Using Wish to raise a victim of Disintigrate

[MarkVIIIMarc]

This may come up in a game I am DMing and the degree of risk will no doubt help determine what an NPC wants for her services.

Reading Wish I believe using it to raise a victim of Disintigrate is "an off label use" by modern terms since it isn't duplicating a lower level spell. The way it isndescribed in the Disintigrate spell gives me a moment of pause if that's Rules As Intended.

What do you all believe and why?

[Pex]

Forget what is written in the spell. As long as a player is not trying to Win D&D give him what he wants as intended. Wish is not permission for the DM to screw over the player nor permission for the player to screw over the game.

[Tiamatwing]

you are correct, as they are basically using wish to cast true resurrection, a 9th level spell, they run the risk of losing access to wish in the future

[Anymage]

Strict RAW, anything that isn't duplicating a spell carries the usual risk.

That said, there are enough effects that explicitly include Wish as either the only countermeasure, or one of only a small handful. I don't think it would be unreasonable to say that wishes to remove such an effect should also be considered safe.

[Laserlight]

If he's using a Wish, is there some reason you would not let it work?

The only time anyone has used Wish in my game has been to do basically the same thing....except the player specified Reincarnation instead of True Resurrection, and specified that he wanted the random race roll. His wife's character came back as the only Gnome in the world.

[CapnWildefyr]

Forget what is written in the spell. As long as a player is not trying to Win D&D give him what he wants as intended. Wish is not permission for the DM to screw over the player nor permission for the player to screw over the game.

Yes. Especially since it may be the most straightforward way to bring back someone who been disintegrated. True Res can do it but you have to know the name -- players dont always tell or remember each others real names in my campaign -- and besides a priest could balk at it depending on who, race, alignment, whatever.

Also you could read "The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect other than duplicating another spell weakens you." to include 9th level spells. It says you can go beyond the 'above examples'.

[Segev]

Does he have true polymorph? If so, I suggest the reincarnation route, then true polymorph the reincarnated person back into their original form. It'll take a smidgen of permissive ruling from the DM to let them retain class levels, but they're hardly abusing anything to say "I'm using the thing that permanently alters form to become myself again."

[Lunali]

If the characters have the dust of the deceased, wish can duplicate resurrection. Restoring almost the entire body is a little extreme, but still technically within the bounds of the spell.

[Necroanswer]

At the very least you could wish for the body to restored so Raise Dead or Resurrect could be cast, right? Anyway, its your game and you can rule what you want with Wish.

[Galithar]

The only other way of resurrecting someone killed by Disintegrate is True Resurrection which is a 9th level spell. Using Wish to duplicate this would certainly fall outside of duplicating a spell of 8th level or lower and carry the associated costs per the spell.

[Aelyn]

I treat all effects which say that Wish solves them as additional entries on the "alternative to a spell" list.

So casting Wish to bring a Disintegrated creature back to life is 100% guaranteed to work, but you do suffer the stress as usual.

[Benny89]

It's Wish. The most powerful spell a mortal can use. The spell that can alert reality, time and space. Spell so strong that you risk not being able to use it every again.

Sure it's enough to do so. If anything is- this is it.

[Eriol]

If they say it's duplicating the 7th-level spell "Resurrection" then it does the job with no issues if they have the pile of dust that resulted from disintegrate. ANY part of the pile of dust. And no stress that way either.

If they don't say that, then it's just "altering reality" and they need to roll on the stress.

Edit: Apologies, I wasn't aware of the extra text on Disintegrate specifically saying it needed True Resurrection or Wish. My comment above does not apply for that reason.

[ImproperJustice]

Don’t suppose you have access to a Cleric who is high enough level for a Divine Intervention?
It may take a little time, but it would have less baggage.

[CapnWildefyr]

Unless there was some other official ruling, how is bringing someone back to life NOT in keeping with the spirit of the spell? The spell IS duplicating another spell effect. It's 9th not 8th, yes, but still it is a spell. How is bringing 1 person back to life MORE than healing 20 200 hp fighters back to full health while also healing their HP max losses at the same time?

