. Why not just wish for a wish item from an efreet and get it over with, aside from the end of meaningful challenges of course.

Also, this whole "but Efreet are evil" thing is dumb as hell. Efreet are also geniuses and incapable of granting themselves wishes. You really think they'd object to a deal where they give you a wish, you make a wish they ask for, then they summon up another Efreet for you?

They're also smart enough to know that you could double cross them and evil enough to presume you will since that's what they'd do in your position. Reliance on NPC's is stupid. Expecting the DM to cater directly to your desires instead of challenging you is stupid. That this nonsense is still bandied about as a given is stupid.

The Cleric in question makes every single person he encounters Fanatic. Why would he need subtlety?

Diplomacy is houseruled more than most any other piece of RAW. Presuming it will be left in tact when it's known to be irretrievably broken is absurd. Though, again, gooose/gander. If the enemy is doing the same then you do, in fact, need to act more subtley.

You mean like the plague of shadows you could unleash at sixth level with rebuking? Clearly, I care at all.

Unless you're intending to rule over the dead and/or can guarantee that this will never backfire in your face you want -mindless- hordes of undead. They're not an army, they're a distraction for an army.

Yes, not all people play with infinite wealth loops. Not all people play with Incantatrixes either.

There's a difference between an extremely powerful class and rendering moot and shattering economies. One is rather dramatically more acceptable when considering the majority of play-groups. If a player's motivation is for his character to gain wealth then he has no reason to play in a game where money is meaningless because there's no difficulty in getting it. Nevermind the damage it does to economies; an undesireable outcome for anyone who likes to actually play with economics.

Top tier optimization is like playing super-chess+++. I get the impression you can see the board and know what some of the pieces do but I don't think you've quite mastered the game to the extent you think.

Brova

2015-09-18, 07:45 PM

Because it -does- break the game. Infinite money -is- infinite power when it can be traded for magical items. The alternative is to toss the purchase of magic items out altogether and then you're in a completely different game. Not everyone wants that.

No, the alternative is to toss the purchase of magic items with gold. The wish economy is premised off a modification of wish (no magic items over 15,000 GP). From that, it flows that gold (which is what you get when you sell a continent made of pure diamond or a fortress of pure obsidian) can't be used to purchase game breaking items. Incidentally, it also solves all the ancillary wealth loops, because they produce gold.

If you're solving plots with a single spell then those plots suck. I'm not talking about solving plots. I'm talking about making them.

Your point? Powers are tools to solve plots. They don't have to solve the entire plot to do that, just contribute towards it.

There's no limit to "as many times as possible" so where you stop is where you arbitrarily decide -or- where the DM stops you via proactive antagonist.

That's true. Presumably there's a gentleman's agreement of some sort in place. After all, none of the characters got an XP-free wish and asked for a magic item of arbitrary power.

B) There is a finite amount of space in the world and if every caster is making arbitrarily large groups of minions it's going to fill up quick.

Not if the world in question is one of the planes. Or more precisely, where high level adventures happen.

You need -greater- plane shift to move with accuracy and this runs into the same logistical problems as the mass teleport options you listed above.

You need N - 1 items of greater plane shift per plane you want to link. Then each of those nodes has greater teleport items to go to each desired location. Not really a massive investment considering the time horizons involved and that it's a worst case scenario (also, it devolves to zero if you don't patch or ban wish).

It's not begging to be shut down because it's high op. It's doing so because it relies on NPC's; characters under the DM's control. They only work if the guy that's supposed to be presenting you with challenges chooses not to do so in these instances. To take it as a given that they'll not only work but work flawlessly is the absolute height of hubris.

The DM is supposed to represent a world. Challenge is ancillary to that. Recall that the creatures which are actually casting the chained greater planar bindings have a very strong incentive to cooperate.

Wish, not gate. Gate can be blocked. Wish can be countered via contingency. If you're so foolish as to leave those vulnerabilities you deserve what you get. Nevermind that the DM's interpretation of "unique" in regards to gate's description may preclude anything with class levels.

How exactly are you blocking gate? Here's the text:

The second effect of the gate spell is to call an extraplanar creature to your aid (a calling effect). By naming a particular being or kind of being as you cast the spell, you cause the gate to open in the immediate vicinity of the desired creature and pull the subject through, willing or unwilling.

Seems pretty clear that you can't block that. Of course contingency does exist, but that works just as well on any plane. Once the offense starts by yanking you away from your home to get beaten on, it doesn't matter what the defenses of your home are.

So now I have to buy two items from the artificer at an dramatically greater cost. Why not just wish for a wish item from an efreet and get it over with, aside from the end of meaningful challenges of course.

Because I'm assuming you live in a world where wish has been nerfed and optimization is possible on an axis other than "how do I get a wish to wish for a Ring of Godhood?"

They're also smart enough to know that you could double cross them and evil enough to presume you will since that's what they'd do in your position.

What? Evil doesn't mean you assume everyone is evil. If an intelligent person consistently predicted that others would act exactly as they did, they would consistently find that their predictions were inaccurate and would revise their mental models of others. FFS, just make the deal "you get your wish, I get mine, you summon someone else, if you screw me I kill you". Who is going to choose "die" when faced with the choice between a wish and death?

Diplomacy is houseruled more than most any other piece of RAW.

Yes, if you modify the parameters of the challenge optimal solutions will become non-optimal. Absent a predictable solution, assume nothing is changed.

Unless you're intending to rule over the dead and/or can guarantee that this will never backfire in your face you want -mindless- hordes of undead. They're not an army, they're a distraction for an army.

Shadows deal ability damage and literally nothing else. You can be immune to that by casting sheltered vitality, which you literally cannot fail to know because you are a 13th level Cleric.

There's a difference between an extremely powerful class and rendering moot and shattering economies.

wish only breaks economies if you let it.

If a player's motivation is for his character to gain wealth then he has no reason to play in a game where money is meaningless because there's no difficulty in getting it.

Wealth =/= gold. If you live in a wish economy world, you don't try to accumulate gold. You try to accumulate planar pearls or raw chaos of souls. Which is frankly way cooler than gold.

Top tier optimization is like playing super-chess+++. I get the impression you can see the board and know what some of the pieces do but I don't think you've quite mastered the game to the extent you think.

There's no need to be condescending. If you think you have knock out argument, make it. If you don't, admit defeat. Don't be snide. Especially considering that your arguments are, to be totally frank, not very good. You haven't presented a single challenge where 9th level spells matter, your arguments range from "but that would be banned" to "no, it's a different spell to totally negate your defenses", and you don't seem to know what the term "wish economy" means.

Masakan

2015-09-18, 08:03 PM

I will be honest, I don't see myself playing in any campaign that goes past level 15 let alone goes into epic level

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-18, 08:45 PM

No, the alternative is to toss the purchase of magic items with gold. The wish economy is premised off a modification of wish (no magic items over 15,000 GP). From that, it flows that gold (which is what you get when you sell a continent made of pure diamond or a fortress of pure obsidian) can't be used to purchase game breaking items. Incidentally, it also solves all the ancillary wealth loops, because they produce gold.

Let me answer this with this:
Yes, if you modify the parameters of the challenge optimal solutions will become non-optimal. Absent a predictable solution, assume nothing is changed

Your point? Powers are tools to solve plots. They don't have to solve the entire plot to do that, just contribute towards it.

Gate doesn't require you to setup a network to move an army, your alternatives do.

That's true. Presumably there's a gentleman's agreement of some sort in place. After all, none of the characters got an XP-free wish and asked for a magic item of arbitrary power.

Of course. However, different gentlemen make different agreements. Some agree that gold, at least on the material plane, -should- mean something.

Not if the world in question is one of the planes. Or more precisely, where high level adventures happen.

Not all high level adventures involve plane hopping. Many do but not all. Besides, when you leave the material you forever close yourself off to being the big fish unless you also dispense with gods.

You need N - 1 items of greater plane shift per plane you want to link. Then each of those nodes has greater teleport items to go to each desired location. Not really a massive investment considering the time horizons involved and that it's a worst case scenario (also, it devolves to zero if you don't patch or ban wish).

It's still grossly less efficient and more vulnerable than simply casting gate.

The DM is supposed to represent a world. Challenge is ancillary to that. Recall that the creatures which are actually casting the chained greater planar bindings have a very strong incentive to cooperate.

No they don't. Berks have nothing to offer on the planes except their souls as fuel. As for the rest, that's a simulationist perspective. Gamists disagree and narrativists often do so as well.

How exactly are you blocking gate? Here's the text:

Seems pretty clear that you can't block that. Of course contingency does exist, but that works just as well on any plane. Once the offense starts by yanking you away from your home to get beaten on, it doesn't matter what the defenses of your home are.

Dimension lock, of course. It precludes planar travel of any kind for those in the effected area. Wish's clause describing moving targets to the caster or vice versa ignores this by virtue of the phrase "regardless of local conditions." Hallow with dimensional anchor may thwart even wish since being under a dimensional anchor effect isn't necessarily a "local condition" so much as a condition of the target.

Because I'm assuming you live in a world where wish has been nerfed and optimization is possible on an axis other than "how do I get a wish to wish for a Ring of Godhood?"

Dodge the question if you like but you're still talking about a ridiculous expenditure that will either far outcost the results or shatter mundane economies by creating infinite mundane wealth.

What? Evil doesn't mean you assume everyone is evil. If an intelligent person consistently predicted that others would act exactly as they did, they would consistently find that their predictions were inaccurate and would revise their mental models of others. FFS, just make the deal "you get your wish, I get mine, you summon someone else, if you screw me I kill you". Who is going to choose "die" when faced with the choice between a wish and death?

I'm not saying evil presumes anyone else is evil, I'm saying skilled strategists consider what they would do in their oppositions' place when deciding what to do. For creatures that are part of evil societies, backstabbing is a given and they'd have to be fools not to expect it. Your deal sounds too good to be true until the "or die" part. The efreet has no reason to believe you won't just kill him anyway since he doesn't know you from any other random berk. It's simply not as cut and dried as you'd like to believe.

Yes, if you modify the parameters of the challenge optimal solutions will become non-optimal. Absent a predictable solution, assume nothing is changed.

