I'm still waiting for any of you to give me a page number and direct quote which _actually_ says to use Wish' casting time, but not Wish' range.
Answer: Here's the information you want so much:
Page 203 see "Casting a Spell." of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect."
Page 203 see "Casting Time" of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Most spells require a single action to cast, but some spells require a bonus action, a reaction, or much more time to cast."
Page 289-289 see "Wish" in the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: V
Duration: Instantaneous
Wish is the mightiest spell a mortal creature can cast. By simply speaking aloud, you can alter the very foundations of reality in accord with your desires.
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."
I have bolded everything you would need to to know, given you the page numbers, and quoted exactly what you need to see and once for all I'll explain it to you once more just so you get it. The Wish has a Cast Time of 1 action, it's Duration is instantaneous, and Range is Self as the effect of the Wish spell is to duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower. The spell effect generated by Wish makes the wizard not need to meet any requirements in that spell, including costly components as the spell simply takes effect.
So that means if I used the spell Wish to generate the spell Resurrection to use on a dead ally Wish would allow the wizard to cast such a spell in a instant reviving the dead ally.
And If you somehow still think Wish doesn't do what we are trying to say it does then here is some other websites that do agree:
I'm still waiting for any of you to give me a page number and direct quote which _actually_ says to use Wish' casting time, but not Wish' range.
Answer: Here's the information you want so much:
Page 203 see "Casting a Spell." of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect."
Page 203 see "Casting Time" of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Most spells require a single action to cast, but some spells require a bonus action, a reaction, or much more time to cast."
Page 289-289 see "Wish" in the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: V
Duration: Instantaneous
Wish is the mightiest spell a mortal creature can cast. By simply speaking aloud, you can alter the very foundations of reality in accord with your desires.
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."
I have bolded everything you would need to to know, given you the page numbers, and quoted exactly what you need to see and once for all I'll explain it to you once more just so you get it. The Wish has a Cast Time of 1 action, it's Duration is instantaneous, and Range is Self as the effect of the Wish spell is to duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower. The spell effect generated by Wish makes the wizard not need to meet any requirements in that spell, including costly components as the spell simply takes effect.
So that means if I used the spell Wish to generate the spell Resurrection to use on a dead ally Wish would allow the wizard to cast such a spell in a instant reviving the dead ally.
And If you somehow still think Wish doesn't do what we are trying to say it does then here is some other websites that do agree:
Answer: Haha thank you I spent a good amount of time on it so I'm glad you like it.
If your link had wet to Sage Advice, it would have been significant. Instead, it is a single reply by some anonymous poster whose significance is no greater than any of our's.
I'm still waiting for any of you to give me a page number and direct quote which _actually_ says to use Wish' casting time, but not Wish' range.
Answer: Here's the information you want so much:
Page 203 see "Casting a Spell." of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect."
Page 203 see "Casting Time" of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Most spells require a single action to cast, but some spells require a bonus action, a reaction, or much more time to cast."
Page 289-289 see "Wish" in the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: V
Duration: Instantaneous
Wish is the mightiest spell a mortal creature can cast. By simply speaking aloud, you can alter the very foundations of reality in accord with your desires.
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."
I have bolded everything you would need to to know, given you the page numbers, and quoted exactly what you need to see and once for all I'll explain it to you once more just so you get it. The Wish has a Cast Time of 1 action, it's Duration is instantaneous, and Range is Self as the effect of the Wish spell is to duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower. The spell effect generated by Wish makes the wizard not need to meet any requirements in that spell, including costly components as the spell simply takes effect.
So that means if I used the spell Wish to generate the spell Resurrection to use on a dead ally Wish would allow the wizard to cast such a spell in a instant reviving the dead ally.
And If you somehow still think Wish doesn't do what we are trying to say it does then here is some other websites that do agree:
Now that is all I have for you if you still think otherwise you are sadly a lost cause.
All you are doing here is repeating yourself. This isn't actual evidence. It isn't an actual direct quote shedding any light on the issue.
Wish doesn't grant the spell effect. if it did, then the posted range of Wish would be an issue.
What Wish does is duplicate any other spell. In duplicating another spell, it takes on that spell's range, casting time, etc., but removes any requirements for that spell. For example, you can _send_ a message to someone you have never met, you can teleport to a place that was never described to you, you can fabricate plate armor without having any relevant skill.
The statement
The spell simply takes effect."
doesn't mean the spell is cast instantly. The statement is not "the spell simply takes effect immediately."
Answer: Haha thank you I spent a good amount of time on it so I'm glad you like it.