The stress factor is there to prevent wishes from ruining the game. I dont know why the designers didn't mention resurrection in the examples, maybe they thought it too obvious. In any event I'm still with Pex, just do it, it is in no way overbalancing.

[Segev]

The designers didn’t mention resurrection because it’s a spell that wish can safely duplicate. They didn’t mention True Resurrection because it’s a no the level cleric spell, and replicating that but better with the same level spell that can do so much else is overpowered.

Have any of the dust, and resurrection will suffice, so wish can do it stress-free.

Two wishes should do it if you lack the dust. I’m pretty sure you can claim the material component of a gem tied to the item you want is obviated by wish, so Drawmij’s instant summons could get you at least one speck of the dust, with a wish, and you can then wish tomorrow for resurrection on the dust.

[ThePolarBear]

What do you all believe and why?

It is not replicating a spell of 8th level or lower, so it incurs in the usual penalities.

[CorporateSlave]

The designers didn’t mention resurrection because it’s a spell that wish can safely duplicate. They didn’t mention True Resurrection because it’s a no the level cleric spell, and replicating that but better with the same level spell that can do so much else is overpowered.

Have any of the dust, and resurrection will suffice, so wish can do it stress-free.

Two wishes should do it if you lack the dust. I’m pretty sure you can claim the material component of a gem tied to the item you want is obviated by wish, so Drawmij’s instant summons could get you at least one speck of the dust, with a wish, and you can then wish tomorrow for resurrection on the dust.

That's a bit of a reach! Or, more likely, they didn't mention Resurrection because they didn't want that spell to be able to restore a Disintegrated creature back to life, and reserved that effect for one of two 9th level spells?

True Resurrection can do it.

Wish can do it, not by duplicating a lower level spell, but by virtue of Wish can do that kind of thing, apparently. But it isn't duplicating a spell of 8th level of lower, so it is indeed an "off label use" and would subject the caster to the strain and risk as per the spell description. I'm really not seeing how this could be read differently.

[Keltest]

Disintegrate explicitly cant be undone with anything short of a true resurrection or wish spell. In 5e, the ash does not count as enough of a body part for Resurrection to work on it.


A creature targeted by this spell must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the target takes 10d6 + 40 force damage. If this damage reduces the target to 0 hit points, it is disintegrated.
A disintegrated creature and everything it is wearing and carrying, except magic items, are reduced to a pile of fine gray dust. The creature can be restored to life only by means of a true resurrection or a wish spell.

Since you cant duplicate True Resurrection with wish safely, restoring a disintegrated target would indeed run the risk of losing access to Wish.

[Keravath]

The disintegrate spell states:

"A disintegrated creature and everything it is wearing and carrying, except magic items, are reduced to a pile of fine gray dust. The creature can be restored to life only by means of a true resurrection or a wish spell."

The only ways to restore the creature killed by disintegrate to life are True Resurrection and Wish. The 7th level Resurrection won't work whether you have the dust or not just because Disintegrate says it doesn't.

The wish spell lists any spell of 8th level or lower as well as a series of examples of what constitute a standard usage of the wish spell.

"The basic use of this spell is to duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower. You don't need to meet any requirements in that spell, including costly components. The spell simply takes effect."

It also lists a series of other examples that can be achieved with the wish spell but the list is not exhaustive.

Finally, the wish spell also states:

"The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect other than duplicating another spell weakens you."

This statement doesn't have a level limit on the spell cast. The wish spell doesn't state that using wish to replicate a 9th level spell would induce the stress associated with casting it. 8th level spells have the benefit of not needing to meet any of the requirements of the spell or supplying material components.

I think it should be possible to use wish to cast True Resurrection without causing stress. However, the caster would have to supply the holy water and the 25,000gp required as part of the casting and the casting would likely take the hour required by the True Resurrection spell.

[Segev]

That's a bit of a reach! Or, more likely, they didn't mention Resurrection because they didn't want that spell to be able to restore a Disintegrated creature back to life, and reserved that effect for one of two 9th level spells?

True Resurrection can do it.

Wish can do it, not by duplicating a lower level spell, but by virtue of Wish can do that kind of thing, apparently. But it isn't duplicating a spell of 8th level of lower, so it is indeed an "off label use" and would subject the caster to the strain and risk as per the spell description. I'm really not seeing how this could be read differently.

