Uses of Wish that are a bit... out there

[Lupine]

Just as the title, what crazy uses of wish could work.

I got the idea about wish from one of the optimization threads here.

I'll contribute using Wish to remove the 33% chance or never being able to use wish. Then after that, wishing wish only used a 1st level spell slot.

[Man_Over_Game]

I've always been partial to using Wish as an atheist Wizard to cast Divination, and ask who the God was.

Or, in essence, what God rules over the atheists? Kelemvor is my guess, but I think that's mostly because he's where atheists end up anyway.

[JNAProductions]

Just as the title, what crazy uses of wish could work.

I got the idea about wish from one of the optimization threads here.

I'll contribute using Wish to remove the 33% chance or never being able to use wish. Then after that, wishing wish only used a 1st level spell slot.

As a DM? Those ain't gonna fly. The first one, MAYBE. If I knew the player was not the powergamer type (because while there's nothing wrong with being a powergamer, unlimited Wish is too easy to cheese).

The latter, though? Hell nah. The ability to cast any 8th level or lower spell as an action from a 1st level slot? Nope nope nope.

[darknite]

Those sound like wishes that would fail. You can't change the fundamental rules of magic with a single 9th level spell. Why not wish that your PC could cast all spells at will and no one else in the multiverse could cast a spell at all? As a DM I would allow some localized reality-bending activity and keep close to the guidelines provided in the spell description itself.

[JackPhoenix]

I'll contribute using Wish to remove the 33% chance or never being able to use wish.

Technically, being forbidden from ever casting Wish again *is* removing the 33% chance....

[RedMage125]

Technically, being forbidden from ever casting Wish again *is* removing the 33% chance....

Right? Be careful what you Wish for...

I'm also a big fan of:

Player (being granted a Wish): I wish to see invisible.
DM: What?
Player: I wish to see invisible.
DM: ...okay...?
Player: I look around, what do I see?
DM: Nothing, everything is invisible to you.

[Lupine]

Or, basically, Wish cannot effect how spells work.
That makes some sense. Since magic is supernatural, you can effect the natural and artificial, but not the supernatural.
I would, however, argue that you should be able to change the way some spells work, such as making simulacrum create another you that can rest and get benefits of such and the like.

On another note, maybe you could use Wish to create a permanent area where resting takes a fourth of the time to get the benefits of a rest.
Fix the five minute adventuring day by breaking it into segements of two hour off.

[Man_Over_Game]

Right? Be careful what you Wish for...

I'm also a big fan of:

Player (being granted a Wish): I wish to see invisible.
DM: What?
Player: I wish to see invisible.
DM: ...okay...?
Player: I look around, what do I see?
DM: Nothing, everything is invisible to you.

That's a pretty douchey result of a Wish.

See Invisibility is already a level 2 spell with no Concentration with a long duration. It wouldn't be astronomical to say that Wish makes someone have it permanently. I'd just rule that it still counts as risking the 33% chance. But as far as permanent buffs go, it's definitely not the most boring or most overpowered I've seen people ask for.

Unless it's more about the ambiguity of the player's Wish. Which begs the question:

Is it better to have a more accurate/detailed Wish, or is it better to have a balanced Wish?
Which, thinking about it, is another way of asking which is more important between Narrative vs. Mechanics.

[RedMage125]

That's a pretty douchey result of a Wish.

See Invisibility is already a level 2 spell with no Concentration with a long duration. It wouldn't be astronomical to say that Wish makes someone have it permanently. I'd just rule that it still counts as risking the 33% chance. But as far as permanent buffs go, it's definitely not the most boring or most overpowered I've seen people ask for.

Unless it's more about the ambiguity of the player's Wish. Which begs the question:

Is it better to have a more accurate/detailed Wish, or is it better to have a balanced Wish?
Which, thinking about it, is another way of asking which is more important between Narrative vs. Mechanics.

It was a pretty "relaxed rules" game, because the DM did not have an ecyclopedic knowledge of all the rules, and this was basically the end of the story. We had saved some kind of...genie...thing...I guess? We each got a wish.

I agree that a permanent 2nd-level spell would be fine, but...

The player didn't say "I want the ability to always see invisible creatures" or "I want to always have the effects of a see invisibility spell". I did not mis-type. He said "I want to see invisible". The DM was puzzled by what that meant, and so granted him a literal truth of those words.

[Hobbo Jim]

I'm also a big fan of:

Player (being granted a Wish): I wish to see invisible.
DM: What?
Player: I wish to see invisible.
DM: ...okay...?
Player: I look around, what do I see?
DM: Nothing, everything is invisible to you.

While it does sound hilarious, I personally wouldn't go this route. This seems like a DM simply going out of their way to screw over a player. You don't have to word everything super precisely, I think it would be much more fair/likely to just cast "See Invisibility", or True Seeing if you're feeling generous. If they start trying to get elaborate and try to go "outside the normal scope of things" like making it permanent, then maybe we should start looking for odd loopholes.

I'm relatively certain that I'm commenting on a joke, but I do think it's an important topic that DMs should, in general, look to avoid screwing over players for wishing beyond written text. I think it's much more interesting (even if a bit harder) to oddly shift wish, causing extra or unforseen effects in addition to what they want. That way it kind of goes with the "You got what you wished for, but at what cost?", giving players a greater risk-greater reward choice.

EDIT: Looks like other people got to the comment first. OOF

[noob]

I wish to know how to formulate wishes properly.

[LordEntrails]

I wish to know how to formulate wishes properly.

Don't be greedy and be careful what you wish for? After that it depends what mood your DM is in. If she is feeling mischievous, your're in for trouble regardless. If he is feeling generous, then your ok regardless.

[Man_Over_Game]

I wish to know how to formulate wishes properly.

Write out your wish, read it back to yourself, and think of all the ways you can think of to break it.

Now rewrite it, changing some of the words a bit so that it gives off a slightly different meaning, and read through it again.

Do this until you feel comfortable with recognizing the various ways someone could break your Wish when interpreted poorly, then try to come up with a proper wish that addresses all of those concerns.

In the See Invisibility example, you could say "I wish to gain the ability to see invisible things, on top of all my normal senses", which is pretty hard to break without some dumb English shenanigans (like emphasizing on a weird interpretation of the words "gain" or "things"). At some point, if you just add so much detail to stop any dumb way of countering the Wish, your DM is just going to give it to you. Parsing through a paragraph of words for you to get your See Invisibility effect, just to try and come up with a workaround to ruin your day, just isn't worth my time as a DM. You put in the work, you get nice things.

[noob]

Write out your wish, read it back to yourself, and think of all the ways you can think of to break it.

Now rewrite it, changing some of the words a bit so that it gives off a slightly different meaning, and read through it again.

Do this until you feel comfortable with recognizing the various ways someone could break your Wish when interpreted poorly, then try to come up with a proper wish that addresses all of those concerns.

In the See Invisibility example, you could say "I wish to gain the ability to see invisible things, on top of all my normal senses", which is pretty hard to break without some dumb English shenanigans (like emphasizing on a weird interpretation of the words "gain" or "things"). At some point, if you just add so much detail to stop any dumb way of countering the Wish, your DM is just going to give it to you. Parsing through a paragraph of words for you to get your See Invisibility effect, just to try and come up with a workaround to ruin your day, just isn't worth my time as a DM. You put in the work, you get nice things.
That does not works: the more clauses a wish have the higher is the amount of breaking points and of possible dysfunctions and if you have to start creating clauses to cover the possible issues created by each clause then your wish might end up having an infinity of clauses.