If your link had wet to Sage Advice, it would have been significant.
Answer: Well then Wren do you have any and I mean any proof to support your claim that what we say is wrong or not fully supported by the rules... oh wait I can answer that question for you.
No you can't and why do you want sage advice? when I gave you the page number and quotes from the literal Players Handbook an official book from wizards of the coast which supports my claim. And yet you still have the rancor and gaul to ask for tweet from sage advice that you know doesn't exist even though I have shown you the text straight from the PHB.
Instead, it is a single reply by some anonymous poster whose significance is no greater than any of our's.
Answer: What in the world? When can't I be happy that someone liked my post and my gosh are you utterly disrespectful and stubborn to the point even in the face of quotes, page numbers, and the actual spells own description you STILL are unable to believe that your claim is wrong even though all the evidence is against you and the entire consensus from the community is that our claim is correct.
Answer: Haha thank you I spent a good amount of time on it so I'm glad you like it.
If your link had wet to Sage Advice, it would have been significant.
Answer: Well then Wren do you have any and I mean any proof to support your claim that what we say is wrong or not fully supported by the rules... oh wait I can answer that question for you.
No you can't and why do you want sage advice? when I gave you the page number and quotes from the literal Players Handbook an official book from wizards of the coast which supports my claim. And yet you still have the rancor and gaul to ask for tweet from sage advice that you know doesn't exist even though I have shown you the text straight from the PHB.
Instead, it is a single reply by some anonymous poster whose significance is no greater than any of our's.
Answer: What in the world? When can't I be happy that someone liked my post and my gosh are you utterly disrespectful and stubborn to the point even in the face of quotes, page numbers, and the actual spells own description you STILL are unable to believe that your claim is wrong even though all the evidence is against you and the entire consensus from the community is that our claim is correct.
You were the one who claimed your interpretation was backed by RAW. Now you don't have actual RAW evidence, just a claim of RAI?
I want to have a friendly, thoughtful, discussion on the subject, but I need you to engage in the discussion without misrepresentation of your argument.
Wren I'll be straight with you... you have no argument... like at all. All you do Is repeatedly say "you don't have actual RAW evidence" when I show you this...
I'm still waiting for any of you to give me a page number and direct quote which _actually_ says to use Wish' casting time, but not Wish' range.
Answer: Here's the information you want so much:
Page 203 see "Casting a Spell." of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect."
Page 203 see "Casting Time" of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Most spells require a single action to cast, but some spells require a bonus action, a reaction, or much more time to cast."
Page 289-289 see "Wish" in the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: V
Duration: Instantaneous
Wish is the mightiest spell a mortal creature can cast. By simply speaking aloud, you can alter the very foundations of reality in accord with your desires.
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."
I have bolded everything you would need to to know, given you the page numbers, and quoted exactly what you need to see and once for all I'll explain it to you once more just so you get it. The Wish has a Cast Time of 1 action, it's Duration is instantaneous, and Range is Self as the effect of the Wish spell is to duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower. The spell effect generated by Wish makes the wizard not need to meet any requirements in that spell, including costly components as the spell simply takes effect.
So that means if I used the spell Wish to generate the spell Resurrection to use on a dead ally Wish would allow the wizard to cast such a spell in a instant reviving the dead ally.
And If you somehow still think Wish doesn't do what we are trying to say it does then here is some other websites that do agree:
Now that is all I have for you if you still think otherwise you are sadly a lost cause.
Guess what you do... you ignore it and say "you don't have actual RAW evidence" when I literally quoted the passage from the PHB but you just play it off.
This isn't an argument between me and you this is me repeatedly preaching to a wall of stone while nothing happens since I am ignored repeatedly and disrespected and I'm done with this supposed "argument" as you are unable to bring up anything to support your claim besides just remarking 'you don't have actual RAW evidence" in the face of actual RAW evidence.
Now if you give me a reason as to why those quotes are wrong or whatever then we might actually have something to debate but you haven't and you probably won't.
Answer: Haha thank you I spent a good amount of time on it so I'm glad you like it.
If your link had wet to Sage Advice, it would have been significant. Instead, it is a single reply by some anonymous poster whose significance is no greater than any of our's.
You have no more significance than any of these guys or us, so at this point it is 4 randos vs 1 rando. Do you have any proof?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
Answer: Haha thank you I spent a good amount of time on it so I'm glad you like it.
If your link had wet to Sage Advice, it would have been significant. Instead, it is a single reply by some anonymous poster whose significance is no greater than any of our's.
You have no more significance than any of these guys or us, so at this point it is 4 randos vs 1 rando. Do you have any proof?
