Open source wish 1: Immortality

[InaVegt]

The idea of open source wishes is to create a wish with the power of the community which cannot be twisted, unless it actually improves your wish. I'll try to keep the first post updated with the current version of the wish.

This wish will be for immortality.
----------------------------------------
(insert complete name here), born on (insert complete date here) in (insert an as exact as possible birth location here), of the race of (insert complete detail of race, including all templates and subraces(, member of (insert all affiliations), with the alignment of (insert complete alignment here), currently located at (insert an exact as possible location here) - from now on called the recepient - wish to be immortal from this day on. Immortality will be defined in this text, as well as any limitations to side effects coming from this wish.

1. This wish cannot bring forth any negative effects to it's recepient, including but not limited to: Death, energy drain, ability drain, ability damage, inability to use any of the recepient's former nor future abilities, damage, increase in the number of enemies of the recepient and knowledge to anyone not present at the casting of the wish of the results of the wish.

2. Immortality includes, but is not limited to: Inability to age, inability to die from old age or similar, immunity to death by so called natural causes. Immortality does not entail being either deatless or undead.
----------------------------------------
I'm sure the current version of this wish can still be twisted, and since this is an open source wish any suggestions on improvements aren't only welcome, but hoped for.

[Solaris]

That certainly violates the spirit of the And Rule, if not the letter.
Personally, I prefer having my powerwishes granted by benign beings who're granting my wish 'cause they like me, not 'cause I'm twisting their arm. Spellslingers probably should stick to the effects listed in the wish spell. DMs who seem to think that all wishes should be twisted had better be using an efreet, a fiend, or wearing body armor.

[NullAshton]

You forgot to mention undeath.

[InaVegt]

That certainly violates the spirit of the And Rule, if not the letter.
Personally, I prefer having my powerwishes granted by benign beings who're granting my wish 'cause they like me, not 'cause I'm twisting their arm. Spellslingers probably should stick to the effects listed in the wish spell. DMs who seem to think that all wishes should be twisted had better be using an efreet, a fiend, or wearing body armor.

I agree with you there, this is merely a mental exercise. And it doesn't violate the letter of the rule (IIRC in older editions all wishes were twistable, there should be plenty of wishes resembling legal contracts in existance)

You forgot to mention undeath.

Good call.

[Noneoyabizzness]

immortality is overated.

the second the being is functionally immortal, the body becomes the ideal host for 1000 fiends, non corporeal undead, and ninjas

[InaVegt]

immortality is overated.

the second the being is functionally immortal, the body becomes the ideal host for 1000 fiends, non corporeal undead, and ninjas

The time you get a wish you're probably prepared to deal with those, and who says they are informed. Probably a good clause to include in the wish though.

[Noneoyabizzness]

higher hitdice being (especially with the fiend of possession prc) or 20 hd noncorp "outsider" like those in the ghostwalk book.

you might be high enough level to handle threats but there is always big threats to be found if you are good enough bait

[InaVegt]

higher hitdice being (especially with the fiend of possession prc) or 20 hd noncorp "outsider" like those in the ghostwalk book.

you might be high enough level to handle threats but there is always big threats to be found if you are good enough bait

If that kind of effect doesn't allow a save, it shouldn't exist. Next open source wish coming up will probably be raising things to insane heights (Some arbitrary number like +1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 will suffice).

[AMX]

The idea of open source wishes is to create a wish with the power of the community which cannot be twisted, unless it actually improves your wish.

Under current D&D rules, this is simply not possible, due to the "partial fulfillment" clause - anything you add to the wish to "save" it can (and will, if I'm DM) be in the unfulfilled part, and thus without any effect.

[Mewtarthio]

[quote=Gezina;2118768]The idea of open source wishes is to create a wish with the power of the community which cannot be twisted, unless it actually improves your wish. I'll try to keep the first post updated with the current version of the wish.

This wish will be for immortality.
----------------------------------------
(insert complete name here), born on (insert complete date here) in (insert an as exact as possible birth location here), of the race of (insert complete detail of race, including all templates and subraces(, member of (insert all affiliations), with the alignment of (insert complete alignment here), currently located at (insert an exact as possible location here) - from now on called the recepient - wish to be immortal from this day on. Immortality will be defined in this text, as well as any limitations to side effects coming from this wish.[quote]

You are now holding a sheet of paper reading "I want to gradually wither and decay while being unable to finally move on to the afterlife."

Also, if it got that complex, I'd force them to make a Profession(lawyer) check to actually avoid the loopholes.

If that kind of effect doesn't allow a save, it shouldn't exist. Next open source wish coming up will probably be raising things to insane heights (Some arbitrary number like +1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 will suffice).

Guess what? They can Wish for that, too. Only they can apply it to the DCs.

[InaVegt]

You are now holding a sheet of paper reading "I want to gradually wither and decay while being unable to finally move on to the afterlife."

Also, if it got that complex, I'd force them to make a Profession(lawyer) check to actually avoid the loopholes.

The idea is that you actually say: ‘My wish is described exactly in the text I hold in my hand.’ While holding the text in your hand.

