Getting used to 4th edition?

[LurkerInPlayground]

GATE:

You can already do this through a combination of existing rituals, existing powers, the NPC cohort rules, and good ol' RP

I'd rather see rituals as a chance for PC's to initiate RP on their own terms. Which is to say, they can alter the game world in their favor. Because that feels rewarding.

Being a glorified second-string to the Rogue is less-so.

In short, it's an excuse for the PC to establish an option of establishing a powerful (but optional) contact, even if the DM's plot doesn't normally allow for it.

WISH:

*looks up Wish in the SRD*

Almost everything on that list either A) simply doesn't work with 4e's mechanics; B) is something that 4e went to great lengths to get rid of; or C) can already be done by existing rituals and whatnot anyways. So Wish just wouldn't work.

I'm thinking more of 2e wishes and not 3e wishes. The thing just literally being a free shot at doing whatever you wanted with the exception that the DM was allowed to screw you on it for getting unreasonable.

3e decided it had to be specific about what you could and could not do, but I fail to see why this couldn't be adapted to 4e with some work. ("Sure, you can swap out a power, if you really want to pay for it." Or "Sure, you can have a magic item of the same worth as the component cost or less.")

GEAS:

Using Geas on a PC was little more than forcibly giving them a quest. If you really really want an actual, ink-on-paper ability to point to as "motivation" the way 3e's Geas spell was, there's nothing keeping the DM from giving an NPC the ability to put such a curse on the PCs.

So the only thing a Geas ritual would do is let PCs force other people to do things. If you want the PCs to be able to enslave NPCs, well, I guess you really do have something that (AFAIK) 4e doesn't have an answer for.

It needn't be a railroading mechanic so much as it is a consequence of wizard actually having power to make you do what he wants if you lose out to him. Or it could be a likely tool for the lawful authority types.

Otherwise, I suppose your point is actually valid.

It's notably short of slavery though since it's not really Dominate Person/Monster and wouldn't necessarily have to be. Especially if you choose the right wording.

Likewise, trying to get the BBEG to follow the groups command isn't going to work if he decides he'd rather just kill you instead, consequences be damned.