Is that where we're at? Your only argument is that four to one randos agree with you?
Answer: Haha thank you I spent a good amount of time on it so I'm glad you like it.
If your link had wet to Sage Advice, it would have been significant. Instead, it is a single reply by some anonymous poster whose significance is no greater than any of our's.
You have no more significance than any of these guys or us, so at this point it is 4 randos vs 1 rando. Do you have any proof?
Is that where we're at? Your only argument is that four to one randos agree with you?
You said deathknight’s outside sources had no more significance than any of us and you aren’t satisfied with any proof we gave, but you provided no more proof than anyone else, so that is what you left us with. Show actual proof of what you say, and then tell us to show ours.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
You said deathknight’s outside sources had no more significance than any of us and you aren’t satisfied with any proof we gave, but you provided no more proof than anyone else, so that is what you left us with. Show actual proof of what you say, and then tell us to show ours.
Answer: Yep absolutely agree Wren just needs to show evidence that could prove his claim then we could start to have a debate but he doesn't (not like there's much proof out there to support his stance to begin with anyways). And since he doesn't/can't backup his stance with evidence all Wren has done is just play off/ignore what evidence we bring forth.
You said deathknight’s outside sources had no more significance than any of us and you aren’t satisfied with any proof we gave, but you provided no more proof than anyone else, so that is what you left us with. Show actual proof of what you say, and then tell us to show ours.
Answer: Yep absolutely agree Wren just needs to show evidence that could prove his claim then we could start to have a debate but he doesn't (not like there's much proof out there to support his stance to begin with anyways). And since he doesn't/can't backup his stance with evidence all Wren has done is just play off/ignore what evidence we bring forth.
I know. Don’t call out problems that you also have, or the other guy will do the same. Sage advice is silent on that aspect of wish, probably because the way everyone but wren does it is correct, or maybe no one’s asked them about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
You said deathknight’s outside sources had no more significance than any of us and you aren’t satisfied with any proof we gave, but you provided no more proof than anyone else, so that is what you left us with. Show actual proof of what you say, and then tell us to show ours.
Answer: Yep absolutely agree Wren just needs to show evidence that could prove his claim then we could start to have a debate but he doesn't (not like there's much proof out there to support his stance to begin with anyways). And since he doesn't/can't backup his stance with evidence all Wren has done is just play off/ignore what evidence we bring forth.
I know. Don’t call out problems that you also have, or the other guy will do the same. Sage advice is silent on that aspect of wish, probably because the way everyone but wren does it is correct, or maybe no one’s asked them about it.
It's because everyone reads it the correct way and sees that the spell is instant and takes one action and plays it that way.
Basically every possible resource is clearly saying it's this way, every time someone asks in another forum/site the answer is the same, and there is no information/evidence that what Wren is saying is even a possibility or really makes sense if you read how spells work.
You said deathknight’s outside sources had no more significance than any of us and you aren’t satisfied with any proof we gave, but you provided no more proof than anyone else, so that is what you left us with. Show actual proof of what you say, and then tell us to show ours.
Answer: Yep absolutely agree Wren just needs to show evidence that could prove his claim then we could start to have a debate but he doesn't (not like there's much proof out there to support his stance to begin with anyways). And since he doesn't/can't backup his stance with evidence all Wren has done is just play off/ignore what evidence we bring forth.
I know. Don’t call out problems that you also have, or the other guy will do the same. Sage advice is silent on that aspect of wish, probably because the way everyone but wren does it is correct, or maybe no one’s asked them about it.
YOU are the one who claimed that your take on the spell is RAW. Prove it by providing a direct quote and page number. I never made that claim, because my take on the spell is based on elementary logic.
My take on the spell doesn't depend on an arbitrary and indefensible distinction being made between casting time and range.
You said deathknight’s outside sources had no more significance than any of us and you aren’t satisfied with any proof we gave, but you provided no more proof than anyone else, so that is what you left us with. Show actual proof of what you say, and then tell us to show ours.
Answer: Yep absolutely agree Wren just needs to show evidence that could prove his claim then we could start to have a debate but he doesn't (not like there's much proof out there to support his stance to begin with anyways). And since he doesn't/can't backup his stance with evidence all Wren has done is just play off/ignore what evidence we bring forth.
I know. Don’t call out problems that you also have, or the other guy will do the same. Sage advice is silent on that aspect of wish, probably because the way everyone but wren does it is correct, or maybe no one’s asked them about it.
YOU are the one who claimed that your take on the spell is RAW. Prove it by providing a direct quote and page number. I never made that claim, because my take on the spell is based on elementary logic.
