Quote from: Benoist;564921I have no problem dealing with Wish in my games.

Wish is easy to handle if the players understand it is a plot device spell and not a hammer.

As others have said, consequences keep it under control.

I have never had the slightest bit of trouble with Wish.

Quote from: jibbajibba;564931Do you impose the DMG limits on it?

My point is that once you do that its not a wish it's a Benoists Benevolent Bounty or some such.

If a 9th level wish isn't as powerful as a Strength spell + Permanency, if its not as powerful as a raise dead, and can't kill someone over 10HD then why call it a wish just remove the spell or leave it in the domain of Beings of extraordinary Power, djini, effreti, gods, giant fish and Jessica Alba (just cos there are a bunch of my wishes she is easily able to grant).

Well, Wish can do both. it can have a mechanical effect comparable to other ninth level spells for when a mechanical solution is appropriate.

Then it can also be a plot device when that is appropriate.

Thats what I do.




And yes, I would rather get a wish from jessica than from a giant fish.

Quote from: Bill;565081The spell denial I refer to is anti magic areas, creatures immune to magic, anything that denies magic but is disgused as a reasonable element of the setting.

Your example of the divine overlord is denying the players their scrying and their teleport. Which is my point.

The scrying effectively denied because the overlord knows they are doing it.
The teleport effectively denied by armies of hell intercepting them if they teleport.

What you are actually doing, is the same as "You fail because"
You are hiding it better, but its the same thing.

Now, you and I might be clever enough to not say the actual words "You fail, just cause" but its the same thing.

It only is in your mind.

First off, creatures who have such things as magic resistance become a part of the game as you raise in level. It's just a fact of the creature rosters. If you are not using such creatures because you think they're "unfair" on the players, then you are missing a critical balancing element of high level magic use, that the opposition is tough, often developed a natural resistance to magic, and that your spells might actually fail sometimes.

Second. Nobody's been talking about using anti-magic areas. They do exist and you can absolutely use them, that said. It's just not something you want to do all the time because then it ceases to be a challenge and becomes a systematic gimping of the magic user and that's just cowardness, or laziness, or both on the DM's part. But using them adequately, with parsimony, when they make sense from the setting's point of view? Absolutely, you can do that.

Third. No, my overlord example is not stopping the PCs from scrying or teleporting.

Quote from: Benoist;565088It only is in your mind.

First off, creatures who have such things as magic resistance become a part of the game as you raise in level. It's just a fact of the creature rosters. If you are not using such creatures because you think they're "unfair" on the players, then you are missing a critical balancing element of high level magic use, that the opposition is tough, often developed a natural resistance to magic, and that your spells might actually fail sometimes.

Second. Nobody's been talking about using anti-magic areas. They do exist and you can absolutely use them, that said. It's just not something you want to do all the time because then it ceases to be a challenge and becomes a systematic gimping of the magic user and that's just cowardness, or laziness, or both on the DM's part. But using them adequately, with parsimony, when they make sense from the setting's point of view? Absolutely, you can do that.

Third. No, my overlord example is not stopping the PCs from scrying or teleporting.

You technically did talk about magic resistant areas, as in, scrying and teleport fail because you say so, in your example.

Its the same effect...spells and magic being neutralized.




How is it not stopping them? Teleporting and getting  ganked by an infernal legion is the same thing.

A target of scrying taunting you is the same thing.

I don't mean literally the same, but effectively, it is.



So you don't see any problem with 'I win buttons' being countered by 'You lose buttons' ?


You seem to keep assuming that I do not know the basics of running a game.

Just because we differ in opinion on this matter does not make me an idiot.

Use of magic resistant creatures is not difficult.

It's about when and why you use them, not that they exist.



I respect your opinion, Benoist, I just do not share it.

Quote from: Bill;565091How is it not stopping them? Teleporting and getting  ganked by an infernal legion is the same thing.

Nope, it isn't.

Quote from: Bill;565091A target of scrying taunting you is the same thing.

Nope.

Quote from: Bill;565091I don't mean literally the same, but effectively, it is.

Nah, really not. Especially effectively, it is not.

Quote from: Bill;565091So you don't see any problem with 'I win buttons' being countered by 'You lose buttons' ?

Nobody loses buttons.

Quote from: Bill;565091You seem to keep assuming that I do not know the basics of running a game.

I don't know about that. What do know is that it'd be nice if you stopped pulling strawmen out of your ass.

Quote from: Bill;565091Just because we differ in opinion on this matter does not make me an idiot.

Not automatically. Start by not pulling strawmen and we'll see.

Quote from: Bill;565091Use of magic resistant creatures is not difficult.

It's about when and why you use them, not that they exist.

And how. I agree.

Quote from: Bill;565091I respect your opinion, Benoist, I just do not share it.

Then show it by not pulling strawmen.

Quote from: Benoist;565093Nope, it isn't.


Nope.


Nah, really not. Especially effectively, it is not.


Nobody loses buttons.


I don't know. If you stopped pulling strawmen out of your ass it'd be nice, though.


Not automatically, for sure. Start by not pulling strawmen and we'll see.


And how. I agree.


Then show it by not pulling strawmen.

What have I said that is a strawman?

What's with the remark about losing buttons?

Quote from: Bill;565094What have I said that is a strawman?

What's with the remark about losing buttons?

Both questions pertain to the same issue I have with your post.