Guess what? They can Wish for that, too. Only they can apply it to the DCs.

Then we just wish for general immunity to all effects, unless we decide for that particular effect not to be.

[Noneoyabizzness]

gezina-immunity to mind control/possession may leave you a zombie in an immortal living body. or kick you out of said immortal body, as a noncorporeal outsider unable to be posessed by any such being like you. but sicne you are immune to such effects of possession, you may be unable to possess a body too.

such wickedness can always be outpaced by a gm willing to play the game of wish.

[AtomicKitKat]

"I wish for any body I may possess at any point in time to be unpossessable by anyone besides myself, by which I mean the very soul that is currently in possession of the body that is making this wish."

That enough !possession protection?

[Noneoyabizzness]

"I wish for any body I may possess at any point in time to be unpossessable by anyone besides myself, by which I mean the very soul that is currently in possession of the body that is making this wish."

That enough !possession protection?

nobody can touch you, literally. as long as you are in that body, your body evades any form of contact. clothes (not being sentient) can touchyou and wrap around, but you cannot be grappled (SCORE!), but you also cannot be grabbed to prevent from falling to your doom.



homophones are fun

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A potential problem is that your wish is worded in meta-game terms that the character (recipient) has no knowledge about.

As a DM I would require that the wish was worded in-game with the words of the character (not the player).

[Emperor Tippy]

Chances are if you are casting Wish then you are a 28+ Int Wizard. To be perfectly fair, the IC wish would actually be worded better than the meta knowledge one that the person is saying.

[Solaris]

I agree with you there, this is merely a mental exercise. And it doesn't violate the letter of the rule (IIRC in older editions all wishes were twistable, there should be plenty of wishes resembling legal contracts in existance)

*Nods* Certainly, it is a good form of practice with legalese.
The wishes were twistable, yes, if the DM wanted to be a jerk about it. Generally speaking (from my experience, naturally), a DM trying to twist a wish wound up looking like an idiot more often than not. Too many times I've seen someone thinking themselves clever for twisting a wish, only to have someone else point out "You didn't twist it. You broke it."

[NullAshton]

It also doesn't prevent people from stabbing and killing you.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Chances are if you are casting Wish then you are a 28+ Int Wizard. To be perfectly fair, the IC wish would actually be worded better than the meta knowledge one that the person is saying.

That is obviously true, but the higher powers of magic that grant the wish are also better at twisting than the average non-genius DM without a background in law.

[Morrandir]

The current version also does not protect against becoming immortal, then shoved into some obscure plane of existence for the rest of eternity.

[Ditto]

I think it's perfectly fair to say to the genie, "So, I'm going to make a wish. Just to make sure there isn't any misunderstanding, when I use the word 'immortality', I mean...", and then say, "I wish for that." "I wish for immortality, as I understand immortality to be." Adding on a "...without any effects I would consider negative resulting from this wish." is a perfectly fine extension, too.

[Nahal]

I think it's perfectly fair to say to the genie, "So, I'm going to make a wish. Just to make sure there isn't any understanding, when I use the word 'immortality', I mean...", and then say, "I wish for that." "I wish for immortality, as I understand immortality to be." Adding on a "...without any effects I would consider negative resulting from this wish." is a perfectly fine extension, too.

Indeed. Laying out assumptions and terminology is an important part of any legal document. And given the propensity infernal powers have for twisting wishes, wording one like a contract is certainly a good plan.

[Hallavast]

ok... so the genie summons Picasso who paints cubist picture of you. Now you will live forever. Then Picasso takes the painting and returns to his own dimension. Pay me.

[MobiusKlein]

Before you actually do the wish, use another wish: "I wish to know the full, true, and acutal effects this here wish would have on me."

That way, you get to know the loopholes before you invoke it.

If you don't like the loopholes, fix the language, and try again.

[Ditto]

Well, you'd have to pull another wish to get the answer on the NEW wish. The other wish thread suggested making the first wish for a detailed vision of relevant consequences of any future wishes immediately before making them.

[Jack_Simth]

Before you actually do the wish, use another wish: "I wish to know the full, true, and acutal effects this here wish would have on me."

That way, you get to know the loopholes before you invoke it.

If you don't like the loopholes, fix the language, and try again.

You know what the flaw in that is, right?

You can learn the full, true, and actual effects this here wish would have by having that there wish done to you. Your wish for debugging becomes the flawed wish you wanted to debug in the first place. That could hurt.

Under current D&D rules, this is simply not possible, due to the "partial fulfillment" clause - anything you add to the wish to "save" it can (and will, if I'm DM) be in the unfulfilled part, and thus without any effect.

That, and note that if there is "the perfect wish" then someone in the past would have already come up with and cast it in most cases (historically, there's been someone in the past who had a higher Int/Wis and Wished something).

If arbitrarily high stats, invulnerability, immortality, immunity to spells you don't want to affect you, and so on are within the range of a well-worded wish without disasterous consequences, it's reasonable that someone's already got them.