[Man_Over_Game]

That does not works: the more clauses a wish have the higher is the amount of breaking points and of possible dysfunctions and if you have to start creating clauses to cover the possible issues created by each clause then your wish might end up having an infinity of clauses.

Not always.

"I want to become the greatest warrior there ever was!"-Turns you into Lord Braxxus, the Great...who is dead. You are now dead.
"I want to become a better warrior than anyone ever was!"-Turns you into a warrior, talented at a playstyle that you are not built for (like becoming the best Shield+Sword Warrior when you have the Great Weapon Master feat).

More words don't inherently mean more vulnerabilities. More walls on a fort don't always make it weaker.

[Segev]

<Krillin> "I wish I was an immortal Saiyin. Retroactively."

[Laserlight]

If you give me a finely detailed legal document as the specification for your wish, I will certainly look for a way to twist it. If you don't try to make it a challenge, I will probably give you what you meant to ask for.

[JNAProductions]

If you give me a finely detailed legal document as the specification for your wish, I will certainly look for a way to twist it. If you don't try to make it a challenge, I will probably give you what you meant to ask for.

Agreed. Especially if you're the one casting it.

As a DM, I'd want a brief OOC of what you're trying to do, and an IC phrasing. Let's say, OOC, you want to give your Barbarian more HP. I'd ask for an IC phrasing-something like "I wish for Grothnar to be able to withstand any blow." And, in exchange for your 33% chance of losing Wish forever, I'd max all Grothnar's Hit Dice, for +80 to +95 HP.

If you try to wish for something too powerful, I'd tell you OOC, and describe it IC as "You feel that even with the mightiest of magics at your disposal, this power is beyond you" or something like that. But I wouldn't screw you over-I'd just flat out say "Wish for something less powerful."

Now, I certainly have NOT been good about this in the past. But in my opinion, if you're casting the wish, it should go as smoothly as possible. If someone else is casting it, then I might try to twist it, if, say, you're bargaining with a devil.

[noob]

"I want to become a better warrior than anyone ever was!"

You feel your heart filling with the will to fight for justice, freedom and good in the best way: through words, compassion and self sacrifice!
Your alignment becomes Awesome(because lawful, chaotic and neutral were all too much unawesome) Good and you heart always know what is the best thing to do and instantly you feel regret for the death you brought and hope you will make things better without killing.
Wait you excepted to be anything less than the best warrior ever and you instead wanted to smash faces?

[Wizard_Lizard]

a PC did not understand what wish meant (This was part of their character) and wished for a good meal. (They were obsessed with food)

[Man_Over_Game]

You feel your heart filling with the will to fight for justice, freedom and good in the best way: through words, compassion and self sacrifice!
Your alignment becomes Awesome(because lawful, chaotic and neutral were all too much unawesome) Good and you heart always know what is the best thing to do and instantly you feel regret for the death you brought and hope you will make things better without killing.
Wait you excepted to be anything less than the best warrior ever and you instead wanted to smash faces?

You're kinda getting it.

The problem with that is that just changing your alignment to be the "Best" is that your resolution directly conflicts with the Warrior part. Many would say that being a better "warrior" requires the willingness to kill. If you're on the battlefield, and your soldier refuses to shoot because he's too cowardly and kind, is he a good warrior? Similarly, too much reckless killing would make you a worse warrior. The "Best" warrior would be a blend of both worlds. He chooses who to kill.

A Wish should accomplish all of the Wish to become true, not just focus on a single word. Additionally, forcing someone's personality might work when using Wish on an NPC, but forcing players to submit to a specific personality is generally a bad play.

I'd be more willing to play a blind person than someone who's forced into having no personality.

An example of something that might work to create that spiteful DM Wish that we all come to expect is rewriting history so that all of the warriors before you were pathetic and weak. This might require a reroll of all of your Martial characters in the party, as they lost off of their "warrior" experience and gained it back as soon as the Wish ended (there's nothing saying that everyone ELSE couldn't be good warriors AFTER the wish, right?). Basically steal all of the experience of all warriors before the Wish resolves, grant you your Wish now that history has been changed, and dump all the experience back where it came from. Bit odd, but that's a Wish for yah.

[noob]

You're kinda getting it.

The problem with that is that just changing your alignment to be the "Best" instead of "Warrior" is that your resolution directly conflicts with the Warrior part. Many would say that being a better "warrior" requires the willingness to kill. If you're on the battlefield, and your soldier refuses to shoot because he's too cowardly and kind, is he a good warrior?

Similarly, too much reckless killing would make you a worse warrior. The "Best" warrior would be a blend of both worlds. He chooses who to kill.

A Wish should accomplish all of the Wish to become true, not just focus on a single word. Additionally, forcing someone's personality might work when using Wish on an NPC, but forcing players to submit to a specific personality is generally a bad play.

I'd be more willing to play a blind person than someone who's forced into having no personality.

well people fighting with words gets called warriors(did you hear about social justice warriors)
being a warrior is not about battlefields or killing: it is about fighting.

you did not specify "better battlefield murderer warrior" you only specified warrior so it could just make you the best social justice warrior if it considers fighting for that cause makes you a better warrior than fighting for killing.

And yes the person who refuses to shoot is a good warrior.
good != powerfull.

Being the best reduce possible variety: having a single flaw makes you the not best(there might be one person in all history that had no flaw toward the task you picked as long as it is not specific enough) so by making your wish make you be a best anything necessarily restrains your personality because if it did not do that you would have a property hampering the task you did pick.

so your wish was doomed as soon as you said "better than anyone"

[Frozenstep]

I remember my first character's motivation. They were devastated because they made a wrong decision that resulted in loss of a loved one (no way they could have known what was the right choice), and learned divination as a wizard because they became obsessed with the idea that seeing into the future == never have any problems in life, ever.

Final goal? Wish that everyone had portent, so that no one would suffer!

DM: You realize that means every monster, bug, and bad guy is going to have it, right?

Me: You think this character thought this through? He's half-insane and has 9 wisdom.

He died before reaching that point, but my DM made it clear that it would have resulted in a cosmic war.

[JackPhoenix]

You're kinda getting it.

The problem with that is that just changing your alignment to be the "Best" is that your resolution directly conflicts with the Warrior part. Many would say that being a better "warrior" requires the willingness to kill. If you're on the battlefield, and your soldier refuses to shoot because he's too cowardly and kind, is he a good warrior? Similarly, too much reckless killing would make you a worse warrior. The "Best" warrior would be a blend of both worlds. He chooses who to kill.

A Wish should accomplish all of the Wish to become true, not just focus on a single word. Additionally, forcing someone's personality might work when using Wish on an NPC, but forcing players to submit to a specific personality is generally a bad play.

I'd be more willing to play a blind person than someone who's forced into having no personality.

An example of something that might work to create that spiteful DM Wish that we all come to expect is rewriting history so that all of the warriors before you were pathetic and weak. This might require a reroll of all of your Martial characters in the party, as they lost off of their "warrior" experience and gained it back as soon as the Wish ended (there's nothing saying that everyone ELSE couldn't be good warriors AFTER the wish, right?). Basically steal all of the experience of all warriors before the Wish resolves, grant you your Wish now that history has been changed, and dump all the experience back where it came from. Bit odd, but that's a Wish for yah.

At that point, you may as well send him to the beginning of time. He's a better warrior than anyone ever was because there was nobody before him. Propably takes less energy too.