The exact result doesn't matter when it can be safely assumed there -will- be a change. Diplomancy is a near universally derided as bad for the game and if its not preemptively shut down it will be closed ASAP when it comes up. If I can't assume diplomacy is nerfed, you can't assume wish is nerfed. Though I -did- point out a flaw in the idea that it negated the need for subtlety anyway.

Shadows deal ability damage and literally nothing else. You can be immune to that by casting sheltered vitality, which you literally cannot fail to know because you are a 13th level Cleric.

This stops land of the dead shadowpocalypse how, exactly? Nevermind ghost touch armor being a thing and the creatures using items becoming a problem.

wish only breaks economies if you let it.

Creating a new economy necessarily means harming the old if you're working with the same consumer base. You're removing actors and resources from it by making it impossible to buy magic items with gold and removing adventurers and the vast stock of resources they represent, nevermind flooding mundane markets with the effortless, costless production of non-magical materials.

Wealth =/= gold. If you live in a wish economy world, you don't try to accumulate gold. You try to accumulate planar pearls or raw chaos of souls. Which is frankly way cooler than gold.

It also precludes non-casters altogether. If you can't produce the spell effects that are absolutely necessary to procure these things, you're screwed. Players that like those classes are equally screwed.

There's no need to be condescending. If you think you have knock out argument, make it. If you don't, admit defeat. Don't be snide. Especially considering that your arguments are, to be totally frank, not very good. You haven't presented a single challenge where 9th level spells matter, your arguments range from "but that would be banned" to "no, it's a different spell to totally negate your defenses", and you don't seem to know what the term "wish economy" means.

Your arguments are no stronger than mine and I've already caught you out on at least one notable error (two if you count the gate blocking). Top-tier optimization is complex beyond most people's ability to completely understand, mine included.

That said, get into an extradimensional space that's dimension locked without wish. I dare you. And binding an efreet doesn't count because that's still a wish.

Actually, your whole premise is predicated on a 9th level spell, now that I think of it. You can't very well participate in the wish economy without wish, can you.

Brova

2015-09-18, 09:07 PM

Let me answer this with this:

What? That's actually not responsive. There are two things that wish does. The first is obviate gold as a mechanism of exchange. It just does that. The second is allow arbitrarily powerful items. The reason you can assume that bit is patched is because otherwise there's not a discussion - everyone is just The Wish. Now, it is true that the specific implementation of the wish economy outlined in the Tomes cannot be derived like that, but that's not actually assumed anywhere.

Gate doesn't require you to setup a network to move an army, your alternatives do.

Depends on what assumptions you make about usability. If you have a plate that can be set to greater plane shift to various planes, that's exactly gate for travel. Actually, it's better because it's a one time cost.

Of course. However, different gentlemen make different agreements. Some agree that gold, at least on the material plane, -should- mean something.

And with the wish economy it does. You can buy anything wish makes with gold. Such as mundane wealth and minor magic items.

It's still grossly less efficient and more vulnerable than simply casting gate.

Actually, you'll note that on further thought, it's better.

Dimension lock, of course. It precludes planar travel of any kind for those in the effected area. Wish's clause describing moving targets to the caster or vice versa ignores this by virtue of the phrase "regardless of local conditions." Hallow with dimensional anchor may thwart even wish since being under a dimensional anchor effect isn't necessarily a "local condition" so much as a condition of the target.

Alright, fair. gating people to the beatings room has counters. That said, I'm not sure why you think this is a win. People can still be brought to the beatings room, meaning home defenses are irrelevant, meaning why do I care about genesis?

I'm not saying evil presumes anyone else is evil, I'm saying skilled strategists consider what they would do in their oppositions' place when deciding what to do. For creatures that are part of evil societies,
backstabbing is a given and they'd have to be fools not to expect it.

Look, the Efreet is a genius. It's going to have interactions with people who are not Efreet, and it's going to observe that they do not always behave totally selfishly. So it's not going to model people as behaving totally selfishly.

The exact result doesn't matter when it can be safely assumed there -will- be a change. Diplomancy is a near universally derided as bad for the game and if its not preemptively shut down it will be closed ASAP when it comes up. If I can't assume diplomacy is nerfed, you can't assume wish is nerfed. Though I -did- point out a flaw in the idea that it negated the need for subtlety anyway.

You also can't assume it's nerfed. The reason you assume wish is nerfed is because there's not a meaningful discussion if it isn't. Given that that's not true for Diplomacy, you can't assume a nerf.

This stops land of the dead shadowpocalypse how, exactly? Nevermind ghost touch armor being a thing and the creatures using items becoming a problem.

It stops you from caring. Also, one would assume that "lots of crappy zombies" (your proposed solution) would be somewhat ineffective against a wider variety of opposition than "people with ghost touch armor."

Creating a new economy necessarily means harming the old if you're working with the same consumer base. You're removing actors and resources from it by making it impossible to buy magic items with gold and removing adventurers and the vast stock of resources they represent, nevermind flooding mundane markets with the effortless, costless production of non-magical materials.

Google "Wish Economy DND". Educate yourself.

It also precludes non-casters altogether. If you can't produce the spell effects that are absolutely necessary to procure these things, you're screwed. Players that like those classes are equally screwed.

No it doesn't. plane shift transports more than one person. So does teleport. The fact that you cannot personally get to the adventure does not mean you can contribute. Or maybe you mean that they can't bind Efreet? I point you to the actual world, where I am totally incapable of making a computer, and yet still use one.

Your arguments are no stronger than mine and I've already caught you out on at least one notable error (two if you count the gate blocking).

I'll cop to the gate blocking, but what other error do you think you've found? And recall that the gate blocking is only a marginal error, as the original argument you advanced still fails if it's wish rather than gate you use.

That said, get into an extradimensional space that's dimension locked without wish. I dare you.

Why do I care? What's there that I need? Your challenge is seriously half a step away from "cast X spell without casting X spell", a challenge that is essentially meaningless. You still fail to grasp that it's a question of challenges overcome rather than powers possessed.

Actually, your whole premise is predicated on a 9th level spell, now that I think of it. You can't very well participate in the wish economy without wish, can you.

It's predicated off a 6th level spell. The fact that the spell in question gives you access to a 9th level spell is neither here nor there.

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-18, 10:10 PM

What? That's actually not responsive. There are two things that wish does. The first is obviate gold as a mechanism of exchange. It just does that. The second is allow arbitrarily powerful items. The reason you can assume that bit is patched is because otherwise there's not a discussion - everyone is just The Wish. Now, it is true that the specific implementation of the wish economy outlined in the Tomes cannot be derived like that, but that's not actually assumed anywhere.

Frank and K's tomes? I couldn't give a flying fig about someone else's homebrew. What wish does is obviate the need for -any- economy outside of trading favors if you really want to take it to its logical conclusion. The fact is that there -is- no limit on the magic items that wish can create and if you want to assume that one has been added then you have to concede that non-raw rules are in play.

Depends on what assumptions you make about usability. If you have a plate that can be set to greater plane shift to various planes, that's exactly gate for travel. Actually, it's better because it's a one time cost.

Gate for travel has -no- cost. You burn a spell slot, concentrate for a bit shy of 2 minutes and let some 200 medium creatures with speed 30ft through. Done and done. If you can't accomplish your goal with a couple hundred troops then an army probably isn't the optimal solution.

A plate can either be captured if its immoble or stolen if it's portable and can be destroyed either way. There's no way around that. Hell, if your enemies are getting wishes in the same way you are it's not even hard.

And with the wish economy it does. You can buy anything wish makes with gold. Such as mundane wealth and minor magic items.

That -can't- be true. Not unless you ignore basic economics. The value of an exchange medium is in its stable supply and controlled inflation. If you can conjure gold at a thought, you can't control its devaluation through market flooding. When you can conjure everything else you can't control inflation. All mundane materials are worthless as mediums of exchange in a wish based economy.

Actually, you'll note that on further thought, it's better.

No, it's not. Wish based transportation makes -any- object based supply lines and travel routes nigh unprotectable. At least with perma tp circles and gate spells you have to send a caster to muck things up.

Alright, fair. gating people to the beatings room has counters. That said, I'm not sure why you think this is a win. People can still be brought to the beatings room, meaning home defenses are irrelevant, meaning why do I care about genesis?

Dim lock keeps people out, dim anchor keeps you in. How are you being dragged to the beatings again?

Look, the Efreet is a genius. It's going to have interactions with people who are not Efreet, and it's going to observe that they do not always behave totally selfishly. So it's not going to model people as behaving totally selfishly.

This is just wishful thinking. Being at the top of an economy requires the kind of ruthlessness that keeps people only as honest as they have to be. Capping things below 15 puts efreeti squarely at the top of the economy, at least in regards to mortals interfacing with it.

Nevermind there's no good reason for him to work with mortals over devils, yugoloths, or any of a number of outsiders, elementals, and constructs native to the outer ring. Mortal casters have nothing to offer wish capable outsiders without acquiring the magical might to procure the things they do want.

You also can't assume it's nerfed. The reason you assume wish is nerfed is because there's not a meaningful discussion if it isn't. Given that that's not true for Diplomacy, you can't assume a nerf.

Nonsense. Diplomancers are just as disruptive as unlimited wishes. Frank and K are no better a source of houserules than any other. If you can assume wish is nerfed, I can assume the same about diplomacy.

It stops you from caring. Also, one would assume that "lots of crappy zombies" (your proposed solution) would be somewhat ineffective against a wider variety of opposition than "people with ghost touch armor."

No, it stops you from being strength drained to oblivion. If you cause a shadowocalypse you've traded one problem for another, likely worse, problem. Also, not "people with ghost touch armor," shadows with ghost touch armor wielding items of power that make them a threat to you; a coordinated, incorporeal threat from the moment one of them breaks a link in the chain of command or one of their victims does it for them.

Google "Wish Economy DND". Educate yourself.

Actual economics; educate yourself.

No it doesn't. plane shift transports more than one person. So does teleport. The fact that you cannot personally get to the adventure does not mean you can contribute. Or maybe you mean that they can't bind Efreet? I point you to the actual world, where I am totally incapable of making a computer, and yet still use one.