When you have an environment that is, for instance, the Tower of Woe in the middle of a hellish plane and that you have a legion of creatures guarding the area, including creatures absolutely capable of casting something like a dimensional anchor, that you have an overlord that wards the place and is himself a representative of a type of creature that gates allies in to fight with them on a casual basis and is somehow not aware that magic users could ever use something like a teleport or planeshift or wouldn't ever prepare contingencies on such attempts as scrying, allowing at the most basic level to say... detect such attempt to then scry right back at them to determine who and what they are, and taunt them, for instance, toying with them as say... a demon would...

When you are making a false equivalence between this and saying "this effectively is the same as negating these abilities," which is absolutely not the case since they can scry and teleport and plane-shift to the Tower to their hearts content, you are being either (A) a complete moron, or (B) pulling a strawman on me.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and believe you are actually pulling a strawman. Am I wrong?

Quote from: Benoist;565096Both questions pertain to the same issue I have with your post.

When you have an environment that is, for instance, the Tower of Woe in the middle of a hellish plane and that you have a legion of creatures guarding the area, including creatures absolutely capable of casting something like a dimensional anchor, that you have an overlord that wards the place and is himself a representative of a type of creature that gates allies in to fight with them on a casual basis and is somehow not aware that magic users could ever use something like a teleport or planeshift or wouldn't ever prepare contingencies on such attempts as scrying, allowing at the most basic level to say... detect such attempt to then scry right back at them to determine who and what they are, and taunt them, for instance, toying with them as say... a demon would...

When you are making a false equivalence between this and saying "this effectively is the same as negating these abilities," which is absolutely not the case since they can scry and teleport and plane-shift to their hearts content, you are being either (A) a complete moron, or (2) pulling a strawman on me.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and believe you are actually pulling a strawman. Am I wrong?

Perhaps I am failing to communicate, I did not intend any offense.

I would never intentionally 'pull a strawman', and I certainly hope I am not an Idiot. Tough choice you gave me there

Am I using the word 'effectively' wrong?

I never said a demon would not taunt someone.
I never said planar beings can't teleport.

My intent was to equate a teleport spell being negated, with an army intercepting you when you arrive.

Is that not effectively denial of teleport?


I am not talking about what events in a setting are logical.
I am talking about negation of magic in high level games.

Quote from: Bill;565098My intent was to equate a teleport spell being negated, with an army intercepting you when you arrive.

Is that not effectively denial of teleport?

No, it is not.

You can effectively teleport however you want. Nobody's guaranteeing that the place where you are going to teleport is safe by any means. Especially if you're looking forward to rescuing a Runechild held prisoner in Hell and being prepped for a ritual that will open a massive gate for the armies of Asmodeus to invade the material plane and wipe out the Great Kingdom for good.

Now you're scrying. Which is not negated either. Your scrying attempt actually works: you see the Tower of Woe, the armies of hell waiting around the Forcecage, the Runechild crying as the cage swings back and forth over the ocean of lost souls... then the Overseer sees you. He smiles. "I was expecting such a spying attempt. Welcome, and witness the greatness of the Armies of Asmodeus. You are priviledged, mortal, for you are seeing them as they prepare to destroy your own world. We have been waiting a long time for this. More than you know. Would you like to see them up close, or rescue the child, maybe? You can try. You are a mighty hero after all. You should have no problem facing us. Or are you a coward, a yellow-bellied mortal afraid to lose his life and stay here for eternity? Come on here. Let's play. Don't make me wait any longer..."

Quote from: Benoist;565100No, it is not.

You can effectively teleport however you want. Nobody's guaranteeing that the place where you are going to teleport is safe by any means. Especially if you're looking forward to rescuing a Runechild held prisoner in Hell and being prepped for a ritual that will open a massive gate for the armies of Asmodeus to invade the material plane and wipe out the Great Kingdom for good.

I think I was missing the point of your argument. I was falsely assuming the teleport would work.

I need to sleep; catch you later.

OK Cool. Good night, mate.

Quote from: Bill;564834Yes, you can zing pc's with uber magic just like they themselves use, but in my experience that is not fun for the players.

Some of the most fun antagonists in our campaigns are classed NPCs that are around the PC's level or higher. Being really powerful means that the opposition will at times also be very powerful.

The slave lords from the A series are a good example. These are NPCs with the same kinds of magic and abilities as the PCs and as such make great villains.

Opponents like these can be the most fun for the players because they have a good idea of the kinds of things they are capable of, the NPCs likewise with regard to the PCs, and the struggle is decided by who can be more clever with their resources.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;565163Some of the most fun antagonists in our campaigns are classed NPCs that are around the PC's level or higher. Being really powerful means that the opposition will at times also be very powerful.

The slave lords from the A series are a good example. These are NPCs with the same kinds of magic and abilities as the PCs and as such make great villains.

Opponents like these can be the most fun for the players because they have a good idea of the kinds of things they are capable of, the NPCs likewise with regard to the PCs, and the struggle is decided by who can be more clever with their resources.

Or decided by luck. Everyone is not clever

Just looking through my new copy of the Pathfinder Core Rulebook, and my heart sunk when I saw True Resurrection still there, copied over from 3e. Incredibly stupid spell - apparently it brings back anyone to life, no body needed, but doesn't bother saying where they come back to life - there is no range. It's potentially game-breaking and just really badly designed; makes me just want to ban all 9th level spells. I recall arguably even worse stuff in 3e splatbooks, like the 9th level spell in PHB2 that lets a caster snap his fingers and get a free iron golem for several hours/day - not even any component cost - when creating the equivalent golem would cost a fortune.

Quote from: Bill;565165Or decided by luck. Everyone is not clever

Luck plays a significant part of any resolution system that hinges on die rolls certainly, but if there is naught to the game but what's on the character sheet and die rolls, then there is little that engages the players thought and imagination.