[noob]

At that point, you may as well send him to the beginning of time. He's a better warrior than anyone ever was because there was nobody before him. Propably takes less energy too.
and also kills the wisher as well which is win.

[MaxWilson]

You're kinda getting it.

The problem with that is that just changing your alignment to be the "Best" is that your resolution directly conflicts with the Warrior part. Many would say that being a better "warrior" requires the willingness to kill. If you're on the battlefield, and your soldier refuses to shoot because he's too cowardly and kind, is he a good warrior? Similarly, too much reckless killing would make you a worse warrior. The "Best" warrior would be a blend of both worlds. He chooses who to kill.

New contentious topic to avoid:

What to do when your DM thinks the way they maliciously granted your Wish technically fulfills your wish, and you disagree?

[Man_Over_Game]

New contentious topic to avoid:

What to do when your DM thinks the way they maliciously granted your Wish technically fulfills your wish, and you disagree?

I think there's a big difference between "I asked for something stupid, and I got stupid back", and "I asked for something, and what I got back was so slim a technicality that you have to explain it to me while I wear DM tinted goggles". Keep in mind that this is AFTER considering the 33% chance of Wish burnout.

I guess, if the outcome doesn't seem obvious, maybe it shouldn't be the result of a Wish?

At some point, you're no longer punishing someone because they were stupid, you're punishing them for asking. Which is not much different than punishing someone, in-game, for playing the game.

"Here is a level 9 spell. You are not allowed to cast this spell, and learning the spell will be a waste of time". Cool. Thanks game.

Or...is it even the game's fault?

[Lupine]

Using wish to remove restrictions on the number of reactions you can have.

[JNAProductions]

Using wish to remove restrictions on the number of reactions you can have.

I wouldn't allow that.

A second reaction, though, is probably fair game.

[Lupine]

Makes sense. Allowing two reactions would be a pretty cool epic boon too. Another possibility would be making AoO not use a reaction.

[Wildarm]

Just as the title, what crazy uses of wish could work.

I got the idea about wish from one of the optimization threads here.

I'll contribute using Wish to remove the 33% chance or never being able to use wish. Then after that, wishing wish only used a 1st level spell slot.

Generally I would not expect wish to break fundamental game rules. You don't want to deal with balance issues like that as a DM. The idea is you are using the power of a 9th level spell to bend reality. There is only so far that can go, especially if you wish the effect to permanent. Look at the other 9th level spells to get an idea of their power level. Wishing for more than that will strain the caster and reality. At some point it breaks.

I haven't had players get hold of wishes in any of my games but I'd generally be very conservative on what it can do. If players are looking for more powerful wishes, they need to look to something equivalent to a 10th level spell. Essentially they need some way to upcast wish. Plenty of great adventure hooks to try and figure out how to do that. If they are willing to go on quests and defeat legendary creatures to get enough "unobtainium" then yes they can get their super wish. Gathering some magic number(3/7/101) powerful casters to cast at the same time might do it too. At that point anything on the power level of epic boons would then be available. World changing magic would require even more. Likely the aid of several extra-planar entities and a massive and costly ritual along with a powerful enemy who would love to stop or subvert this event.

TLDR; Don't let players break the game with a simple luckblade. Make them work for it.

[Dalebert]

Using wish to remove restrictions on the number of reactions you can have.

:smallconfused:
Okay, now rephrase that for terms that your character actually understands and uses instead of metagame mechanical terms.

[Kyutaru]

Wishing that your party member was now a genie.

Cha-ching! More wishes!!

[ProsecutorGodot]

Wishing that your party member was now a genie.

Cha-ching! More wishes!!

That doesn't guarantee that your former party member remains friendly to you. That also doesn't guarantee that they even stay with you physically if they did remain friendly to you, they could replace the body of genie that is in a different plane altogether.

Like Dalebert says, always remember that your character is the one wishing, not the player. If your character has no comprehension of what they're wishing for like game terms "give me more actions" or "Allow me to cast spells using lower level slots" for example then the wish is likely no good.

I'm not a very good wisher, Wish does tons of useful things already without even touching into the territory of creating your own.

If I had to come up with an "out there" wish that has thought very little of the potential twistings, I'd say wishing for an "alter ego" that is as capable as you are but in a vastly different way. Perhaps the Wizard wishes that he could transform between himself and a brutish and physically capable warrior at the snap of his fingers.

[FabulousFizban]

i wish bobby kennedy hadn’t been shot...

[FabulousFizban]

a PC did not understand what wish meant (This was part of their character) and wished for a good meal. (They were obsessed with food)

porbably the best use of wish i’ve seen. “so how is it?” “it’s the best damn meal you’ve ever had. you have never been so culinarily satisfied.”

[Kyutaru]

If I had to come up with an "out there" wish that has thought very little of the potential twistings, I'd say wishing for an "alter ego" that is as capable as you are but in a vastly different way. Perhaps the Wizard wishes that he could transform between himself and a brutish and physically capable warrior at the snap of his fingers.

I feel like you never read the Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde if you don't see that as highly corruptible.

[Laserlight]

At the end of a campaign, one character Wished for a dead PC (who had been possessed by a minor Great Old One) to be Reincarnated. Not "resurrected". Specifically "Reincarnated" and roll on the table to see what race she got, in a world with the only two PC races being human and half orc. She came back as a gnome--the only gnome in the world.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I feel like you never read the Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde if you don't see that as highly corruptible.

I did say that very little thought was put into the consequences. My first impressions were that the fighter could be an entirely different person with a life of his own, whisked away to live as a wizards plaything. Some other thoughts were that the fighter would be completely moronic and incapable of reverting back or that the fighter persona would simply have no fingers, leaving the wizard without the ability to transform back.

If you dig deep enough, anything can be twisted, I just didn't want to go too far into the specifics of how because it seems to be against the spirit of the thread. It wasn't asking for monkey's paw wishes, it was asking for suggestions of unusual wishes.

But I'm guilty of picking apart another posters wish already and boy is it fun.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Back in PF my lawful evil Cleric used Miracle. (the divine version of Wish in older editions). To remove the rejuvenating properties from a Lich's phylactery essentially turning it into a soul gem. Sure I COULD have destroyed it, but that would only kill the Lich and send his soul to the abyss.

[noob]

Back in PF my lawful evil Cleric used Miracle. (the divine version of Wish in older editions). To remove the rejuvenating properties from a Lich's phylactery essentially turning it into a soul gem. Sure I COULD have destroyed it, but that would only kill the Lich and send his soul to the abyss.

Why do that?
dispel all magic but the most basic phylactery magic then put the phylactery in your base in a dimensional anchor zone with a trap that makes an antimagic field when a creature enters it and make the following idiotic rulings: "anyone in that room should try to escape" and "anyone in that room should try to take revenge on me" and duplicate those in 9 exemplars.
the lich will instantly accumulate enough lawful acts for becoming lawful evil then you break the phylactery and kill the lich.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Why do that?
dispel all magic but the most basic phylactery magic then put the phylactery in your base in a dimensional anchor zone with a trap that makes an antimagic field when a creature enters it and make the following idiotic rulings: "anyone in that room should try to escape" and "anyone in that room should try to take revenge on me" and duplicate those in 9 exemplars.
the lich will instantly accumulate enough lawful acts for becoming lawful evil then you break the phylactery and kill the lich.