But you cannot aquire the new form of wealth short of working for those who are wealthy in it or bartering without currency. You are at a distinct, drastic disadvantage in this economy if you are a non-caster compared to caster who is at a disadvantage to the suppliers; wish granters.

I'll cop to the gate blocking, but what other error do you think you've found? And recall that the gate blocking is only a marginal error, as the original argument you advanced still fails if it's wish rather than gate you use.

The basic targetting error on polymorph that forced you to concede two levels in the creation of thinking constructs.

Also, contingency reverses wish if dim anchor doesn't stop it which it likely does, depending on how the DM defines "local conditions." My argument was sound.

Why do I care? What's there that I need? Your challenge is seriously half a step away from "cast X spell without casting X spell", a challenge that is essentially meaningless. You still fail to grasp that it's a question of challenges overcome rather than powers possessed.

It's predicated off a 6th level spell. The fact that the spell in question gives you access to a 9th level spell is neither here nor there.

In that case it's predicated on NPC's letting you into their economy and a 9th level spell that you cannot directly access.

As for what's in the extradimensional space that you want or need, the current adventure's macguffin or antagonist. You can't get to him without wish and you can't get wish without going through an NPC medium. You -can't- complete the challenge under your own power. That 6th level spell only lets you ask for help. That's the whole point.

Brova

2015-09-18, 11:11 PM

Gate for travel has -no- cost. You burn a spell slot, concentrate for a bit shy of 2 minutes

Wow. Both of those are costs. So maybe you could stop contradicting yourself in the next sentence if you want me to take you seriously?

That -can't- be true. Not unless you ignore basic economics. The value of an exchange medium is in its stable supply and controlled inflation. If you can conjure gold at a thought, you can't control its devaluation through market flooding. When you can conjure everything else you can't control inflation. All mundane materials are worthless as mediums of exchange in a wish based economy.

You have just described the conditions in which every modern economy operates. The USFG can print dollars. As many as it wants, whenever it wants (there's some chicanery with the Fed, but that's basically how a fiat currency operates). And yet people still use dollars as a medium of exchange. Why?

Well, it's because the people with the ability to produce new dollars at arbitrary rates don't have the incentive to do so. Now how does this relate to the wish economy? Recall the original premise. You cannot buy with gold what can be created by wish. Now, who has the ability to produce arbitrary quantities of gold? People with wish. And what can they trade it for? Stuff they could make with wish. So why are they not just wishing for whatever they want to buy directly? Oh wait, they totally are.

No, it's not. Wish based transportation makes -any- object based supply lines and travel routes nigh unprotectable. At least with perma tp circles and gate spells you have to send a caster to muck things up.

So, uh, let's point out that you clearly don't believe this:

Dim lock keeps people out, dim anchor keeps you in. How are you being dragged to the beatings again?

Is an actual question.

Beyond that, you seem to have forgotten that the characters presented are totally capable of creating armies with personal movement as effective as teleport circle and gate. Which is enough mobility that you still need overwhelming local defensive force, considering those armies are infinite numbers of Wizards.

This is just wishful thinking. Being at the top of an economy requires the kind of ruthlessness that keeps people only as honest as they have to be. Capping things below 15 puts efreeti squarely at the top of the economy, at least in regards to mortals interfacing with it.

A CR 8 Efreet is barely a challenge for a level 15 PC. Claiming they're "on top of the heap" is deeply dubious. Irregardless, you still have yet to explain why one can't understand the prisoner's dilemma.

Nevermind there's no good reason for him to work with mortals over devils, yugoloths, or any of a number of outsiders, elementals, and constructs native to the outer ring. Mortal casters have nothing to offer wish capable outsiders without acquiring the magical might to procure the things they do want.

Sure they do. They've bound the Efreet and they aren't genies. I mean yes, if it was selling wishes on an open market there's no particular reason it would prefer casters, but that's not the scenario.

Nonsense. Diplomancers are just as disruptive as unlimited wishes. Frank and K are no better a source of houserules than any other. If you can assume wish is nerfed, I can assume the same about diplomacy.

You still don't understand. Here's the argument as to why wish and Diplomacy are different:

1. By RAW, wish allows you to obtain a magic item of arbitrary power.
2. In the context of this discussion, people are not doing that.
3. Therefore some ruling has reduced the power of wish in this area.

Now it is totally true that no particular solution is implied. Which is why none of the builds include one. It is also true that 1 isn't particularly absolute in its truth. We could have a discussion about optimization in a world where everyone has an item which gives them all the power. That's not really an interesting discussion, particularly not in the context of attempting to evaluate the point at which people can tell "epic stories" in D&D.

To be clear. I'm not presenting Frank and K's rules as any part of an argument as to the power of 15th level characters. I'm presenting them as a solution to a problem that you've presented external to the primary discussion. Also, you should probably read what they've written on the issue before you keep claiming I "don't understand economics."

No, it stops you from being strength drained to oblivion. If you cause a shadowocalypse you've traded one problem for another, likely worse, problem. Also, not "people with ghost touch armor," shadows with ghost touch armor wielding items of power that make them a threat to you; a coordinated, incorporeal threat from the moment one of them breaks a link in the chain of command or one of their victims does it for them.

The Cleric being discussed has unlimited turning and cannot fail to turn a Shadow. No number of Shadows threaten him, regardless of gear.

Actual economics; educate yourself.

If you had done as was requested, you would understand that the people who invented the wish economy explained why you were wrong the better part of decade ago.

But you cannot aquire the new form of wealth short of working for those who are wealthy in it or bartering without currency. You are at a distinct, drastic disadvantage in this economy if you are a non-caster compared to caster who is at a disadvantage to the suppliers; wish granters.

But I thought it was unrealistic to assume casters could get wishes out of creatures.

The basic targetting error on polymorph that forced you to concede two levels in the creation of thinking constructs.

Oh, sure. Bear in mind that I presented a solution to the problem which still works at the given level. Two actually. Artificers and wish.

Also, contingency reverses wish if dim anchor doesn't stop it which it likely does, depending on how the DM defines "local conditions." My argument was sound.

wish on the edge of an antimagic field. Now the target's contingencies are suppressed.

In that case it's predicated on NPC's letting you into their economy and a 9th level spell that you cannot directly access.

Unless, you know, you happen to be able to make NPCs Fanatic. Or credibly threaten them with violence. Oh, wait...

As for what's in the extradimensional space that you want or need, the current adventure's macguffin or antagonist. You can't get to him without wish and you can't get wish without going through an NPC medium. You -can't- complete the challenge under your own power. That 6th level spell only lets you ask for help. That's the whole point.

First, that's not actually a problem. You've presented "you have to get in there" with no explanation as to why you'd want to get in there. What does the MacGuffin do? Why can't I do that myself with my legion of simulacra or bound demons? How is the antagonist doing any antagonisting from inside his demiplane?

Second, you have yet to explain why a literal genius is incapable of understanding the concept of "trading".

HolyCouncilMagi

2015-09-18, 11:12 PM

I dunno about everybody else, but I like Epic-level play (with some houserules in regards to Epic spellcasting) because I like to explore large-scale consequences. I want to be the Darth Vaarsuvius dealing with the horrific realizations about the implications of Familicide. I want to kill Death and watch Ragnorra turn the world to hell because I didn't think that through. I want to smite a god for getting up in my business and then play my part making sure that the political fallout caused among the other gods in response doesn't cause catastrophe.

And when it's all said and done, I want to fix problems rather than just stymie them or make them fixable by somebody else. If something's threatening the multiverse, I want to stop it and fix the damages done myself, not serve as an agent to some other great power(s) to "give them an opportunity to fix it" or whatever. I don't want to make the reality-ender slumber or retreat, either, I want to kill it.

That's the sort of story that satisfies me. D&D's mechanics aren't the best for it; they aren't even good, really. But D&D is one of the only games that even lets me get that powerful, so yeah, I'm going to play it for that sometimes.

zergling.exe

2015-09-19, 12:46 AM

A CR 8 Efreet is barely a challenge for a level 15 PC. Claiming they're "on top of the heap" is deeply dubious. Irregardless, you still have yet to explain why one can't understand the prisoner's dilemma.

Sure they do. They've bound the Efreet and they aren't genies. I mean yes, if it was selling wishes on an open market there's no particular reason it would prefer casters, but that's not the scenario.

Efreet are immortal beings that would have few needs or wants. Anything you would want it could twist or subvert. You want an epic ring of wishes? It can just wish you to someone who can make that item for you. Maybe a balor has one and the Efreeti wishes you to that balor. You will have to spend at least a round to get back, time for the Efreeti to polymorph into a mouse or something else equally small and scurry away. It's stuck on the material plane for a while but immortality's tough.

If you start killing Efreet left and right because none of them do what you want you will soon end up at war with the Efreet, and they could find powerful allies to use their wishes to bring greivous harm back upon you.

Efreet are infamous for their hatred of servitude, desire for revenge, cruel nature, and ability to beguile and mislead.
Efreet would do whatever they could to foil your attempts for free stuff. They HATE things like planar binding. They likely would have you kill them out of spite and rebellion rather than going back to their home after being humiliated by a mortal.

Brova

2015-09-19, 01:05 AM

You want an epic ring of wishes? It can just wish you to someone who can make that item for you.

No, it can't. wish very explicitly describes those things which you just get no questions asked. Making any magic item is one of those things. If you wish for a ring of "all the things", you get it. You do not get your statement parsed in a language where it means "beat me to death with my own legs". You do not get transported to a creature you can make a ring of "all the things." You do not pass go. You do not collect $200. You get a ring of "all the things." Because that is how the spell actually works.

Efreet would do whatever they could to foil your attempts for free stuff. They HATE things like planar binding. They likely would have you kill them out of spite and rebellion rather than going back to their home after being humiliated by a mortal.

You're not asking for servitude. You're making a trade. You are giving it a wish and it is giving you a wish and another Efreet. Which could totally be some political rival it wants to screw over if you're super convinced that "evil" means "villain on a children's cartoon".

But let's be straight. It doesn't actually matter what hoops you want PCs to jump through, because "bind an Efreet" is just a proxy for "get a wish that doesn't cost XP". Which you can do with a simulacrum of an Efreet, which at least two of the characters in question can make.