That's...what I said, though. You bolded one sentence in my quote, then scold me for it by acting like it says "true resurrection" when it says "resurrection," and then go on to say exactly the same information as the rest of what you quoted. :smallconfused:

The designers probably didn't mention resurrection as a thing wish could do, specifically, because, as a 7th level spell, resurrection is caught in the category of replicating 8th level or lower spells. It doesn't mention copying true resurrection safely likely because true resurrection is a 9th level cleric spell with expensive material components, and wish is neither and is not higher-level, so copying a spell on another class's list of the same level with more expensive components without having to expend those would be overpowered for wish to do.

Except wish has its own cost for replicating it: a gamble on losing the spell forever.



The text on disintegrate saying only true resurrection or wish can undo it is pretty definitive. The dust wouldn't qualify. You need wish (and the risks incurred by doing other than replicating a spell) or true resurrection.

The argument about using wish with true resurrection's casting time and material components is clever, but I think against the spirit of the text. In context, "anything other than duplicating a spell [as previously described]" is the most sensible reading of it, I think. But, if a DM wants to rule otherwise, more power to him.

[Democratus]

The spell specifically states that it can be undone by Wish.

Since specific overrides general - then Wish will work.

[Aelyn]

The spell specifically states that it can be undone by Wish.

Since specific overrides general - then Wish will work.
Absolutely, I don't think anyone disputes that.

But using Wish in that way is not replicating the effect of an 8th-or-lower spell, and therefore incurs the stress penalties associated. That is what some people are disputing.

[Segev]

The spell specifically states that it can be undone by Wish.

Since specific overrides general - then Wish will work.

Nobody's saying it won't work. The question is whether it will incur the 1/3 chance that the caster never can cast wish again. And since disintegrate doesn't say wish can reverse its effects safely, there's no text overriding the fact that wish, in this case, isn't replicating a spell effect [as spelled out in the wish spell as a safe effect], and thus it comes down to whether disintegrate's clause makes it safe or not. Which is a DM call, but I'd lean towards the RAW saying it doesn't make it safe.

[Keravath]

Nobody's saying it won't work. The question is whether it will incur the 1/3 chance that the caster never can cast wish again. And since disintegrate doesn't say wish can reverse its effects safely, there's no text overriding the fact that wish, in this case, isn't replicating a spell effect [as spelled out in the wish spell as a safe effect], and thus it comes down to whether disintegrate's clause makes it safe or not. Which is a DM call, but I'd lean towards the RAW saying it doesn't make it safe.

Wish says:
"The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect other than duplicating another spell weakens you."

It does not say:
"The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect other than duplicating another spell of 8th level or less weakens you."

Wish says:
""The basic use of this spell is to duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower. You don't need to meet any requirements in that spell, including costly components. The spell simply takes effect."

It seems to me that a strict reading of Wish says that it can duplicate the effects of ANY spell without incurring stress BUT that only spells of 8th level or lower can be cast without requirements or components.

This would tend to mean that you could use wish for a 9th level spell but you have to take the time and provide the components for the casting.

Ultimately it is up to the DM but I don't really see an issue with someone using Wish to cast True Resurrection (and having to provide all the components). Wish is not a cheap way to bypass component costs on 9th level spells.

[Keltest]

Wish says:
"The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect other than duplicating another spell weakens you."

It does not say:
"The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect other than duplicating another spell of 8th level or less weakens you."

Wish says:
""The basic use of this spell is to duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower. You don't need to meet any requirements in that spell, including costly components. The spell simply takes effect."

It seems to me that a strict reading of Wish says that it can duplicate the effects of ANY spell without incurring stress BUT that only spells of 8th level or lower can be cast without requirements or components.

This would tend to mean that you could use wish for a 9th level spell but you have to take the time and provide the components for the casting.

Segev mentioned that earlier, and I kind of agree with him that while clever, its against the spirit of the spell. If they wanted you to be able to duplicate 9th level spells safely, its highly likely they would have made it explicit in the text that it can do that if you pay the component and time cost of the spell youre duplicating.