That’s not how alignment changes work, or even how being lawful works. My goal was to deny him the peace of oblivion. In the abyss or hell his essence would eventually becomes a part of the fabric of the plane. Or it be molded into some lesser fiend.
No his soul would scream forever trapped in his own phylactery.

[Zobo]

Just as the title, what crazy uses of wish could work.

I got the idea about wish from one of the optimization threads here.

I'll contribute using Wish to remove the 33% chance or never being able to use wish. Then after that, wishing wish only used a 1st level spell slot.

Granted: you will not get 33% chance to never cast a wish again.

(Next wish you cast, though, you do)

Granted: Casting a wish henceforth will cost you a 1st level spell slot.

(With the effect of the casting scaled down a 1st level spell.)

Z.

[noob]

That’s not how alignment changes work, or even how being lawful works. My goal was to deny him the peace of oblivion. In the abyss or hell his essence would eventually becomes a part of the fabric of the plane. Or it be molded into some lesser fiend.
No his soul would scream forever trapped in his own phylactery.

Oh sorry I confused with 3.5.
the fiendish codex introduce the notion of lawful points and having enough condemns you to lawful hell.

[Kyutaru]

I did say that very little thought was put into the consequences. My first impressions were that the fighter could be an entirely different person with a life of his own, whisked away to live as a wizards plaything. Some other thoughts were that the fighter would be completely moronic and incapable of reverting back or that the fighter persona would simply have no fingers, leaving the wizard without the ability to transform back.

If you dig deep enough, anything can be twisted, I just didn't want to go too far into the specifics of how because it seems to be against the spirit of the thread. It wasn't asking for monkey's paw wishes, it was asking for suggestions of unusual wishes.

But I'm guilty of picking apart another posters wish already and boy is it fun.

I'm seeing it as the alter ego is granted but it's now trying to assert itself as the dominant one, even attempting to kill off the original ego. Like how Mr Hyde or the Hulk try to stay permanently themselves, you now have a wizard whose greatest enemy is himself. Puts a rather proper spin on the whole wish and leaves them regretting being so hungry. Well you have your alter ego now see if you can survive him. Might need a second wish just to get rid of the bugger.

[Chronos]

I think that, in the current culture of the game, if someone makes a Wish that can be satisfied with a casting of a lower-level spell, then the DM should just give that lower-level spell. So, for instance, if a wizard Wishes to be able to see invisible, then it's the same effect as if they cast the See Invisibility spell (complete with duration). Likewise, if you wish for someone to die, then it emulates Finger of Death or some similar spell.

Now, on the other hand, if the wizard had Wished to permanently gain the ability to see invisible, there's no existing spell that can do that, and so now you're on potentially shaky ground, and a Monkey's Paw might be possible.

Although, come to think of it, the minimal way to grant "I wish to permanently gain the ability to See Invisible", when asked for by a wizard, would be to add the See Invisibility to the wizard's spellbook. He now has the ability to See Invisible: All he has to do is cast the spell.

[JackPhoenix]

Oh sorry I confused with 3.5.
the fiendish codex introduce the notion of lawful points and having enough condemns you to lawful hell.

Still not how it works. Nothing from the table applies to the situation.

[RedMage125]

Back in PF my lawful evil Cleric used Miracle. (the divine version of Wish in older editions). To remove the rejuvenating properties from a Lich's phylactery essentially turning it into a soul gem. Sure I COULD have destroyed it, but that would only kill the Lich and send his soul to the abyss.


My goal was to deny him the peace of oblivion. In the abyss or hell his essence would eventually becomes a part of the fabric of the plane. Or it be molded into some lesser fiend.
No his soul would scream forever trapped in his own phylactery.


I once ran a short Evil campaign in 3.5e. Players were fairly high-level, and wanted to destroy a chapoterhouse of a paladin order. Short version is, they were all devotees of ym deity of death and undeath, and the beseiged the city with an army, snuck in, and the necromancer (having already made his phylactery in advance), turned himself into a lich on the paladins' altar, which of course, desecrated it. He hid his phylactery in a rather genius way, used Stone to Mud, sank the phylactery a few feet into the mud, then reversed the spell, preserving the gem in the stone, and he would regenerate within 6 feet of it if killed. He did not, however, place ANY spells on it which would prevent divination of its location.

Eventually, the white hats showed up, an enemy party of Good-aligned NPCs. It was meant to be a challenging fight, but the PCs' tactics did not hold up well, and after the lich was dusted, the evil fighter killed, and the cleric's blackguard cohort mowed down, the cleric and the assassins all fled. So these Good aligned "heroes", recognizing the lich for what he was, use divinations to attempt to locate the phylactery. They find it, retrieve it, and instead of just destroying it (they were very angry about the desecration of the altar), they opened a Gate to the Positive Energy Plane and tossed it in. I rules that the lich (who did not have Spell Mastery in any way, shape or form) re-formed every 1d4 days, onyl to be destroyed by his environment in a matter of rounds, wash-rinse-repeat.

Fun times.

[Chronos]

Fun fact about that: By 3.5 RAW, undead would thrive on the positive energy plane. Nothing in the plane's description gives any exceptions for undead, and fast healing and temporary HP are abilites that undead are able to have. But the death-by-awesome when you get too many HP offers a Fort save and doesn't affect objects, so undead automatically succeed on it.

Though obviously, this is just begging for a houserule.

[Misterwhisper]

One of my players spent months researching the wish spell and when he finally got it he wished that everyone would just forget he ever existed.

Was perfect for his character arc, he just simply retired.

[ProsecutorGodot]

One of my players spent months researching the wish spell and when he finally got it he wished that everyone would just forget he ever existed.

Was perfect for his character arc, he just simply retired.

Amnesiac Wizard hires local adventurers to find out why he can't remember existing before doing something, they hit it off and he decides to stick around with them.

[RedMage125]

One of my players spent months researching the wish spell and when he finally got it he wished that everyone would just forget he ever existed.

Was perfect for his character arc, he just simply retired.


Amnesiac Wizard hires local adventurers to find out why he can't remember existing before doing something, they hit it off and he decides to stick around with them.

Right? He forgot to exclude himself from the "everyone forgets I ever existed" and gives himself amnesia. Lol.

[Dalebert]

I would suggest getting ideas of power level from the bulleted list provided. If you want some permanent benefit, compare it to stuff like gaining a certain Resistance for the whole party. That's pretty powerful. I'd posit that permanent See Invisible is probably fine.

[Mercurias]

My DM and I have an understanding that Wish is a powerful spell with limits. In practice, I plan on using it as an ultimate utility spell (e.g., using it to cast Find Familiar, Find Greater Steed, Clone, Simulacrum, and Create Homunculus on a Sorcerer) during adventuring off-days, and during actual campaign days as a niche encounter-breaker once/day.

My plan upon receiving the spell, though, is to primarily use it to scare the DM in roleplay situations by making him think I’m about to use it to derail the campaign...And then botch it at the last minute by being overly specific and wishing for the wrong tool or spell. There is a deep, deep joy in playing an arcane caster with an intelligence of 8.

[noob]

My DM and I have an understanding that Wish is a powerful spell with limits. In practice, I plan on using it as an ultimate utility spell (e.g., using it to cast Find Familiar, Find Greater Steed, Clone, Simulacrum, and Create Homunculus on a Sorcerer) during adventuring off-days, and during actual campaign days as a niche encounter-breaker once/day.