Vrock_Summoner

2015-09-19, 01:21 AM

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-19, 01:22 AM

Wow. Both of those are costs. So maybe you could stop contradicting yourself in the next sentence if you want me to take you seriously?

Burning a spell slot isn't a cost except in the strictest sense of a negligible opportunity cost. Same goes for the time invested. Even if your a wizard or archivist who bought the spell as a spell known it's a trivial to the point of irrelavence cost compared to devices that you're just giving away or at least leaving outside of your direct control. Such a petty dig at my arguments reeks of desperation.

You have just described the conditions in which every modern economy operates. The USFG can print dollars. As many as it wants, whenever it wants (there's some chicanery with the Fed, but that's basically how a fiat currency operates). And yet people still use dollars as a medium of exchange. Why?

Well, it's because the people with the ability to produce new dollars at arbitrary rates don't have the incentive to do so. Now how does this relate to the wish economy? Recall the original premise. You cannot buy with gold what can be created by wish. Now, who has the ability to produce arbitrary quantities of gold? People with wish. And what can they trade it for? Stuff they could make with wish. So why are they not just wishing for whatever they want to buy directly? Oh wait, they totally are.

Fiat money barely works because it's controlled by a central government and is made as difficult to counterfeit as possible. Uncontrolled printing of new money leads to such drastic inflation as to make that money effectively worthless. See the example of the german mark after world war 2, wherein things reached a point that it took literally a million marks, enough to fill a wheel barrow, just to buy a loaf of bread. The wish economy has no medium of exchange because the wish granters have, and will use, their ability to effectively print new money whenever they want something. There's no regulating body to stop them. Gold? Produced in arbitrary amounts. Gems? Produced in arbitrary amounts? Spices, metals, art? Produced as trivially as a flick of the wrist. For anything to have -any- value, it has to be something that can't be wished for. If it has no value then you can't trade it for or use it as currency. Fiat currency can't exist because there's no authority to back it. Mundane wealth simply cannot exist in a wish economy.

Even medium and major items have extremely limited value at the proposed 15k limit. Wish up the supplies to make it, wish yourself the feat to craft it, wish yourself a supply of ambrosia/agony to pay the xp cost, spend some time to make it. Since they can be produced by any of the innumerable suppliers their relative values are inherently low. They have their practical uses but because of this they're not suitable for currency either, just barter.

So, uh, let's point out that you clearly don't believe this:

It's called concession for the sake of argument. I'm pointing out that, if you assume wish is easily accessed, it exacerbates this problem. Even without wish based transportation items are vulnerable in a way that spell effects simply aren't. There's an added cost of security beyond the cost of the items themselves that makes using them over the spells that much more efficient when they were already the superior option to begin with.

Is an actual question.

Beyond that, you seem to have forgotten that the characters presented are totally capable of creating armies with personal movement as effective as teleport circle and gate. Which is enough mobility that you still need overwhelming local defensive force, considering those armies are infinite numbers of Wizards.

Goose and gander again. Anything the players can do the enemy can do. Two infinite armies clash in an infinite war. See the blood war. Nevermind the logistical nightmare of trying to actually adjudicate this nonsense. Even with the mini's handbook mass battle rules turns would take hours nevermind whole battles. There's also a nasty hiccup in that you have to be able to command your army personally or risk losing control of it. This puts a practical limitation on how big it can be.

A CR 8 Efreet is barely a challenge for a level 15 PC. Claiming they're "on top of the heap" is deeply dubious. Regardless, you still have yet to explain why one can't understand the prisoner's dilemma.

CR isn't a factor in the economy. The prisoner's dilemma doesn't even apply. It's not a matter of betraying an ally out of self interest or not (something efreet are biased toward, btw). It's a matter of negotiation from a position of disadvantage.

The caster -could- kill you but then he gets nothing. He could kill you after you give him what he wants and give you nothing. He could be honest for the sake of future relations. Thats nothing for nothing, something for nothing, and something for something, respectively.

You, as the efreet, have to give the opposition a deal that presents option 3 as superior to 2 when it clearly isn't given that there are infinite efreeti. If you can't then you go with option 1.

The caster has to convince the efreet that he wants to choose option 3 over option 2, knowing that efreeti are, as a race, vengeful and that seeking vengeance after the fact is a non-option.

There are three wishes on the table that no one gets unless an agreement is made. Trading wishes 1-1, favors no one. This likely won't disengage the caster from wanting to kill the efreet or the efreet from seeking vengeance if he does. 2-1 favoring the caster leaves the efreet wanting vegeance. 1-2 for the efreet doesn't give the caster an incentive not to kill the efreet. Both have unknown, potentially immense, resources to fall back on.

This is a no win situation, plain and simple. What's needed to balance the situation is something outside of these given parameters. Something likely contained in those unknown resources.

Approaching the efreet in the city of brass would be an altogether different scenario wherein the efreet could be engaged without invoking their vengeful nature but also gives the efreet all of the negotiating power.

There is no simple solution here.

Sure they do. They've bound the Efreet and they aren't genies. I mean yes, if it was selling wishes on an open market there's no particular reason it would prefer casters, but that's not the scenario.

Sure it is. It's just not the scenario you want it to be. For the reasons I outlined above, binding an efreet is a no-win situation and calling one by planar ally explicitly demands you pay it which is open market. Given that there is an infinite number of efreet, getting one with all three of its wishes unused is a given but you have to make the best offer he's received or likely to get for a day.

You still don't understand. Here's the argument as to why wish and Diplomacy are different:

1. By RAW, wish allows you to obtain a magic item of arbitrary power.
2. In the context of this discussion, people are not doing that.
3. Therefore some ruling has reduced the power of wish in this area.

Now it is totally true that no particular solution is implied. Which is why none of the builds include one. It is also true that 1 isn't particularly absolute in its truth. We could have a discussion about optimization in a world where everyone has an item which gives them all the power. That's not really an interesting discussion, particularly not in the context of attempting to evaluate the point at which people can tell "epic stories" in D&D.

To be clear. I'm not presenting Frank and K's rules as any part of an argument as to the power of 15th level characters. I'm presenting them as a solution to a problem that you've presented external to the primary discussion. Also, you should probably read what they've written on the issue before you keep claiming I "don't understand economics."

I've read Frank and K. I wasn't impressed.

The reason for wish being limited is because the game can't function if it's taken to its logical conclusion. The same is true of diplomacy. It doesn't matter why these things are true, just that they are. The infinite capacity to make fanatics of anything that isn't immune to mind-affecting effects offers infinite free wishes as surely as leaving wish uncapped. Neither leaves a meaningful discussion because they're the same thing in different forms.

The Cleric being discussed has unlimited turning and cannot fail to turn a Shadow. No number of Shadows threaten him, regardless of gear.

There are a number of effects that can protect the shadows from turning and your turning isn't infinite, it's arbitrarily high. You can be overwhelmed by an arbitrarily higher number of shadows.

If you had done as was requested, you would understand that the people who invented the wish economy explained why you were wrong the better part of decade ago.

I read Frank and K over six years ago. I wasn't impressed then, I'm not impressed now. I don't recall any solutions to the points I've put forward. I'll double check though. Just in the interest of fairness.

But I thought it was unrealistic to assume casters could get wishes out of creatures.

For free, it is. Getting wishes at all is possible but they'll cost you and you're likely not getting them through binding unless you want them to cost Big.

Oh, sure. Bear in mind that I presented a solution to the problem which still works at the given level. Two actually. Artificers and wish.

Which puts us back to extremely limited and costly access to something that could be done quicker, cheaper, and easier with a few more levels. I'll give you that it's at least an equivalent result this time. Though getting that PAO to last the 24 hours needed to cast awaken will be a hell of a trick. Might even require some collaboration.

wish on the edge of an antimagic field. Now the target's contingencies are suppressed.

Proactive antagonist does the same to you first and/or the wish granter you're abusing intentionally screws your wish and puts him on the far edge and/or misunderstands and drops him just outside the edge of the dead magic zone since that's still on the edge and/or doesn't agree to the wish at all because of an extant relationship with the antagonist or any of a number of other issues. Also, dim anchor foils wish-a-port by virtue of being a condition on the target rather than a condition local to targets locale.

Unless, you know, you happen to be able to make NPCs Fanatic. Or credibly threaten them with violence. Oh, wait...

Still not buying either of those. I think I've adequately outlined why by now.

First, that's not actually a problem. You've presented "you have to get in there" with no explanation as to why you'd want to get in there. What does the MacGuffin do? Why can't I do that myself with my legion of simulacra or bound demons? How is the antagonist doing any antagonisting from inside his demiplane?

Doesn't matter why. You said it's about overcoming challenges so overcome the challenge. As for how he's doing anything, seriously? You're the one advocating armies of simulacra and you can't see how he might effect things without acting directly. Really?

Second, you have yet to explain why a literal genius is incapable of understanding the concept of "trading".

He certainly can. He can also recognize racketeering.

zergling.exe

2015-09-19, 01:47 AM

No, it can't. wish very explicitly describes those things which you just get no questions asked. Making any magic item is one of those things. If you wish for a ring of "all the things", you get it. You do not get your statement parsed in a language where it means "beat me to death with my own legs". You do not get transported to a creature you can make a ring of "all the things." You do not pass go. You do not collect $200. You get a ring of "all the things." Because that is how the spell actually works.

You're not asking for servitude. You're making a trade. You are giving it a wish and it is giving you a wish and another Efreet. Which could totally be some political rival it wants to screw over if you're super convinced that "evil" means "villain on a children's cartoon".

But let's be straight. It doesn't actually matter what hoops you want PCs to jump through, because "bind an Efreet" is just a proxy for "get a wish that doesn't cost XP". Which you can do with a simulacrum of an Efreet, which at least two of the characters in question can make.

Let's look at the wish spell itself, 'K?

You may try to use a wish to produce greater effects than these, but doing so is dangerous. Such a wishgives the DM the opportunity to fulfil 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. Wishing to be immortal could get you imprisioned in a hidden extradimensional space (as by an imprisonment spell), where you could “live” indefinitely.
Oh look, it does potentially work that way. Even without the Efreeti warping it.