[Keravath]

Segev mentioned that earlier, and I kind of agree with him that while clever, its against the spirit of the spell. If they wanted you to be able to duplicate 9th level spells safely, its highly likely they would have made it explicit in the text that it can do that if you pay the component and time cost of the spell youre duplicating.

I missed him mentioning it earlier in the thread. As for "against the spirit", I am less confident. I've always read the spell previously as casting any spell of 8th level or less without cost was the point of the spell and that any other use could incur stress (including casting 9th level spells or any other application).

However, when I read it again today, the spell says that ..
"The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect other than duplicating another spell weakens you."
.. which I found remarkably blunt.

This made me wonder if I have been misinterpreting the spell for years now since I try to read these things without imposing my own expectations. If the designer had really wanted it to be only 8th level or less spells they could have easily said that. They didn't. They did say that 8th level or less spells have no requirements or components, they just happen.

Every 9th level spell can be cast on a daily basis by someone, they aren't intrinsically stressful. A wizard with a 9th level spell in their spellbook could choose to cast any one of them. Is it too far of a stretch to consider Wish as a swiss army knife of 9th level spells, allowing it to stand in for any other one but still require the components and other requirements? It does make Wish better but it has always been an iconic spell. Anyway, none of this last paragraph is really relevant since it doesn't discuss rules or rulings but some sort of logical justification that isn't really relevant.

In the end, it is up to the DM on how they want to rule it, but as a DM I wouldn't really have any problem allowing Wish being able to stand in for any 9th level spell as long as the requirements and components were supplied. I don't think it really breaks anything but it does make Wish a better and more flexible spell for those that can cast it.

[Segev]

Is it too far of a stretch to consider Wish as a swiss army knife of 9th level spells, allowing it to stand in for any other one but still require the components and other requirements?

Yes, it is. Because if it were, wizards would never need learn any other 9th level spell, same with sorcerers.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Is it too far of a stretch to consider Wish as a swiss army knife of 9th level spells, allowing it to stand in for any other one but still require the components and other requirements?

I would say so, context says that "duplicating the effects of a spell" refers to the basic use of the spell "duplicating any other spell of 8th level or lower."

If we break wish down into simple parts, Wish only does two things:
-Duplicates 8th level of lower spells
-Everything else (the list of buffs are only examples of alternative effects after all)

If you're not doing the first thing, you're going to suffer the penalty.

With that said, I don't see it as that much of a problem. It's a buff to Sorcerer's since they might not have several 9th level spells known and it's only really a convenience for the likely incredibly rich Wizard who can save some memory, assuming they hadn't planned on keeping Wish prepared at all times from the point they learn it. Don't think it really impacts the Bards who might have taken it either.

At that tier of play, even if it's not intended I think it's actually a fairly minor improvement to a spell that is already strong. I'm legitimately unsure if this small bump creates any problems worth agonizing over.

[Porcupinata]

Strict RAW, anything that isn't duplicating a spell carries the usual risk.

That said, there are enough effects that explicitly include Wish as either the only countermeasure, or one of only a small handful. I don't think it would be unreasonable to say that wishes to remove such an effect should also be considered safe.

That's how my group have always house-ruled it. Anything that explicitly requires a Wish to fix/undo is safe. It's only casting a freeform Wish that runs the risk of losing it.

[CapnWildefyr]

Yes, it is. Because if it were, wizards would never need learn any other 9th level spell, same with sorcerers.

True but not so easy. Wish is about wording. Its straightforward enough to say "I was that so and so will be returned to life with a whole, new body" Vs imprisonment. How would you word that with a wish? Any slip in how its stated can be twisted. I agree you could do it but casting the original is easier. And if your wording implies more than the spell does, then you do run the stress risk, as you would no longer be replicating a spell. (I am emphasizing the DMs role here--others may not DM with the same interpretations on wish. And yes, if in wishing someone back to life I ask for too much, I run the stress risk.)

Keravath, thanks for quoting that part of the spell, that's exactly what I was thinking.