My plan upon receiving the spell, though, is to primarily use it to scare the DM in roleplay situations by making him think I’m about to use it to derail the campaign...And then botch it at the last minute by being overly specific and wishing for the wrong tool or spell. There is a deep, deep joy in playing an arcane caster with an intelligence of 8.

wizards are also allowed to have int as low as they want.

[Wizard_Lizard]

That’s not how alignment changes work, or even how being lawful works. My goal was to deny him the peace of oblivion. In the abyss or hell his essence would eventually becomes a part of the fabric of the plane. Or it be molded into some lesser fiend.
No his soul would scream forever trapped in his own phylactery.

That is a little... ...harsh?

[Personification]

One of my players spent months researching the wish spell and when he finally got it he wished that everyone would just forget he ever existed.

Was perfect for his character arc, he just simply retired.

This kind of reminds me of the Doctor's attempt to go off the grid between 11 and 12.

Also, did the wizard have a wonderful life?

[Misterwhisper]

This kind of reminds me of the Doctor's attempt to go off the grid between 11 and 12.

Also, did the wizard have a wonderful life?

His character had a ton of responsibilities due to his place in a noble house and was practically forced to become an adventurer because it was his role he was supposed to do, go out and solve problems to make the family look better.

All he wanted was to be an arcane researcher and settle down with a family.

He blanked the memories of himself and just built and worked in his own arcane library.

So pretty happy.

[Damon_Tor]

I'll contribute using Wish to remove the 33% chance or never being able to use wish.

Granted: the chance is no longer 33%.


Then after that, wishing wish only used a 1st level spell slot.

Alright, it uses a first level slot. Not YOUR first level slot though. A random spellcaster somewhere on the planet now has the ability to cast Wish with his level 1 slot. Gosh, I really hope it was a lawful good type.

[noob]

Granted: the chance is no longer 33%.



Alright, it uses a first level slot. Not YOUR first level slot though. A random spellcaster somewhere on the planet now has the ability to cast Wish with his level 1 slot. Gosh, I really hope it was a lawful good type.
Or someone who does not have the spell in its spell list.

[Kyutaru]

"What's a spell slot?" asks the djinn, not at all sarcastically.

[noob]

"What's a spell slot?" asks the djinn, not at all sarcastically.

3 month later:
Ok so I made a setup for getting all the wishes I want: I throw a random guy in that trap which controls it and make it walk in 5000 traps in a row thus getting all those "levels" and then force it to pick a "class" that grant a "spell slot" that can contain wish then the controlled person grants me the wish: now I get those instead of granting them.
(aka: why you should not teach game mechanics to cunning and powerful creatures)

[Lord Vukodlak]

That is a little... ...harsh?
Here’s a list of some of the Liches actions.
He crystalized the entire capital city turning its inhabitants into crystalline monsters. A cancerous growth which would spread and threaten the entire world.
He put my PC’s brother in-law under a Geas forcing him to act against the party.
Among the crystalized victims was my PCs pregnant wife.

Still think it as harsh? I’ll accept spiteful. Because it was done out of spite.

"What's a spell slot?" asks the djinn, not at all sarcastically.
There certain game mechanics that characters shouldn’t be aware of in game. Spell slots is not among them. No one would bat an eye about people knowing what Mana is in a Mana based magic system.
So why shouldn’t people know what a spell slot is in a spell slot based magic system.

[Chronos]

Yeah, it'd be kind of hard for a spellcaster not to know what a spell slot is.

"How many more times can you cast Magic Missile today?"
"Twice more, but I can't cast any more Scorching Rays today at all."

Is that metagaming? And how can the characters have knowledge like that, but not be able to say "I have two more 1st-level slots, but I'm out of 2nds"?

[Damon_Tor]

I mean, it feels wrong (for some reason) for the casters in question to call them "spell slots" but yes, they should absolutely be aware of their spellcasting limits. A wizard and most other casters certainly would be: maybe a sorcerer would have more trouble quantifying them because they're more nebulous for him in the first place. A warlock knows he gets two (later three) before he has to go back to the negotiating table (or whatever is supposed to be happening).

[noob]

I mean, it feels wrong (for some reason) for the casters in question to call them "spell slots" but yes, they should absolutely be aware of their spellcasting limits. A wizard and most other casters certainly would be: maybe a sorcerer would have more trouble quantifying them because they're more nebulous for him in the first place. A warlock knows he gets two (later three) before he has to go back to the negotiating table (or whatever is supposed to be happening).
was not a warlock's power independent from the one of its patron once they got the sparK?

[Kyutaru]

There certain game mechanics that characters shouldn’t be aware of in game. Spell slots is not among them. No one would bat an eye about people knowing what Mana is in a Mana based magic system.
So why shouldn’t people know what a spell slot is in a spell slot based magic system.

Because since the creation of the game, spell slots are metaphorical memory limits. The wizard may know how well his memory works but would chalk his ability to memorize spells purely down to it. The smarter the wizard, the more bonus spell slots they used to obtain showcasing the advantages of an enhanced memory. Ultimately though the only reason you can memorize only a few high level and many low level spells is because of how difficult each is to retain in the mind and the drain of flushing them out after casting. Similarly, casters could totally use higher level spell slots to cast lower level spells so saying you're out of Scorching Rays is actually saying you have no spell slots above 1st level, which easily means you're tired and spent all your prepared formulas. The fact that the formulas follow certain patterns is entirely irrelevant because there are no such things as levels. Some wizards know six magic missiles, others know sixteen. It's entirely caster dependent and no one knows what makes it work other than becoming such an adept at rote memorization that you are able to squeeze more and more spells into the same brain.

I wouldn't go too deep into Vancian magic and try to understand it more than that. Magic is weird on its own but no wizards understand it from a metagame level. Elminster doesn't go around saying his spell is a 9th level one but that it's "very hard to cast". Similarly, why should this not work for every class if you want to claim it? Rogues know exactly how many sneak attack dice they get because they know exactly how lethal they are, always driving that dagger in an extra centimeter. Druids know exactly how many wildshapes they can use per day instead of roleplaying becoming exhausted after a number are spent, as though the arbitrary limit means anything for any reason. Clerics know exactly how many turn requests their god will channel for them and beyond that he's a stingy old goat. Bards know exactly how many songs they can sing every day before you have to let them rest their vocal cords. The Barbarian knows exactly how pissed off he gets every day and how much of his anger he can channel and how much gets reserved for later (why doesn't he just use it all now?).

At some point it becomes silly to quantify some of these things. If a character knows he can only rage once per day, why would he ever rage twice? Does he suddenly feel like he's not that tired yet one day and maybe can go for another attempt? Is this an anime where the hero gets more and more used to being in his Berserk mode between long rests? You can roleplay it however you'd like but it should remain out of game knowledge. The Fighter doesn't need to know that he will qualify for the Improved Critical feat "very soon", it's enough that his daily practice has lent itself to him improving with his weapon.

Some things should remain out of game knowledge. You can quantify Strength as "I'm as strong as a bear" because it's something you can estimate by wrestling one. But you can't say "I have 22 Strength because I ranked myself against the average person and compiled this flowchart describing where the break points are and the standard deviations from the norm, placing me on or around the 22 mark" because no. Same with wizards, there's no point trying to figure out how many spell slots they have. They simply have a finite amount of memory space or mental strain and try to use it efficiently, setting arbitrary limits on themselves while upcasting lower level spells for extra burden. As they level, they get better at this process naturally while unlocking the secrets to more complex magic. They don't ask the merchant "Do you have any 4th level spells?" they simply look for formulas they can make sense of.