Your counter argument will be that any magic item is within wish's power to make. Well, artifacts are magic items too, so not all items are safe it seems.

Also, Kelb, the German money problem was after the Great War, not WWII. The allies weren't stupid enough to make the same mistake twice.

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-19, 01:58 AM

Also, Kelb, the German money problem was after the Great War, not WWII. The allies weren't stupid enough to make the same mistake twice.

Was it? No matter. My point remains valid even if I got the time period off by a bit. Thanks for the correction though.

ryu

2015-09-19, 02:23 AM

Let's look at the wish spell itself, 'K?

Oh look, it does potentially work that way. Even without the Efreeti warping it.

Your counter argument will be that any magic item is within wish's power to make. Well, artifacts are magic items too, so not all items are safe it seems.

Also, Kelb, the German money problem was after the Great War, not WWII. The allies weren't stupid enough to make the same mistake twice.

Your reading of wish is inaccurate. The clause in parenthesis only applies if you wish for something not on the incredibly broad, versatile, and powerful list of basic uses. Literally any magic item is one of those uses.

zergling.exe

2015-09-19, 02:45 AM

Your reading of wish is inaccurate. The clause in parenthesis only applies if you wish for something not on the incredibly broad, versatile, and powerful list of basic uses. Literally any magic item is one of those uses.

I already addressed this. Any magic item is on the list. However artifacts are also magic items. Wishing for a staff of the magi (an artifact) can have bad things happen to you. Thus there are some unspecified limitations upon wish in regards to magic items. What these limits are is up to individual DMs however.

NichG

2015-09-19, 02:48 AM

Perhaps the reason to play epic is to avoid this kind of high-op and theoretical-op debate. If there's a strong cap on your power level, and you're facing challenges that seem too big to deal with, it can feel as though you have to optimize harder - or even that you're expected to. If there is no built-in upper limit to your potential power level, there's less feeling that you have to go all out.

Power in D&D is really a matter of metagame decisions, not something inherent to character or CR. The system is complex enough that it's always going to have unpatched exploits that let you obtain almost arbitrary amounts of power at almost any time in the character's adventuring career. The thing that keeps it playable is that people don't feel like actually going and using those exploits is warranted (at which point mutually assured destruction between players and DM can kick in, and everyone loses). If the players feel OOC that they're up against a wall, they're more likely to push things a bit further to get enough room to breath.

If you're playing epic, maybe just having 600hp is enough to make you feel invulnerable - you don't need to actually become totally immune to damage (and in the process discover that its pretty trivial to apply it to everyone in the party once you've figured out how to do it for yourself, so might as well, right?)

In principle, epic-level play also explicitly legitimizes certain things that one would otherwise consider exploitative. It says to some extent 'its okay if you're punching mountains to gravel, its epic level, you're supposed to' whereas if someone pulled that out at Lv3 (using, say, clever interpretations of certain Stone Dragon maneuvers) it'd net a lot of eye-rolling.

Yahzi

2015-09-19, 03:16 AM

I've read Frank and K. I wasn't impressed.
This could be the problem. Frank and K's stuff is objectively impressive.

Selion

2015-09-19, 03:17 AM

Sorry, i lost the point in this UN-understandable talking about crazy optimizations.

I thought wishes had huge drawbacks, especially those granted by powerful extra-planar beings.

You want all the gold in the world? You are teleported in a world in which there is not gold
You want 10000000000000 gold pieces? You get a chunk of gold powder, that is made of really tiny gold pieces
You want a ton of gold? A large piece of gold drops on your head killing you
You want a huge castle made of diamonds? You get a huge castle made of diamonds, in a huge pool of lava, that burns the diamonds to carbon.

If you play in a world in which it is possible to obtain infinite wealth, you would not be the only one having had the "great idea", gold wouldn't worth anything to anyone (even non casters, why bother to collect something that can be produced infinitely?).

By the way, if you "play" with divine powers, obtaining with a weird combo a power that should not be granted to someone with your level of faith (such as infinite charisma), you would likely lose your powers: a druid/cleric that indefinitely polymorph himself and ask his god/nature to awaken intellect in himself is literally playing with the rules of nature, why should his god grant something like this?

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-19, 03:29 AM

This could be the problem. Frank and K's stuff is objectively impressive.

It's not bad but they didn't extrapolate all the way on the economics and ultimately it's a pile of houserules on a similar level to pathfinder. I wasn't impressed by pathfinder's "improvements" either.

Tippy is impressive. Frank and K were just pretty good.

Brova

2015-09-19, 09:05 AM

Since the Efreet is the one actually making the Wish on your behalf, the Efreet can absolutely subvert the Wish in ways a Wish you cast yourself wouldn't. Them's the risks you deal with when you try to get the power of a 9th-level spell with a lower level spell and less XP. (Or no spell/XP, if you have other means of capturing Efreeti.) But I guess that's neither here nor there.

The Efreet ability in question is:

grant up to three wishes (to nongenies only)

wish is a precisely defined term within the rules. The wish "I want you to cast planar binding to summon a Quasit" is not fulfilled (assuming the wish is made in a way that is fully logically specified) by transporting you to a Quasit. It is also not fulfilled by transporting a Quasit to you with the "transport travelers" clause of wish. It is also not fulfilled by summoning a Quasit with lesser planar binding. Or greater planar binding. It is not fulfilled by summoning an Imp with planar binding. It is not fulfilled by summoning a Babau with planar binding. It is fulfilled only and exclusively by summoning a Quasit with planar binding. There is no perversion of intent. It's just not how it works.

Burning a spell slot isn't a cost except in the strictest sense of a negligible opportunity cost. Same goes for the time invested. Even if your a wizard or archivist who bought the spell as a spell known it's a trivial to the point of irrelavence cost compared to devices that you're just giving away or at least leaving outside of your direct control. Such a petty dig at my arguments reeks of desperation.

If you're going to use a word (with the special "'-"s for emphasis even) you should use the right word. Use the word "negligible" if you mean "negligible". Use the word "no" if you mean "no", not if you mean "negligible".

Uncontrolled printing of new money leads to such drastic inflation as to make that money effectively worthless.

You're not actually saying anything. I know what inflation is. But you still haven't explained why people will use wish to produce unlimited amounts of something that can only buy things they can get with wish. Is it because all evil people are secretly children's cartoon villains and they want to cause as much chaos as possible?

Even medium and major items have extremely limited value at the proposed 15k limit. Wish up the supplies to make it, wish yourself the feat to craft it, wish yourself a supply of ambrosia/agony to pay the xp cost, spend some time to make it.

The assumption (admittedly unstated in the original wish economy explanation) is that you can't wish for the materials needed to make items worth more than 15k.

Even without wish based transportation items are vulnerable in a way that spell effects simply aren't. There's an added cost of security beyond the cost of the items themselves that makes using them over the spells that much more efficient when they were already the superior option to begin with.

And that added cost is? I don't understand how securing the place an item is is different from securing the place a spell effect is. And of course, the item is better because it targets more locations and has at most the operational cost of having to "dial" it like a Stargate.

The prisoner's dilemma doesn't even apply.

Actually, this is true. It's not true why you say it is, but it is true. It's not a prisoner's dilemma, because the Nash Equilibrium is to conspire. If the Efreet is honest, it gets a free wish. If it isn't honest, it gets nothing. So again, why is it going to betray?

Oh right, evil means you have the ethical outlook of the villain on a children's cartoon.

And again, this is not the only way to get a wish. Noble Djinn grant wishes, and are totally not evil *****. Also simulacrum.

I've read Frank and K. I wasn't impressed.

So you read the most powerful build in the game (the Wish), fixes to 90% of balance problems (the Tomes), and a legitimate test for character balance (the SGT) and weren't impressed? What impresses you?

There are a number of effects that can protect the shadows from turning and your turning isn't infinite, it's arbitrarily high. You can be overwhelmed by an arbitrarily higher number of shadows.

Your turning actually is infinite. It's limited per day and you have more than 14,400 uses, meaning you can use it every round of the day until it resets. It's not numerically infinite, but it's infinite with respect to uses.

Which puts us back to extremely limited and costly access to something that could be done quicker, cheaper, and easier with a few more levels. I'll give you that it's at least an equivalent result this time. Though getting that PAO to last the 24 hours needed to cast awaken will be a hell of a trick. Might even require some collaboration.

Unless you have a power surge'd item of polymorph any object. Which you totally could. And cast awaken as a standard action via limited wish.

Still not buying either of those. I think I've adequately outlined why by now.

You really haven't. You've explained that Efreet are selfish enough to not grant you wishes for their personal advancement, but not why someone that selfish wouldn't fold when threatened with personal violence. You also haven't provided any explanation why CharOp doesn't happen in a world with Diplomacy being legal.

Doesn't matter why. You said it's about overcoming challenges so overcome the challenge. As for how he's doing anything, seriously? You're the one advocating armies of simulacra and you can't see how he might effect things without acting directly. Really?

So his plan is to send armies of simulacra out of a plane that cannot be entered or exited by planar travel? Smooth.

Let's look at the wish spell itself, 'K?

You see the part you didn't bold? It says you only get screwed for "greater effects". Creating a magic item is a listed effect, not a greater effect. You don't get screwed. You might make a case that you get screwed for wishing for artifacts, but a ring of "all the powers" isn't actually an artifact.

Tippy is impressive. Frank and K were just pretty good.

So the guy who won't even post his character sheet is more impressive than people who posted a patch that balances the game? That's an interesting position, but not one that ultimately makes any sense.

Mr Adventurer

2015-09-19, 09:32 AM

My experience is that people want to play Epic because they don't want to stop playing the game they're in or the characters they're playing.

ryu

2015-09-19, 01:06 PM

I already addressed this. Any magic item is on the list. However artifacts are also magic items. Wishing for a staff of the magi (an artifact) can have bad things happen to you. Thus there are some unspecified limitations upon wish in regards to magic items. What these limits are is up to individual DMs however.