[Keltest]

True but not so easy. Wish is about wording. Its straightforward enough to say "I was that so and so will be returned to life with a whole, new body" Vs imprisonment. How would you word that with a wish? Any slip in how its stated can be twisted. I agree you could do it but casting the original is easier. And if your wording implies more than the spell does, then you do run the stress risk, as you would no longer be replicating a spell. (I am emphasizing the DMs role here--others may not DM with the same interpretations on wish. And yes, if in wishing someone back to life I ask for too much, I run the stress risk.)

Keravath, thanks for quoting that part of the spell, that's exactly what I was thinking.

"I wish to cast the spell Meteor Swarm" or "I wish to duplicate the effects of having cast Meteor Swarm." From a phrasing standpoint, theres no difference between duplicating 8th level spells versus 9th level spells, its just that one has less potential for magic feedback.

[CapnWildefyr]

Well, I was replying to the comment "Why would I need to learn any other 9th level spells?" I would argue that without metagame knowledge, you can't just say
"I wish to cast the spell Meteor Swarm" or "I wish to duplicate the effects of having cast Meteor Swarm." unless you have learned that spell.

If you've had the misfortune to be on the receiving end of a meteor swarm, then you can describe the effects or say something like "I wish that that guy over there in the red hat is the epicenter for the same magical swarm of flaming explosions that Wizardo the Evil blasted me with when I fought him in the Tower of Ages." But this is where DM interpretation comes in, as written in the spell description. If I don't know the spell, I don't know the AOE or range. As a matter of fact, for a 9th level spell, I don't know the material components, either, and I would need those. AOE can be covered by my example because I want the same effect as what I got hit with. But I don't know the range. If in this example the guy in the red hat is 5 feet out of range... ooops. I would even extend this expectation to level 1-8 spells, too -- but in my campaign my level of caring would be inversely proportional to the spell level. I mean, if a PC wishes for a magic missile and doubles the range... using a 9th level spell slot... who cares? Trying to double the range of Abi-Dalzim’s Horrid Wilting, on the other hand, I would care about.

So I think that learning other spells besides wish is needed, even though strictly wish can duplicate 9th level spells. You have to know it enough to duplicate it. And you need the components, so again, you have to at least have researched it. There are still limitations, assuming you are trying to avoid the stress factor.

So in this case, with the PCs trying to bring back a disintegrated character, I would allow it as a duplication of true res, provided the casting wizard knows enough about true resurrection to know the material components. That's my 'rules' stance.

But in my campaign, I would go further & rule like Pex said on page 1. In general, I'm not going to hammer the players for trying to bring back someone's favorite character so they can keep playing and having fun. The PCs are already going to have to give up a LOT to get someone to cast a wish, anyway.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Given that Wish is LISTED under Disintegrate as a means of bringing someone back, I'd say it works fine and without any additional drawback. No risk of never casting it again. At the very least you could use Wish to duplicate his body via the clone spell giving you remains you can use for a standard resurrection.(its arguable that a clone spell won't revive someone who died before the clone matured).

[ProsecutorGodot]

Given that Wish is LISTED under Disintegrate as a means of bringing someone back, I'd say it works fine and without any additional drawback. No risk of never casting it again. At the very least you could use Wish to duplicate his body via the clone spell giving you remains you can use for a standard resurrection.(its arguable that a clone spell won't revive someone who died before the clone matured).

Then we have to decide which effect overrides which, the spell saying that wish can do it or wish saying that using it for anything other than duplicating the effects of a spell causes strain.

My take is that spells listing wish as a solution are doing so as a restriction on what can fix the problem, not as permission for wish to be used without penalty

[Segev]

Given that Wish is LISTED under Disintegrate as a means of bringing someone back, I'd say it works fine and without any additional drawback. No risk of never casting it again. At the very least you could use Wish to duplicate his body via the clone spell giving you remains you can use for a standard resurrection.(its arguable that a clone spell won't revive someone who died before the clone matured).This would seem viable. Two-wishes would then resolve it.


Then we have to decide which effect overrides which, the spell saying that wish can do it or wish saying that using it for anything other than duplicating the effects of a spell causes strain.

My take is that spells listing wish as a solution are doing so as a restriction on what can fix the problem, not as permission for wish to be used without penaltyI would make the same argument, but if a DM ruled otherwise, I wouldn't argue too strenuously for his game, even just over the pedantic point of whether it was a house rule or just a ruling.