[Mercurias]

I have a serious question on Wish limits.

Would you allow the Wish to replenish the spell slots of another PC if it was worded correctly? For example, “I wish for the Druid to regain the spells they prepared at the beginning of today.”

[ProsecutorGodot]

I have a serious question on Wish limits.

Would you allow the Wish to replenish the spell slots of another PC if it was worded correctly? For example, “I wish for the Druid to regain the spells they prepared at the beginning of today.”

I wouldn't call that a good wording since prepared spells are separated from spell slots, even in the fiction it's distinct as the spells you meditate on in the morning are different than your well of magical strength.

I would probably allow someone to wish to "regain magical energy" like the Arcane Recovery Wizard feature describes regaining a spell slot. I wouldn't even be too much of a stickler for wording, assuming that the caster doesn't try to push too far. 6th level seems like the top end cutoff point with 3rd level being almost trivial, like a Pearl of Power.

However, is there really much of a point? Wish can duplicate any spell. Why waste a spell to replenish your allies magical reserves, potentially losing access to Wish forever, when you could just cast whatever spell it is that they would need their spell slots restored for.

[Kyutaru]

I have a serious question on Wish limits.

Would you allow the Wish to replenish the spell slots of another PC if it was worded correctly? For example, “I wish for the Druid to regain the spells they prepared at the beginning of today.”

In 5e it's less of an issue and the extra spell slots really don't add that much more casting because there's only so many encounters per day. It's sort of like eliminating fatigue. But it's also not something I'd let happen regularly and summoning different wish granters will randomly decide whether they like you or not. If the wish were to be corrupted, you might even undo all the things those spells did during the day. Wounds would reappear, that earthquake never happened, no one has Goodberries, and the like. Or perhaps the Druid disappears and is now in the past, having regained all his spells from that morning.

Spell preparation is kind of arbitrary and even levels don't truly exist. There's no 2nd level magic, there's just magic that's so complicated it's a little harder to get a full grasp of over 1st level spells. Rather than there being 9th level spells that no wizard is allowed to know until he gets stronger, there's just normal spells that no wizard can comprehend until he becomes more experienced and even then it's straining.

[Mythcaller]

I don't give wish often (except for a custom race ability, which has since been remedied) so when I do I give my players until the beginning of the next session to work out their wording for the wish and then I ask them to email the text to me or otherwise give it to me. I give them time to do their thinking and planning, and then I do my best to twist it. Most of the time if I find something minor I'll let it slide (for example they wished that the stuff they wished for with a ring of wishing would remain with the ring after the Jumanji-style game was over and the stuff disappeared. I was nice and decided not to grant them the wish with the stuff staying with the ring, which was not included and would cease to exist.) In my opinion, the wish spell can do pretty much anything (within reason, no summoning Tiamat as an ally permanently or crap like that) and the DM is free to twist the wish as they please, barring nit-picky tiny stuff like alternate word meanings and such.

[SociopathFriend]

Ever hear about the guy who wished whenever he reached into his pocket to buy something he would always have exact change?

[Dalebert]

Because since the creation of the game, spell slots are metaphorical memory limits.


No. Your spells prepared may represent memory limits, or maybe not. They don't get into the fluff of it that much. But not your slots. I think of spell preparation as pre-casting rather than memorizing. As of 5e it's not Vancian any more. You don't forget them when cast. I figure wizard spells are more complicated and require you do some ritual stuff to get it ready to fire off with just a few final words while expending some personal energy (spell slots).

"Memorizing" is an older edition phrasing that is now just misleading.

[Kyutaru]

No. Your spells prepared may represent memory limits, or maybe not. They don't get into the fluff of it that much. But not your slots. I think of spell preparation as pre-casting rather than memorizing. As of 5e it's not Vancian any more. You don't forget them when cast. I figure wizard spells are more complicated and require you do some ritual stuff to get it ready to fire off with just a few final words while expending some personal energy (spell slots).

"Memorizing" is an older edition phrasing that is now just misleading.
:smallsmile:

Spell preparation is kind of arbitrary and even levels don't truly exist. There's no 2nd level magic, there's just magic that's so complicated it's a little harder to get a full grasp of over 1st level spells. Rather than there being 9th level spells that no wizard is allowed to know until he gets stronger, there's just normal spells that no wizard can comprehend until he becomes more experienced and even then it's straining.

[Chronos]

So, none of these supergenius wizards have ever noticed that Magic Missile, Charm Person, Sleep, Burning Hands, and Silent Image all take about the same amount of effort, and Web, Suggestion, Shatter, Scorching Ray, Spider Climb, and Enhance Ability all take about the same amount of effort, and that the latter take more effort than the former, and that there are no spells that take more effort than Magic Missile but less than Web? Or that they have noticed this, but never thought to assign numbers to these levels of difficulty? That strains my suspension of disbelief and pulls me out of the game, a lot more than saying "first level" and "second level" ever could.

[Dalebert]

Or that they have noticed this, but never thought to assign numbers to these levels of difficulty?

I agree with your points and yet it bugs me that they would literally refer to spell slots. I have a hard time putting my finger on why. I think it comes down to being kind of bothered by the idea of specific slots in the first place as opposed to Mana which would just seem to make more sense from a fluff perspective if not a balance one.

[JNAProductions]

I agree with your points and yet it bugs me that they would literally refer to spell slots. I have a hard time putting my finger on why. I think it comes down to being kind of bothered by the idea of specific slots in the first place as opposed to Mana which would just seem to make more sense from a fluff perspective if not a balance one.

A good term I've heard is "Circle".

So Magic Missile is a First Circle Spell, or Lowest Circle Spell. Wish is of the Ninth Circle, or Highest Circle.

[noob]

A good term I've heard is "Circle".

So Magic Missile is a First Circle Spell, or Lowest Circle Spell. Wish is of the Ninth Circle, or Highest Circle.

It is just the caster trying to avoid the name of spell slot.
I mean there is a lot of fantasy where people speak explicitly of spell levels.

[PhoenixPhyre]

A good term I've heard is "Circle".

So Magic Missile is a First Circle Spell, or Lowest Circle Spell. Wish is of the Ninth Circle, or Highest Circle.

I use "Rank", but it's the same idea. And different styles/schools (not the schools of magic, but the actual in-universe styles of casting) might refer to the slots differently. Those with a more scientific bent might use more precise terminology, others might simply say "I can cast 2 more 1st rank and 3 more 2nd rank spells before I rest".

I should say that I have no issues with players using "spell slots" or "spell levels" in conversation. It's just translation convention.

[Kyutaru]

So, none of these supergenius wizards have ever noticed that Magic Missile, Charm Person, Sleep, Burning Hands, and Silent Image all take about the same amount of effort, and Web, Suggestion, Shatter, Scorching Ray, Spider Climb, and Enhance Ability all take about the same amount of effort, and that the latter take more effort than the former, and that there are no spells that take more effort than Magic Missile but less than Web? Or that they have noticed this, but never thought to assign numbers to these levels of difficulty? That strains my suspension of disbelief and pulls me out of the game, a lot more than saying "first level" and "second level" ever could.