Artifact is a specifiable magic item quality. Nothing you call for is an artifact unless you demand it so, you're demanding the transport of an artifact that already exists, or there is some demand in the crafting rules that states the item you just wished for must be an artifact. Other than that? They don't meaningfully exist to wish. They aren't special either. Every spell component pouch contains a limitless number of artifacts that do nothing and are worth 0 GP.

zergling.exe

2015-09-19, 01:53 PM

wish is a precisely defined term within the rules. The wish "I want you to cast planar binding to summon a Quasit" is not fulfilled (assuming the wish is made in a way that is fully logically specified) by transporting you to a Quasit. It is also not fulfilled by transporting a Quasit to you with the "transport travelers" clause of wish. It is also not fulfilled by summoning a Quasit with lesser planar binding. Or greater planar binding. It is not fulfilled by summoning an Imp with planar binding. It is not fulfilled by summoning a Babau with planar binding. It is fulfilled only and exclusively by summoning a Quasit with planar binding. There is no perversion of intent. It's just not how it works.
So you want to have the CG/LE creature bind the quasit? In either case the quasit will not be dealing with you in any way, and the Noble Djinni/Efreeti now gets to make a friend in can use against you or just send back.

You really haven't. You've explained that Efreet are selfish enough to not grant you wishes for their personal advancement, but not why someone that selfish wouldn't fold when threatened with personal violence. You also haven't provided any explanation why CharOp doesn't happen in a world with Diplomacy being legal.
They don't fold to personal violence because they hate serving. Even if they were to fold to you, the next day they would have one of their many servants utilize their wishes to get revenge on you. Playing with a creature that can grant wishes as if you can hold anything over them is like trying to stop a thunderstorm with a paper fan.

You see the part you didn't bold? It says you only get screwed for "greater effects". Creating a magic item is a listed effect, not a greater effect. You don't get screwed. You might make a case that you get screwed for wishing for artifacts, but a ring of "all the powers" isn't actually an artifact.

Artifact is a specifiable magic item quality. Nothing you call for is an artifact unless you demand it so, you're demanding the transport of an artifact that already exists, or there is some demand in the crafting rules that states the item you just wished for must be an artifact. Other than that? They don't meaningfully exist to wish. They aren't special either. Every spell component pouch contains a limitless number of artifacts that do nothing and are worth 0 GP.
Let's turn to the Epic Handbook now.

The following specific suits of armor and shields usually are preconstructed with exactly the qualities described here. Some may have been considered artifacts before the secrets of their construction were discovered.

The following specific weapons usually are preconstructed with exactly the qualities listed here. The only difference between these items and some of the artifacts presented later in this chapter is that the processes for creating these weapons are known.

Even in a world with epic magic items, there will always be artifacts: legendary relics of mysterious power, their origins shrouded in tales of lore. Some of these items may be little more than unique epic magic items with a story attached, while others defy even the greatest loremasters’ efforts to glean their methods of creation.
Regardless of an artifact’s origin, no price can truly be attached to these items. In most cases, this is because their powers flout categorization. Other items are so far beyond the means of mortal creators that no fair price can be attached to their ownership.
Artifacts are epic magic items. So anything costing more than 200k gold becomes essentially an artifact, and is potentially out of range of wish's ability to make.

So if component pouches contain artifacts that are worthless and do nothing, any possible epic item ever conceivable is within your component pouch. And is worthless so it doesn't actually do anything. So now you wish for a ring of all the spells and get a fancy looking ring that is worth 0 gp and does nothing because it either took it from a random component pouch, or just made a random 0 gp one.

Crux Argentum

2015-09-19, 02:05 PM

This thread has spun so far out of control, lol. It mostly looks like a pi**ing contest now.

"I know more about how to break the game than you do."
"Nope, I'm afraid I know how to ruin a game better than you do."
"No no no, surely I know more about to shatter any fun one might have playing D&D better than you, or anyone else for that matter."
"No, me."
"No, me!"
etc. etc. etc....

I think this is why people don't play epic, lol. It's ridiculous. Who honestly cares that you can do all that stuff? I personally know only one person and I would never sit down at a table to play any rpg with him ever again as a DM or a player.

I thought D&D was about sitting down and having fun. Not exploiting the heck out of the rules, which is apparently inherently easier to do at epic levels. To each their own, I guess...

zergling.exe

2015-09-19, 02:11 PM

Brova

2015-09-19, 02:32 PM

So you want to have the CG/LE creature bind the quasit? In either case the quasit will not be dealing with you in any way, and the Noble Djinni/Efreeti now gets to make a friend in can use against you or just send back.

First, you've conceded the broader point. If the wish granter must fulfill "normal" wishes in the exact way specified, you can still get your ring.

Second, it's a reasonable assumption to make that the phrase "grant up to three wishes" implies that the wishes are adjudicated as if the wisher made them.

They don't fold to personal violence because they hate serving. Even if they were to fold to you, the next day they would have one of their many servants utilize their wishes to get revenge on you. Playing with a creature that can grant wishes as if you can hold anything over them is like trying to stop a thunderstorm with a paper fan.

So confronted with the opportunity to make a deal allowing it to use one of the most powerful abilities in the game or die, it will choose to die?

Artifacts are epic magic items.

No, that's not what the thing you quoted says. It says that "Some may have been considered artifacts" and "The only difference between these items and some of the artifacts presented later in this chapter is that the processes for creating these weapons are known" and "Even in a world with epic magic items, there will always be artifacts: legendary relics of mysterious power, their origins shrouded in tales of lore."

So some epic items are considered artifacts, despite the fact that there is a difference between epic items and artifacts. If you're going to claim that something supports your position, quote the parts that support your position.

zergling.exe

2015-09-19, 03:17 PM

First, you've conceded the broader point. If the wish granter must fulfill "normal" wishes in the exact way specified, you can still get your ring.

You are asking it to use wish to duplicate the effects of planar binding. You ask it to create an epic magic item (see end of post for this stuff) then it will try, and fail to create your ring because it is too expensive. It might then try the next best thing. Moving you to either someone who could make it for you, or moving you to someone in possession of such an item. Or perhaps just tell you your wish was wasted because it couldn't complete the request.

Also I am not totally conceding the point. You tell it to bind a quasit. It decides that it could totally make a different bargain than you want to make with it and so go ahead with planar binding, because it can subvert what you want to do with it.

Second, it's a reasonable assumption to make that the phrase "grant up to three wishes" implies that the wishes are adjudicated as if the wisher made them.

1/day an Efreeti or Noble Djinni can grant three wishes to a nongenie. It is casting the spell up to three times on their behalf. Or the it grants the target the ability to make 3 wishes as special abilities similar to clerics bestowing spells upon someone. In one instance the genie can influence the effects of the wish (which they can), the other grants the genie no further influence after granting the wishes.

With the second option the genie won't get its wish unless you make it on its behalf.

So confronted with the opportunity to make a deal allowing it to use one of the most powerful abilities in the game or die, it will choose to die?

Genies tend to have many servants in their home. They can have those, who they have as slaves, make any wish they want for them. Why do they care if the wizard offers them something they can get access to 3/day of? They also likely have invested some of their many wishes into such resources as death pact and contingent true resurrections if they so choose. Death is a non-obstacle for something that has wish as a spell-like ability, even if it can't use it directly itself.

No, that's not what the thing you quoted says. It says that "Some may have been considered artifacts" and "The only difference between these items and some of the artifacts presented later in this chapter is that the processes for creating these weapons are known" and "Even in a world with epic magic items, there will always be artifacts: legendary relics of mysterious power, their origins shrouded in tales of lore."

So some epic items are considered artifacts, despite the fact that there is a difference between epic items and artifacts. If you're going to claim that something supports your position, quote the parts that support your position.

Wish allows you to create magic items. Epic magic items are distinctly different from regular magic items in many way. They have no cost restrictions, no bonus restrictions, require an additional epic creation feat, and require a caster level of over 20. A ring of all the spells by virtue of cost alone will be epic. Wish does not let you make epic magic items. It allows you to make nonepic magic items. This distinction does not exist in the Player's Handbook because epic items do not exist to it.

Selion

2015-09-19, 03:33 PM

The Efreet ability in question is:
You really haven't. You've explained that Efreet are selfish enough to not grant you wishes for their personal advancement, but not why someone that selfish wouldn't fold when threatened with personal violence. You also haven't provided any explanation why CharOp doesn't happen in a world with Diplomacy being legal.

There are two possible interpretations IMHO about how a wish granted by an efreet works:
1) (my personal one) wish is a powerful spell that forces the gods to produce the effects you require. The gods may react badly if a wish is driven by hubris and may grant the wish in unfavorable ways.
2) The efreet grants the wish using his own powers, he can use this kind of powers only under request of a mortal, but must use them according to the spelling of the wish.

Both interpretations put the poor human wishing for infinite wealth in a bad position.
1) the efreet is just a medium, his disposition/indisposition toward the human asking for a wish is irrelevant as long as he decides to grant the wish: the gods decide how the wish will be granted, and imagine how happy would be a god about a world balance changing feature granted to a low level character.
2) the efreet grants the wish himself, under the threat of a mortal stronger than him. He is an intelligent and proud creature and will likely act in self defense, granting the wish in a way that would kill the poor human. (Not only i will confer you unmatched richness in all the world, thou thyself shall be a monument of your opulence: your skin, your limbs, your entrails and even your blood shall be made of gold and wonderful gems. Your wish is granted, as you have requested, i can return to my home proud of the uprightness of my kind.)

This is what i would do as a DM if a player tries this thing. It's not a war against the players, the rulebook is quite clear about wish consequences, yours is a clear example of a wish out of balance and MUST be diverted from its original means. A DM who allows this kind of wishes is breaking the game rules in my opinion.

martixy

2015-09-19, 03:38 PM

Well that's easy.

Because...

...and...

I like epic because of the ingame implication of scale and scope.
Not for the mechanics or the RAW. You can break 3.5 before that, nobody disputes that. But that's a failing of a different category in the whole experience of roleplaying(the game system).

Being epic isn't about the game system. It's about the world the characters inhabit and their agency in it.

Also as Kelb mentioned, I am one of those people who enjoy complexity for complexity's sake.

And power is cool. So are many capstone abilities.

It isn't about TO or RAW, even if much of this thread focuses on that right now.

Sometimes you just wanna play that epic quest and battle godlike entities for the fate of the world.