The DM doesn't need to come up with the specific wording for a Wish an NPC made/makes off-screen, just the in-game effects. It's not unreasonable for the DM to turn your tricks against you (either under a "there is nothing new under the sun" or a "successful tactics are copied" hypothesis). You want to go up against someone who has successfully wished The Ultimate Wish? No? Then don't try to wish it in game.

Don't get me wrong - it can be an interesting mental excersize. But fundamentally this should never see the table.

[MobiusKlein]

You know what the flaw in that is, right?

You can learn the full, true, and actual effects this here wish would have by having that there wish done to you. Your wish for debugging becomes the flawed wish you wanted to debug in the first place. That could hurt.

The other flaw - asking to know the full effect of an infinite expanse of time will cause your finite mind to run out of memory, killing you, (Or feeblemind, if the GM is feeling generous.)

[Jack_Simth]

The other flaw - asking to know the full effect of an infinite expanse of time will cause your finite mind to run out of memory, killing you, (Or feeblemind, if the GM is feeling generous.)

Or neither, if the DM is feeling annoyed. Unable to learn anything further, without being cursed in any breakable way or ressurectably killed. Your character can no longer gain any XP, ever. Your character can't make new plans. Your character can't make use of anything your character otherwise would have learned.

Alternately, your character becomes stuck in a fantasy that must play out for eternity which outlines all the effects the wish would have had if you Wished it.

Or other, more creative things.

[Ditto]

If arbitrarily high stats, invulnerability, immortality, immunity to spells you don't want to affect you, and so on are within the range of a well-worded wish without disasterous consequences, it's reasonable that someone's already got them.

Arguments with this line always tire me... no, it's not necessarily reasonable. 'Someone did it first, right?' Can't we just let it be me? Otherwise, wouldn't the First Caster figure, 'Well, I'm sure whoever did it first would hunt me down for trying to step on *his* toes. I'd better not.'

Also, these assume that it eventually happens, because everything eventually happens in a world of infinite possibilities. If that's so, why couldn't this caster just sit around being invulnerable - on the other side of the planet? You aren't going to bother him. And there are only so many 17th level wizards in the world... 'eventually happening' loses points when you're drawing from such a small sample.

Alternately, your character becomes stuck in a fantasy that must play out for eternity which outlines all the effects the wish would have had if you Wished it.

I really like this one.

[Jack_Simth]

Arguments with this line always tire me... no, it's not necessarily reasonable. 'Someone did it first, right?' Can't we just let it be me? Otherwise, wouldn't the First Caster figure, 'Well, I'm sure whoever did it first would hunt me down for trying to step on *his* toes. I'd better not.'

"Would you want it used on you" is another way of saying "dude, that's cheese" or "Depends... what's your cheese tolerance for the encounters I pit you up against?"

It's a game balance arguement, not necessarily something you actually do in game. Your wonderfully flavorful Kobold Transmuter with a snake familiar looks at the Assume Supernatural Ability feat, and remembers reading about a particular beast in Serpant Kingdoms as he's thinking about his character level 15 feat. Do you let him use "why can't I be the first?" for initiating the Pun-Pun loop? No, it's completely cheesy and it can very, very easily ruin the campaign.

So is the ultimate wish.

Also, these assume that it eventually happens, because everything eventually happens in a world of infinite possibilities. If that's so, why couldn't this caster just sit around being invulnerable - on the other side of the planet? You aren't going to bother him. And there are only so many 17th level wizards in the world... 'eventually happening' loses points when you're drawing from such a small sample.

Efreeti can grant wishes to mortals, and are subject to the 6th level Planar Binding spell / Planar Ally. Look at 11th level Wizards/Clerics. Don't even need to branch out of Core. If you're okay with visiting the City of Brass, a Cleric-9 gets Plane Shift, and can go talk to one.

Glabrezou are listed as semi-selling wishes up to once per month. They are also subject to Planar Binding/Planar Ally for the Wizard/Cleric 11. If you're okay with going to their native territory, a Cleric-9 gets Plane Shift, and can go talk to one.

Solars get Wish 1/day as a spell-like ability. You could conceiveably do a Wish-worthy quest for one.

A Luckblade with 1 or more Wishes has a 10% on Major Specific Weapon table, which has a 14% chance of comming up on a Major Weapon roll, which has a 10% chance of coming up on a Major Item roll, which has a 20% chance of coming up on a CR 10 treasure roll for a net 0.028% chance of getting a Luckblade with one or more wishes on a "standard" CR 10 encounter.

A Ring of Three Wishes (with 1d3 wishes remaining) has a 1% chance on a Major Ring roll, which has a 10% chance on a Major Item roll, which has a 20% chance on a CR 10 encounter for a net 0.02% chance of getting a Ring of Three Wishes on a "standard" CR 10 encounter.

A Scroll of Wish has a 1% chance on a 9th level Arcane Scroll roll; chance of 9th level spell: 5% on a Major Scroll roll, chance of arcane: 70% on any Scroll roll, 10% chance of a scroll on a Major Item roll, and a 20% chance on a CR 10 encounter for a net 0.0007% chance of getting a Scroll of Wish on a "standard" CR 10 encounter.

You don't need to be a Wiz-17 to get Wish, Core.

I really like this one.

Thanks.