Please assign numbers to your childhood memories versus your memory from yesterday. You know which is easier to recall but please by all means assign difficulty to them that is consistent. It's bound to be arbitrary and not at all clear because it's your own brain you're trying to look at. This is why we have psychologists, they look at you and tell you that you're crazy because you wouldn't even know it yourself.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Please assign numbers to your childhood memories versus your memory from yesterday. You know which is easier to recall but please by all means assign difficulty to them that is consistent. It's bound to be arbitrary and not at all clear because it's your own brain you're trying to look at. This is why we have psychologists, they look at you and tell you that you're crazy because you wouldn't even know it yourself.

Spells aren’t arbitrary.
Magic missile requires the same amount of energy as sleep. Because magic should run on its own set of rules. Rules magic users should be able to understand and quantify.

One can tell you the exact amount of thrust to lift a one ton rocket to escape velocity. It’s rocket science but still the key word science.

There are no rules to memory or at lest there aren’t any rules we can really comprehend. You can compare all you want but it’s apples to hammers.

[Kyutaru]

Spells aren’t arbitrary.
Magic missile requires the same amount of energy as sleep. Because magic should run on its own set of rules. Rules magic users should be able to understand and quantify.

One can tell you the exact amount of thrust to lift a one ton rocket to escape velocity. It’s rocket science but still the key word science.

There are no rules to memory or at lest there aren’t any rules we can really comprehend. You can compare all you want but it’s apples to hammers.

My point is that the wizard isn't going to know magic missile takes the same amount of energy. You can know the exact thrust of a rocket because it's a measurable observation. My exact point was that memory/mana doesn't have laws of physics that we can comprehend. Gandalf doesn't run around knowing he has 74 magic points left in him any more than a track star knows he has 14 more miles in him. Effort is NOT quantifiable and your best guess is subjective, especially when experience and training keeps moving the bar.

[jaappleton]

I know DracoKnight wished for his Sorcerer to have Shadow Blade no longer be a Concentration spell.

[Chronos]

But how many of which spell you can cast is just as observable and measurable as a rocket launch. No, Gandalf couldn't precisely quantify his magical energy (or at least, we never saw him do so, but then, we see very little of him interacting with other spellcasters), but Gandalf was using a very different magic system from D&D. Even then, he clearly has at least some notion of how depleted he is, because when he encounters the Balrog, he grumbles about how he's already tired. And heck, maybe he does know precisely what he still has the energy for, but it doesn't matter, because no matter how you quantify it, the answer boils down to "Run, you fools!"

One interesting implication of the spell levels, by the way, is that in-universe, wizards probably describe themselves in terms of the spell level they can cast, not their character level. So what we call a "5th-level wizard" might describe himself as a "wizard of the 3rd circle", meaning that he's a wizard capable of casting spells of the 3rd circle. With more study, they might come to the realization that each circle of wizards has an upper half and a lower half, and that that distinction is occasionally relevant, but it's much less relevant than which circle you are.

[Man_Over_Game]

But how many of which spell you can cast is just as observable and measurable as a rocket launch. No, Gandalf couldn't precisely quantify his magical energy (or at least, we never saw him do so, but then, we see very little of him interacting with other spellcasters), but Gandalf was using a very different magic system from D&D. Even then, he clearly has at least some notion of how depleted he is, because when he encounters the Balrog, he grumbles about how he's already tired. And heck, maybe he does know precisely what he still has the energy for, but it doesn't matter, because no matter how you quantify it, the answer boils down to "Run, you fools!"

One interesting implication of the spell levels, by the way, is that in-universe, wizards probably describe themselves in terms of the spell level they can cast, not their character level. So what we call a "5th-level wizard" might describe himself as a "wizard of the 3rd circle", meaning that he's a wizard capable of casting spells of the 3rd circle. With more study, they might come to the realization that each circle of wizards has an upper half and a lower half, and that that distinction is occasionally relevant, but it's much less relevant than which circle you are.

I've pondered for a long time to come up with an in-narrative way of how casters understand how much magic they can cast.

One way they could do it is make them "feel" how much magic they can cast, as isolated thoughts or memories of the preparation/casting process. When they lose the ability to "remember" those abilities, they know how "exhausted" they are. For example, a 2nd level caster might have two "memories" they can think of, and they become unable to remember those pockets of "thought" when they spend their spell slots.

There are many things that you once remembered and have now forgotten. It could be like that, but more sudden. You could use the term "Gate", "Seal", although I hear people use "Circle" a lot (like 1st Circle spells).

[PhoenixPhyre]

My basic idea still works here. A spell slot is a discrete packet of energy, a "knot" or "bundle" of sorts, in the soul of the caster. They know how many of what caliber they have, because it takes dedicated mental/spiritual effort to learn to bind them in the first place. And they come one at a time. Each one presents a sort of tension that is measurable to an experienced caster.

I have absolutely no problem with a caster being able to quantify their reserves. Or anyone else for that matter--similar (although not as variegated) resources are present in most classes. A barbarian knows how many times he can enter a rage, a fighter knows how many times he can exceed his limits (Action Surge), etc.

[Kyutaru]

But how many of which spell you can cast is just as observable and measurable as a rocket launch.
Problem is when you start going down that rabbit hole, the entire book is fair game.

I would like to quantify my Strength score. I'm going to create an arbitrary system that uses numbers to represent physical might. Let me start at a baseline of the average human, with some creatures being stronger and others being weaker, and after averaging out the weight limits people can bench I'm thinking 10 is a good starting point. It's also about as strong as the average Giant Poisonous Snake. In fact, I'll just start by coming up with a list of animals and organizing them by how strong they are, again with testing and experimentation being possible if we capture them to verify. While I do that, let me just number them in ascending order.

11 Deer
12 Goat
13 Boar
14 Mule
15 Crocodile
16 Camel
17 Lion
18 Cow
19 Brown Bear
20 Polar Bear
21 Rhinoceros
22 Elephant

So now that I've deciphered my scale, I'm going to test my strength against each of these animals in a variety of methods to get an understanding for where my own strength lies. I'm pretty sure I'm Cow-strong after the experiments so I'll call my Strength 18.

How many spells you can cast or memorize is not measurable, it's something you stop doing when you fill up your brain or get tired or can't focus anymore or however you want to roleplay it. Your threshold changes as you gain experience because you get better at it and it changes RAPIDLY. Just last week you couldn't figure out how to cast Fireball. You do the best you can and it happens that you can squeeze in so many magic missiles. But did you even try experimenting with more magic missiles? Did you use ALL your "Spell Slots" on magic missiles? Why is it you can cast 16 of them now but only 4 of them if you spend them "efficiently"? The player knows how many spell slots he has and how to use them efficiently but the wizard is simply draining himself with no understanding for how to best use his fatigue. He just feels it and if necessary can still use higher level spell slots to cast magic missile. Why does magic missile sometimes take MORE ENERGY TO CAST???

In the end, it's metagame knowledge and not quantifiable. It makes no sense even logically by their world's standards and varies according to how many spells you already cast today. You can chain cast magic missile and it's easy at first but gets harder and harder and more draining yet produces stronger effects simultaneously?? What the heck? Just no, no to it all, no to determining your strength score through science, no to figuring out spell slot quantities, no to calling spells circles. You either can or you can't and you don't know why, the PLAYER does. Leave metagaming out of D&D and don't get upset when the DM rules you can't obtain out of game information through in game methods.

[Chronos]

Yes, in principle, D&D characters could quantify most of their stats, if they set their minds to it. But the sorts of people who are inclined towards that sort of thing are wizards, who are naturally most interested in quantifying their own abilities, and those of others similar to theirs.