Eldan

2015-09-19, 03:54 PM

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-19, 03:54 PM

@brova:

Since I'm now seeing shifting goal posts (new assumption on the wish economy), cherry picking (ignoring both lore regarding efreet and the fact that a wish granted, rather than cast, can be perverted by the caster), and ad-hominem attacks (addressing my grammar rather than my argument), I can no longer believe you're arguing in good faith. We will simply have to agree to disagree at this point since we clearly cannot convince one another. Good day.

Brova

2015-09-19, 04:00 PM

@wish discussion over all: Y'all are right that wish giving you any item is broken. I understand the temptation to say that is not how things work. Either because Efreet are *****, or the rules secretly contradict it, or for some other reason. But that is not how the rules work. Rather than trying to contort the rules until they work, you should admit they are broken, then fix them.

You are asking it to use wish to duplicate the effects of planar binding.

Specifically, you are wishing "that I had just cast planar binding, calling a Quasit". That's totally a thing wish can do (planar binding being a Sorcerer/Wizard spell of 8th level or less, and the Efreet not having any banned schools), and it avoids any shenanigans.

You ask it to create an epic magic item (see end of post for this stuff) then it will try, and fail to create your ring because it is too expensive.

Not by RAW. If you institute a wish fix, like the Tomes do, they the problem goes away. Unfortunately, we're talking about RAW not houserules.

[1/day an Efreeti or Noble Djinni can grant three wishes to a nongenie. It is casting the spell up to three times on their behalf. Or the it grants the target the ability to make 3 wishes as special abilities similar to clerics bestowing spells upon someone. In one instance the genie can influence the effects of the wish (which they can), the other grants the genie no further influence after granting the wishes.

There's not actually a difference. I mean, the Efreet could refuse to grant a wish, but once it does, it does not get to screw you over. Period.

With the second option the genie won't get its wish unless you make it on its behalf.

That's how it always works. It can't make its own wishes.

Wish allows you to create magic items. Epic magic items are distinctly different from regular magic items in many way. They have no cost restrictions, no bonus restrictions, require an additional epic creation feat, and require a caster level of over 20. A ring of all the spells by virtue of cost alone will be epic. Wish does not let you make epic magic items. It allows you to make nonepic magic items. This distinction does not exist in the Player's Handbook because epic items do not exist to it.

Here is what the actual SRD actually says about what wish can do in terms of creating magic items:

Create a magic item, or add to the powers of an existing magic item.

Notice that there is no GP restriction. Notice that there is no "no artifacts" restriction. Notice that there is no "no epic magic items" restriction. Notice that you are wrong.

This is what i would do as a DM if a player try this thing. It's not a war against the players, the rulebook is quite clear about wish consequences, yours is a clear example of a wish out of balance and MUST be diverted from its original means. A DM who allows this kind of wishes is breaking the game rules in my opinion.

Well, your opinion is wrong. Objectively and demonstrably. The wish spell does specific things. One of those things is allow you to create any item in the game. You are right that it is broken, but you are dead wrong that it is in any way "against the rules".

@brova:

Since I'm now seeing shifting goal posts (new assumption on the wish economy), cherry picking (ignoring both lore regarding efreet and the fact that a wish granted, rather than cast, can be perverted by the caster), and ad-hominem attacks (addressing my grammar rather than my argument), I can no longer believe you're arguing in good faith. We will simply have to agree to disagree at this point since we clearly cannot convince one another. Good day.

If you had done as instructed, and read about the wish economy, you would understand that item components are assumed to be wish economy by the creators of the wish economy. But you didn't, and instead ranted about economics you don't understand, in either the real or the game world.

wishes are precisely defined in the rules. If the wish "I wish for a casting of X spell with Y specifications" is a precise linguistic construct (it is, at least with enough work) it cannot be both granted and perverted. If you grant the wish, as Efreet do, it will be granted in the precise way the rules describe.

As far as the lore goes, it's not actually relevant. They hate "servitude", but people who have studied economics would recognize "I'll give you X if you give me Y" as a trade rather than servitude.

As far as the grammar goes, you made a claim that you did not personally believe, then whined when I called you on it. Perhaps you should say the things you mean if you want people to understand your meaning.

Literally all your points about how I am "arguing in bad faith" are wrong. Literally never have you responded to the original argument I made. You may now believe that I am arguing in bad faith, but you were never arguing in good faith.

Have the decency to admit you lost.

zergling.exe

2015-09-19, 04:53 PM

As far as the lore goes, it's not actually relevant. They hate "servitude", but people who have studied economics would recognize "I'll give you X if you give me Y" as a trade rather than servitude.

Casting this spell attempts a dangerous act: to lure a creature from another plane to a specifically prepared trap, which must lie within the spell’s range. The called creature is held in the trap until it agrees to perform one service in return for its freedom.

Even proposing a trade, you have cast a spell that traps and holds the Efreeti until such time as it agrees to a service for its freedom, or escaping in some other way. If that is not servitude in any form, than I don't know what is. It still has access to its wish spell-like ability back in its home, where it is using one of its many servants to grant its own wishes. Why does it want to trade something it gets for free?

Also on the limits of wish, we have differing views on how permissive creating a magic item is. You believe it has absolutely no limits. While I believe it is limited to nonepic magic items. Wish was not made with epic magic items in mind. Artifacts are the closest thing in the DMG to what anything over 200k gp is. Artifacts can have bad things happen when you try to wish for them. Thus I believe that as epic magic items are closer to artifacts than the other magic items in the DMG that they too are beyond wish. RAW is not a clear cut as you believe it to be. Perhaps RAW actually means that you can wish for any item printed in the DMG, but not items that are "custom made".

We will not convince each other either way on what exactly RAW is saying. I am leaving this argument, as you strongly believe wish's ability to make magic items is broken by RAW.

Selion

2015-09-19, 05:08 PM

There's no reason (in RAW D&D) for a character to care about gold past 9th or so. You can get wishes from Genies at that point, and they can give you all the gold. Now, by RAW they can also give you all the items, but that's obviously stupid broken,

These are your words. You were wrong about the infinite wealth, clearly, and switched with the epic magic item argument.
We are talking about RAW, right?
Create a magic item, or add to the powers of an existing magic item.
Where it's written that you decide which magic item you obtain or what powers you add to an existing item?

Brova

2015-09-19, 05:22 PM

It still has access to its wish spell-like ability back in its home, where it is using one of its many servants to grant its own wishes. Why does it want to trade something it gets for free?

I though Efreet hated servitude. Surely that expends to other people.

As far as the actual scenario goes, the trapping only occurs if they don't make a deal. It's not really a factor in whether the deal itself is good.

You believe it has absolutely no limits. While I believe it is limited to nonepic magic items.

No.

The rules say it has no limits. They maybe sort of imply that you can't get artifacts. They are completely silent on the question of epic items.

These are your words. You were wrong about the infinite wealth, clearly, and switched with the epic magic item argument.

What? I think you might have got caught up somewhere. wish gives you unlimited gold. That's unlimited wealth if all things can be bought for gold. I'm an advocate of a solution where that's not the case (wish economy), but by RAW that's how it works.

Where it's written that you decide which magic item you obtain or what powers you add to an existing item?

So your contention is that when wish says it can "duplicate any wizard or sorcerer spell of 8th level or lower, provided the spell is not of a school prohibited to you" that is not because the value is unspecified but because it is because it is random?

That certainly addresses the balance problems, but it seems like a deeply problematic way to adjudicate that.

Selion

2015-09-19, 05:57 PM

What? I think you might have got caught up somewhere. wish gives you unlimited gold. That's unlimited wealth if all things can be bought for gold. I'm an advocate of a solution where that's not the case (wish economy), but by RAW that's how it works.

I admit i had to search with google. Know i understand what you are saying, you summon an army of efreets with chain binding and ask for 25k gold to every one of them.
...
-_-
...
this is sick :)

Ok, fine by me, you are right, but in a real game nothing of this would happen.
If i must choice then i prefer to stick with the foolish thing that you cannot choice what magical item, non-magical item or spell you obtain. If you want something in particular you are prone to drawbacks :P

Brova

2015-09-19, 06:05 PM

If i must choice then i prefer to stick with the foolish thing that you cannot choice what magical item, non-magical item or spell you obtain. If you want something in particular you are prone to drawbacks :P

Why not just have a GP cap? Then PCs can't get unlimited power, but still don't feel like the DM is jerking them around. There are some issues with charged items, but frankly those issues exist in any wealth system. Plus, if you accept that wish produces infinite mundane wealth (coins, gems, tapestries, diamonds) and minor magic items (flaming swords, frost daggers, feather tokens) you get a lot of good for the system. Benefits include:

-Players can spend mundane wealth on story advancement without hurting their combat effectiveness.
-Players have no incentive to rip apart cool pieces of scenery.
-You can have legitimate hoards for dragons or other monsters.
-High level people don't have to do accounting for trail rations or rope.

Also, if you implement the scaling items suggested in the Tomes (or possibly supplemental works), you can boost mundanes by allowing them level appropriate numbers for free.

All in all, I really think it's ideal to lean into wish, rather than nerf it.

Selion

2015-09-19, 06:18 PM

Why not just have a GP cap? Then PCs can't get unlimited power, but still don't feel like the DM is jerking them around. There are some issues with charged items, but frankly those issues exist in any wealth system. Plus, if you accept that wish produces infinite mundane wealth (coins, gems, tapestries, diamonds) and minor magic items (flaming swords, frost daggers, feather tokens) you get a lot of good for the system. Benefits include:

-Players can spend mundane wealth on story advancement without hurting their combat effectiveness.
-Players have no incentive to rip apart cool pieces of scenery.
-You can have legitimate hoards for dragons or other monsters.
-High level people don't have to do accounting for trail rations or rope.

Also, if you implement the scaling items suggested in the Tomes (or possibly supplemental works), you can boost mundanes by allowing them level appropriate numbers for free.

All in all, I really think it's ideal to lean into wish, rather than nerf it.

Naah, i was kidding, i don't play by raw, i just would not permit chain binding. Magic is an erratic power, it is not science, if a player wants to summon an arbitrary high number of efreets i would come up with something to prevent it.