My take on the spell doesn't depend on an arbitrary and indefensible distinction being made between casting time and range.
They did and the relevant rules that apply.
You don't accept it. Not sure what else to do here as it seems you won't accept the written rules or pages and pages of personal experience and rulings that agree with said rules.
If you really want to prove your point then provide counter evidence... Which you still have not done
You said deathknight’s outside sources had no more significance than any of us and you aren’t satisfied with any proof we gave, but you provided no more proof than anyone else, so that is what you left us with. Show actual proof of what you say, and then tell us to show ours.
Answer: Yep absolutely agree Wren just needs to show evidence that could prove his claim then we could start to have a debate but he doesn't (not like there's much proof out there to support his stance to begin with anyways). And since he doesn't/can't backup his stance with evidence all Wren has done is just play off/ignore what evidence we bring forth.
I know. Don’t call out problems that you also have, or the other guy will do the same. Sage advice is silent on that aspect of wish, probably because the way everyone but wren does it is correct, or maybe no one’s asked them about it.
YOU are the one who claimed that your take on the spell is RAW. Prove it by providing a direct quote and page number. I never made that claim, because my take on the spell is based on elementary logic.
My take on the spell doesn't depend on an arbitrary and indefensible distinction being made between casting time and range.
They did and the relevant rules that apply.
You don't accept it. Not sure what else to do here as it seems you won't accept the written rules or pages and pages of personal experience and rulings that agree with said rules.
If you really want to prove your point then provide counter evidence... Which you still have not done
n English
The spell simply takes effect."
doesn't mean
The spell simply takes effect immediately
So, when it is claimed that they gave the direct quote, but this is what they quoted, they really didn't.
If you really want to prove your point then provide counter evidence...
So, when it is claimed that they gave the direct quote, but this is what they quoted, they really didn't.
If you really want to prove your point then provide counter evidence...
Basic English?
Answer: You literally ignoring what we have said Wish has a casting time of one action and duration of instantaneous that means when you cast it it’s immediate it not that hard to understand.
And the PHB agrees that the casting time is as not as complicated as you make it especially when this is compounded by the fact that in the wish spell it says “The spell simply takes effect.” No matter how you look at it Wren your in denial unless you give actual proof but you can’t since there is none.
Page 203 see "Casting a Spell." of the Players Handbook (PHB): "When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.”
Answer: You literally ignoring what we have said Wish has a casting time of one action and duration of instantaneous
It also has a range of self.
Please post the direct quote and page number where Wish says that, when duplicating a spell, use the casting time of Wish, but the range and duration of the duplicated spell.
Answer: Here's the information you want so much:
Page 203 see "Casting a Spell." of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect."
Page 203 see "Casting Time" of the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Most spells require a single action to cast, but some spells require a bonus action, a reaction, or much more time to cast."
Page 289-289 see "Wish" in the Players Handbook (PHB)
"Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: V
Duration: Instantaneous
Wish is the mightiest spell a mortal creature can cast. By simply speaking aloud, you can alter the very foundations of reality in accord with your desires.
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."
I have bolded everything you would need to to know, given you the page numbers, and quoted exactly what you need to see and once for all I'll explain it to you once more just so you get it. The Wish has a Cast Time of 1 action, it's Duration is instantaneous, and Range is Self as the effect of the Wish spell is to duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower. The spell effect generated by Wish makes the wizard not need to meet any requirements in that spell, including costly components as the spell simply takes effect.
So that means if I used the spell Wish to generate the spell Resurrection to use on a dead ally Wish would allow the wizard to cast such a spell in a instant reviving the dead ally.
And If you somehow still think Wish doesn't do what we are trying to say it does then here is some other websites that do agree:
First Link
Second Link
Now that is all I have for you if you still think otherwise you are sadly a lost cause.
I wish I could give you real money for this post!
Answer: Haha thank you I spent a good amount of time on it so I'm glad you like it.
If your link had wet to Sage Advice, it would have been significant. Instead, it is a single reply by some anonymous poster whose significance is no greater than any of our's.
All you are doing here is repeating yourself. This isn't actual evidence. It isn't an actual direct quote shedding any light on the issue.
Wish doesn't grant the spell effect. if it did, then the posted range of Wish would be an issue.
What Wish does is duplicate any other spell. In duplicating another spell, it takes on that spell's range, casting time, etc., but removes any requirements for that spell. For example, you can _send_ a message to someone you have never met, you can teleport to a place that was never described to you, you can fabricate plate armor without having any relevant skill.
The statement
The spell simply takes effect."
doesn't mean the spell is cast instantly. The statement is not "the spell simply takes effect immediately."