On the other hand, it's also really easy to quantify Strength. Even in our world, plenty of people (pretty much anyone interested in their own strength) talk about their maximum bench press, or the like.

[Kyutaru]

Yes, in principle, D&D characters could quantify most of their stats, if they set their minds to it. But the sorts of people who are inclined towards that sort of thing are wizards, who are naturally most interested in quantifying their own abilities, and those of others similar to theirs.
Which goes into detailed university classes on why Wizards can cast four magic missiles but the fifth one takes more energy and the sixteenth is a huge ball of force missiles. Figuring out why magic works so arbitrarily as to discern noticeable spell slots is going to take some Plato-level philosophical reaching. The more you try to justify it, the less digestible and plausible it sounds till someone is going to start burning the witch for speaking this heresy.


On the other hand, it's also really easy to quantify Strength. Even in our world, plenty of people (pretty much anyone interested in their own strength) talk about their maximum bench press, or the like.
That's comparing Carrying Capacity rather than Strength. You are free to tell anyone your personal lift cap. You're not as likely to know your Strength score, especially when other creatures have equal scores that need to remain consistent with your measurement. If you apply modern science, you can BS your way through anything like the rules lawyer that gave us Pun-Pun. There's a point where you're just gaming and that knowledge belongs on the game level rather than the world level.

[FabulousFizban]

i wish sam raimi had made that 4th spiderman movie with bruce campbell as mysterio

[FabulousFizban]

i wish these damn bugs would leave me alone!

[Bjarkmundur]

I would make a wish to apply some feature to all PCs in all coming campaigns. Why increase current enjoyment when I can add a feature that either encourages an important aspect of what the group enjoys or adds a fun feature to the entire game.

"I wish that all those I call " friend" become blessed with luck. A character that has received my blessing gains one use of the lucky feat at the start of each session. "

Or

"I wish that the first time I encounter a new creature it acts as if under a charm spell, and I gain its language while the spell is actice, in order to communicate with it and better understand its motive and history"

[Chronos]

Trying to figure out any explanation that doesn't involve spell slots requires Plato-level reasoning. Of course, I'm assuming that "Plato-level reasoning" means "Reasoning that's entirely divorced from anything at all about how the real world actually works, and sets back real world understanding by a millennium". It's not that your magic missiles get stronger as you run out of power; it's that they get stronger when you put more power into them. You can use a 6th-level slot for Magic Missile on your first spell of the day, if you choose (at least, if you have 6th-level slots). But sometimes, you can't use a low amount of power any more, and all you can do is use a larger amount of power. You'd have to be actively trying very hard to avoid thinking to see that and not describe it as "spell slots", or something equivalent.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Trying to figure out any explanation that doesn't involve spell slots requires Plato-level reasoning. Of course, I'm assuming that "Plato-level reasoning" means "Reasoning that's entirely divorced from anything at all about how the real world actually works, and sets back real world understanding by a millennium". It's not that your magic missiles get stronger as you run out of power; it's that they get stronger when you put more power into them. You can use a 6th-level slot for Magic Missile on your first spell of the day, if you choose (at least, if you have 6th-level slots). But sometimes, you can't use a low amount of power any more, and all you can do is use a larger amount of power. You'd have to be actively trying very hard to avoid thinking to see that and not describe it as "spell slots", or something equivalent.

And "amount of effort" isn't a continuous variable, coming from a common pool.

The best model for spell slots (that I've come up with anyway) is similar to how radiation in atoms/molecules works. You have a set of allowed states, with fixed energies. When an electron relaxes into a lower state, it gives up a specific, discrete amount of energy--those photons serve as a fingerprint for the atom. It's the basis of spectroscopy.

Same with spell slots. A caster has a bunch of these "excited states" in his soul. Casting a spell transitions one of them downward, releasing the energy needed to catalyze the spell. They're specific, discrete levels with specific, non-integer-multiple energies. You can't transition 2x 1st level slots to cast a 2nd level slot (even Sorcerers, who have an extra pool of energy available, don't get lossless conversion). When you upcast a spell, you don't get 100% efficiency on the extra energy--healing word does 2d4 + MOD, not 2*(1d4+MOD).

Spell slots are specific, discrete, real things. They're not pre-prepared spells. 5e's casting is not Vancian in anything but name anymore. You have patterns in mind (spells known/prepared) and a set of energy bundles available to enact them. And there's absolutely no fictional or meta reason to deny the caster this knowledge.

[Dalebert]

I would make a wish to apply some feature to all PCs in all coming campaigns.

OMG, suuuuper meta-gamey.

Genie: What's a PC?
Genie: What's the lucky feat?

And your wish to charm everything you meet is definitely OP and would certainly result in a twisting of your intent.

Genie: Granted!
You get trapped in a demiplane where you're alone forever. You'll never meet another creature again and eventually starve.

[deljzc]

Finding a roll-playing narrative for spell levels is interesting.

In the old days, it was described more as a "memorization" restriction, but it does seem 5th edition doesn't describe it that way. Particularly with the ability to cast lower level spells at a higher level.

It almost feels like spell "level" measure energy expulsion. Some spells just cost more effort/energy/mental ability to cast and there is a limit (that grows as you get better at your craft) to how much you can physically or mentally handle.

That could explain a bit of casting a magic missile spell using a 5th level spell slot. Even for a simple spell to "memorize" and know you used up a lot of your spell "energy" to create the more powerful effect.

Some spells are so difficult there is no "easier" way to cast them (thus they are 5th level, 7th level, etc.). Others are relatively easy but can be improved by expending greater mental energy.

It's an interesting discussion and maybe its a combination of understanding the spell, the spell complexity and the mental energy it takes to cast that all impact "level" that spellcasters "feel" more than talk about actual "level", which I agree is not roll playing appropriate talk.

[noob]

Finding a roll-playing narrative for spell levels is interesting.

In the old days, it was described more as a "memorization" restriction, but it does seem 5th edition doesn't describe it that way. Particularly with the ability to cast lower level spells at a higher level.

It almost feels like spell "level" measure energy expulsion. Some spells just cost more effort/energy/mental ability to cast and there is a limit (that grows as you get better at your craft) to how much you can physically or mentally handle.

That could explain a bit of casting a magic missile spell using a 5th level spell slot. Even for a simple spell to "memorize" and know you used up a lot of your spell "energy" to create the more powerful effect.

Some spells are so difficult there is no "easier" way to cast them (thus they are 5th level, 7th level, etc.). Others are relatively easy but can be improved by expending greater mental energy.

It's an interesting discussion and maybe its a combination of understanding the spell, the spell complexity and the mental energy it takes to cast that all impact "level" that spellcasters "feel" more than talk about actual "level", which I agree is not roll playing appropriate talk.
except that then you discover that you did cast all intermediary fireballs and now know you can only cast super strong or super weak fireballs and then it does not makes much sense if spell slots are not a thing.

[deljzc]

except that then you discover that you did cast all intermediary fireballs and now know you can only cast super strong or super weak fireballs and then it does not makes much sense if spell slots are not a thing.

Couldn't you theoretically cast a 3rd level fireball (only 8d6 damage) using a 4th level spell slot? You HAVE to add the 1d6? No choice?

It is a bit different now in 5th edition with all these sliding scale spells while other are rigidly in their spell slot only.

[Chronos]

That'll depend on the spell. With Fireball, when you cast it using a higher-level slot, the effect is "the damage increases", no option to it. On the other hand, with Hold Person, the effect is "you can target one additional creature", "can", but you don't have to.