ANYWAY

It's possible to create a world in which high level wizards can create mundane wealth, they basically become human banks and give money to kingdoms, they have strict laws about how much gold has to be created in an amount of time and hunt whoever tries to produce wealth illegally. (basically it works exactly in the same way currency works in the real world)

martixy

2015-09-19, 06:24 PM

Oh yeah. Complexity for complexity's sake. That's absolutely a factor. I love it. I never quite understood people who want simplified rules. I love opening 300 pages of legalese and formulae and working through them.

Oh, no, I can completely understand the people who like simple. I have nothing against them.

I'm just not that kind of man.
Heck, I'd had a couple of characters where I've had to write a program from scratch to calculate my attack sequence each round, just so my turn doesn't take half an hour.

There's just something about combing through a ton of splatbooks and lining up all the classes, feats and skills just right so everything works together in a cool and powerful way.

That's why I stick to 3.5 - I enjoy the breadth of material and hijinks this system allows - even when practically all of my friends no longer want to touch it with a 10-foot pole anymore.

Kelb_Panthera

2015-09-19, 09:25 PM

If you had done as instructed, and read about the wish economy, you would understand that item components are assumed to be wish economy by the creators of the wish economy. But you didn't, and instead ranted about economics you don't understand, in either the real or the game world.

This simply isn't in Frank and K's work. While you -could- simply be mistaken, I'm more inclined, at this point, to believe you're pulling stuff out of your butt because of your generally aggressive tone and the absolute vehemence with which you're insisting you're right and no one else knows what they're talking about.

wishes are precisely defined in the rules. If the wish "I wish for a casting of X spell with Y specifications" is a precise linguistic construct (it is, at least with enough work) it cannot be both granted and perverted. If you grant the wish, as Efreet do, it will be granted in the precise way the rules describe.

Yes, wish is precicesly described in the rules and the efreet is perfectly capable of giving you exactly what you want. The problem is that you have to convince him to -want- to give you what you want instead of a deliberately literal or otherwise unintended but technically accurate representation of your request. There's also nothing short of you being clever enough in your phrasing of your request to keep it from adding unwanted extras such as producing a cursed version of the item you've requested or an intelligent one of a grossly different personality from your own when creating items.

The wish isn't coming from you, it's coming from the efreet and your requested desire. It very much can be fulfilled in a way that perverts your desires.

As far as the lore goes, it's not actually relevant. They hate "servitude", but people who have studied economics would recognize "I'll give you X if you give me Y" as a trade rather than servitude.

Are you familiar with the idea of a deal made under duress? It's not a trade, it's a demand to make a trade. It's racketeering. If you want a wish from a genie you use planar ally or you go visit him. You don't forcibly drag him into a cage and demand he work with you or die.

As far as the grammar goes, you made a claim that you did not personally believe, then whined when I called you on it. Perhaps you should say the things you mean if you want people to understand your meaning.

Even if you genuinely didn't take my meaning because of my imprecise grammar, you still could've made your correction -and- addressed the larger point. The cost in time, resources, and man-power in presice planar transportation by casting a gate spell is very close to nothing especially in comparison to building the devices and then setting up and securing the infrastructure of a pan-dimensional network. The cost-benefit ratio comparison of tp circles vs device based tp network is somewhat less pronounced but still huge. You chose to attack my grammar instead of addressing this. That's an ad-hominem attack.

Literally all your points about how I am "arguing in bad faith" are wrong. Literally never have you responded to the original argument I made. You may now believe that I am arguing in bad faith, but you were never arguing in good faith.

None of your proposed characters could stand against an equally optimized solar angel, much less a properly built god. So, no, they couldn't stand in epic play.

If wish is the basis of an economy there isn't an economy that non-magical characters can meaningfully participate in other than as serfs. None of Frank and K's proposed solutions to this are extant or RAW viable within the game as it currently exists.

Have the decency to admit you lost.

If you have to demand a concession of victory, you haven't won.

That said, I have no intention of further engaging you in this discussion. You clearly have no intention of even considering that you might be wrong and I don't enjoy shouting at walls.

Brova

2015-09-19, 09:43 PM

This simply isn't in Frank and K's work.

Did I say "read the paragraph where the wish economy is introduced? No, I didn't. Read the discussions. People raise the points you do, and the creators of the wish economy address them.

instead of a deliberately literal or otherwise unintended but technically accurate representation of your request.

It is possible to specify a wish for which the only output that would "grant" it is to do whatever you intend. The DM playing "who's the better lawyer" with you is just jerking you around. Also, you are presumably a high level Wizard with 30+ Int and large numbers of ranks in whichever Knowledge skill would be appropriate. I image you'd be able to draft an airtight contract.

Are you familiar with the idea of a deal made under duress? It's not a trade, it's a demand to make a trade. It's racketeering. If you want a wish from a genie you use planar ally or you go visit him. You don't forcibly drag him into a cage and demand he work with you or die.

Except no one was proposing "or die" until you insisted that "I get a wish, you get a wish, I get another genie" was somehow not a deal he'd make. The payoff matrix is "don't grant wish: nothing"/"do grant wish: get a free wish". Would you seriously make the call of going "don't grant wish" in that scenario?

Even if you genuinely didn't take my meaning because of my imprecise grammar, you still could've made your correction -and- addressed the larger point.

You mean the larger point that you pay a lower fixed cost and a higher marginal cost for an ability of lower utility? That's a trade off. Neither option is superior. Frankly, for any sort of campaign where it's assumed that you had time to create items, I'd prefer stepping disks to gate for travel purposes.

None of your proposed characters could stand against an equally optimized solar angel, much less a properly built god. So, no, they couldn't stand in epic play.

Wow, it's like you never read my first post. My contention was that power comes more from level of optimization than literal level. Whether they can beat something of the same optimization but higher level is at best tangential to the discussion. By that logic, nothing is ever epic, because the enemies could always optimize more.

If wish is the basis of an economy there isn't an economy that non-magical characters can meaningfully participate in other than as serfs.

Does the US economy use dollars as currency?

Can you print dollars (that are legal tender)?

Do you participate in the US economy?

Are you a serf?

That aside, I'm not sure what the role of people without magic in a wish economy has to do with anything at all.

If you have to demand a concession of victory, you haven't won.

If you make a passive aggressive post about how I'm "not arguing in good faith" and storm off, you have lost. You're just being too dishonest to admit it. Also, if you subsequently come back, you're clearly just trolling in an attempt to make me look bad with ad hominem attacks.

zergling.exe

2015-09-19, 10:28 PM

I though Efreet hated servitude. Surely that expends to other people.

Efreet hate servitude visited upon themselves. But they also keep servants.

The grand sultan is said to be an efreeti of singular power and prowess, and is advised by all manner of maliks, beys, and emirs. His direct servants, both in the city and on the Material Plane, are six pashas of considerable power.

Genies: The dao, djinn, efreet, and marids might be more than they seem. Perhaps they have solved the secrets of their planes of existence, and their mightiest caliphs and emirs can wield almost godly power if the price is right. The elementals are their vassals and servants, informing them of what occurs on the Material Plane.

On a quick skim, I did not find anything on how Efreet treat their servants. I also did not see anything preventing a Efreeti in the City of Brass from asking one of the many other residents to aid it in taking revenge upon someone that has wronged them. This population includes Devils. So don't mess with the Efreet, they have friends in low places. That they can have grant their wishes as well. And that they can charge one wish every, say five, the Efreeti gets one to make. That's potentially a wish every other day.

Now tell me why an Efreet would be inclined to make that trade where you get a wish and it gets a wish. It gives you your wishes and suddenly it can't give that balor that has an appointment today its wishes, that would likely have worse consequences than it not showing up because you killed it. These Efreet have lives as well.

Illven

2015-09-19, 11:06 PM

There are two possible interpretations IMHO about how a wish granted by an efreet works:
1) (my personal one) wish is a powerful spell that forces the gods to produce the effects you require. The gods may react badly if a wish is driven by hubris and may grant the wish in unfavorable ways.

This is what i would do as a DM if a player tries this thing. It's not a war against the players, the rulebook is quite clear about wish consequences, yours is a clear example of a wish out of balance and MUST be diverted from its original means. A DM who allows this kind of wishes is breaking the game rules in my opinion.

If you want a strong ninth level spell, that allows gods to intercede, why not try miracle. It even doesn't cost xp for some of the effects.

But please. Keep divinity out of my arcane casting. :smallannoyed:

Selion

2015-09-20, 03:57 AM

Does the US economy use dollars as currency?

Can you print dollars (that are legal tender)?

Do you participate in the US economy?

Are you a serf?

That aside, I'm not sure what the role of people without magic in a wish economy has to do with anything at all.

Ok, i think that here what invalidates the entire argument is the weird way in wich you create gold (by RAW you are right, wish has not side effects used this way, once the 3 wishes are granted by the efreet you can use two of them to summon other efreets and one to create 25k gold pieces)
If wish could grant infinite gold directly you would be right, but this way a lot of things may happens: an efreet, out of proud, could decide to die instead of granting such a wish, being sure he will be resurrected.
I can imagine a world in which few dozens of high level mages decide the economy of countries, but not this way.
If i would read this thing in a book i would consider this book trash, or a comic book.
I give to you an example in an actual game of a less powerful "combo": i'm running a pathfinder campaign, my oracle can take a power that allows him to cast once per day an arcane spell from a book, erasing it in the process. He cannot write wizard spells, but he could hire a wizard (or take the leadership feat) to write a proxy spell book, so that he can re-write erased spells. This mechanics is too twisted according to my tastes, so i think that if my player is interested in casting arcane spells, i would allow him to do so without this strange hiring and re-writing process, he will just pay the cost of the rewriting as additional spell components. In terms of game balance it's the same, but this way the atmosphere is not broken.
The same way, in this situation, the DM could allow the infinite gold creation (without the chain binding), changing the world design in the process to maintain a form of congruence. (in such a world if you create wildly gold you will be killed in brief time by a dozen of high level mages)
Or, more likely, he wouldn't change his world design to allow a crazy combo (even if by raw you are right, unless the genie opts for suicide)
In both cases, your character wouldn't have access to infinite wealth, in the same way a printer don't make me automatically rich :P