Answer: Well then Wren do you have any and I mean any proof to support your claim that what we say is wrong or not fully supported by the rules... oh wait I can answer that question for you.
No you can't and why do you want sage advice? when I gave you the page number and quotes from the literal Players Handbook an official book from wizards of the coast which supports my claim. And yet you still have the rancor and gaul to ask for tweet from sage advice that you know doesn't exist even though I have shown you the text straight from the PHB.
Answer: What in the world? When can't I be happy that someone liked my post and my gosh are you utterly disrespectful and stubborn to the point even in the face of quotes, page numbers, and the actual spells own description you STILL are unable to believe that your claim is wrong even though all the evidence is against you and the entire consensus from the community is that our claim is correct.
You were the one who claimed your interpretation was backed by RAW. Now you don't have actual RAW evidence, just a claim of RAI?
I want to have a friendly, thoughtful, discussion on the subject, but I need you to engage in the discussion without misrepresentation of your argument.
Wren I'll be straight with you... you have no argument... like at all. All you do Is repeatedly say "you don't have actual RAW evidence" when I show you this...
Guess what you do... you ignore it and say "you don't have actual RAW evidence" when I literally quoted the passage from the PHB but you just play it off.
This isn't an argument between me and you this is me repeatedly preaching to a wall of stone while nothing happens since I am ignored repeatedly and disrespected and I'm done with this supposed "argument" as you are unable to bring up anything to support your claim besides just remarking 'you don't have actual RAW evidence" in the face of actual RAW evidence.
Now if you give me a reason as to why those quotes are wrong or whatever then we might actually have something to debate but you haven't and you probably won't.
In English
The spell simply takes effect."
doesn't mean
The spell simply takes effect.immediately
So, when you claim that you gave the direct quote, but this is what you quoted, you really haven't.
You have no more significance than any of these guys or us, so at this point it is 4 randos vs 1 rando. Do you have any proof?
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
Quest offer! Enter the deep dungeon here
Ctg’s blood is on the spam filter’s hands
Is that where we're at? Your only argument is that four to one randos agree with you?
You said deathknight’s outside sources had no more significance than any of us and you aren’t satisfied with any proof we gave, but you provided no more proof than anyone else, so that is what you left us with. Show actual proof of what you say, and then tell us to show ours.
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
Quest offer! Enter the deep dungeon here
Ctg’s blood is on the spam filter’s hands
Answer: Yep absolutely agree Wren just needs to show evidence that could prove his claim then we could start to have a debate but he doesn't (not like there's much proof out there to support his stance to begin with anyways). And since he doesn't/can't backup his stance with evidence all Wren has done is just play off/ignore what evidence we bring forth.
I know. Don’t call out problems that you also have, or the other guy will do the same. Sage advice is silent on that aspect of wish, probably because the way everyone but wren does it is correct, or maybe no one’s asked them about it.
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
Quest offer! Enter the deep dungeon here
Ctg’s blood is on the spam filter’s hands
It's because everyone reads it the correct way and sees that the spell is instant and takes one action and plays it that way.
Basically every possible resource is clearly saying it's this way, every time someone asks in another forum/site the answer is the same, and there is no information/evidence that what Wren is saying is even a possibility or really makes sense if you read how spells work.
1.) The description of the spell
YOU are the one who claimed that your take on the spell is RAW. Prove it by providing a direct quote and page number. I never made that claim, because my take on the spell is based on elementary logic.
My take on the spell doesn't depend on an arbitrary and indefensible distinction being made between casting time and range.
They did and the relevant rules that apply.
You don't accept it. Not sure what else to do here as it seems you won't accept the written rules or pages and pages of personal experience and rulings that agree with said rules.
If you really want to prove your point then provide counter evidence... Which you still have not done
n English
The spell simply takes effect."
doesn't mean
The spell simply takes effect immediately
So, when it is claimed that they gave the direct quote, but this is what they quoted, they really didn't.
Basic English?
Answer: You literally ignoring what we have said Wish has a casting time of one action and duration of instantaneous that means when you cast it it’s immediate it not that hard to understand.
And the PHB agrees that the casting time is as not as complicated as you make it especially when this is compounded by the fact that in the wish spell it says “The spell simply takes effect.” No matter how you look at it Wren your in denial unless you give actual proof but you can’t since there is none.
Page 203 see "Casting a Spell." of the Players Handbook (PHB):
"When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.”
It also has a range of self.
Please post the direct quote and page number where Wish says that, when duplicating a spell, use the casting time of Wish, but the range and duration of the duplicated spell.