This week on Todd Talks, Todd Kenreck gathered a panel of sharp-minded D&D players: Lauren Urban, Jen Kretchmer, and Jim Davis, to talk about controversial spells in D&D. With the latest events of Heroes of the Vale fresh on their minds, the wish spell immediately became their first topic of conversation. In this week’s Spell Spotlight, let’s take a close look at the history of the wish spell, and some ways for you to adjudicate player wishes without breaking your campaign.
A History of Wishes
The wish spell has changed a lot over the ages. Some editions wildly restrict its power, some editions let the characters rewrite reality with a word. Some wishes have discrete costs, while others are more lax. Before we dig into the best ways to adjudicate wish at your table, we need to see why wish works the way it does in the current edition of D&D.
Original D&D
Wish first appeared in “OD&D,” in Supplement 1: Greyhawk. This version of wish was, in keeping with the style of OD&D, light on hard-coded restrictions. However, it advised the Dungeon Master (or rather, the “referee”) to be as devious and cruel as they liked with their interpretation of the player character’s wish.
[Wish alters] the past, present, or future to cause a wish to come true. The caster may wish to erase an unfortunate adventure, for instance, or may get a clue to a powerful item or great treasure. Wishes must be careful: the referee may grant a wish in such a way as to kill or handicap a character.
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st Edition
The AD&D Player’s Handbook published an updated version of the wish spell, as well as another spell known as limited wish, a 7th-level spell with more restricted effects.
A Limited Wish is a very potent but difficult spell. It will fulfill literally, but only partially or for a limited duration, the utterance of the spell caster. Thus, the actuality of the past, present or future might be altered (but possibly only for the magic-user unless the wording of the Limited Wish is most carefully stated) in some limited manner. The use of a Limited Wish will not substantially change major realities, nor will it bring wealth or experience merely by asking. The spell can, for example, restore some hit points (or all hit points for a limited duration) lost by the magic-user. It can reduce opponent hit probabilities or damage, it can increase duration of some magical effect, it can cause a creature to be favorably disposed to the spell caster, and so on. The Limited Wish can possibly give a minor clue to some treasure or magic item. Greedy desires will usually end in disaster for the wisher.
And though wish was still the ultimate spell, it saw a significant reduction in power between OD&D and AD&D. Interestingly, its power was reduced not by placing restrictions on what kind of wishes the caster could make, but by striking the caster with fatigue that persisted after the spell’s casting. Worthy of note also, is that the spell text now gave referees a certain amount of guidance as how to adjudicate the spell, even going so far as to encourage the DM to “maintain game balance” by obliquely interpreting player wishes.
The Wish spell is a more potent version of a Limited Wish. If it is used to alter reality with respect to hit points sustained by a party, to bring a dead character to life, or to escape from a difficult situation by lifting the spell caster (and his or her party) from one place to another, it will not cause the magic-user any disability. Other forms of wishes, however, will cause the spell caster to be weak (–3 on strength) and require 2 to 8 days of bed rest due to the stresses the wish places upon time, space, and his or her body. Regardless of what is wished for, the exact terminology of the Wish spell is likely to be carried through. (This discretionary power of the referee is necessary in order to maintain game balance. As wishing another character dead would be grossly unfair, for example, your DM might well advance the spell caster to a future period where the object is no longer alive, i.e. putting the wishing character out of the campaign.)
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd Edition
The versions of wish and limited wish in AD&D 2nd edition are much the same as they were in 1st edition. The text is almost identical, in fact! Its one significant divergence from the wish as presented in 1e is a permanent cost to the caster!
Casting a wish spell ages the caster five years.
This is the first instance of wish requiring a cost beyond simply a 9th-level spell slot to cast. This idea would be developed further in 3rd edition. Speaking of which…
3rd Edition Dungeons & Dragons
D&D changed a lot in the jump from 2nd to 3rd edition, including dropping the now-superfluous “Advanced” moniker. The wish spell received a significant overhaul, which in true 3rd edition style, was a full codification of the spell’s effects. While this expansive elucidation helped remove guesswork and DM-to-DM variance in the spell’s usefulness, it significantly increased the complexity and restrictiveness of the spell. Ultimately, it’s a matter of opinion whether or an increase in codification made wish better or worse.
Continuing the trend that 2nd edition began, wish now costs experience points to cast, but no longer caused the spellcaster to suffer wish fatigue. Now, a not-insignificant XP cost was the balancing factor in this reality-altering spell. This spell wasn’t the only thing in this edition of D&D to use XP as a currency; creating magic items required an expenditure of experience points, for instance. The XP cost may have been a more successful disincentive than a few days of bedrest, but simply marking down a number feels less epic and mythic than suffering from debilitating weakness after channeling untold arcane power through your flimsy mortal frame. Again, a fielder’s choice.
See the full text of wish in the 3rd edition System Reference Document.
4th Edition D&D
Interestingly, wish didn’t appear in 4th edition D&D as a spell in any capacity, though creatures like genies could still grant wishes. To the best of my knowledge, no official explanation for the spell’s controversial removal is available online, but there’s no reason to ignite old edition wars. Broadly speaking, the effects of wish were divvied up among the game’s many rituals. It’s also entirely possible that the reality altering effects of wish were just another way that spellcasting characters were superior to martial characters, and wish was removed in the name of harmonious game balance.
Fifth Edition Dungeons & Dragons
Finally, wish appeared in the fifth edition Player’s Handbook as “the mightiest spell a mortal creature can cast,” though it should be noted that limited wish, which existed in D&D since 1st edition (not counting 4th edition), didn’t appear alongside it’s more powerful cousin. One particular item of note is that this incarnation of wish gives the Dungeon Master guidance on how to adjudicate a player wishing a villain were dead, as opposed to the AD&D version of wish, which gave (identical) advice on how to deal with a player wishing another player out of existence.
This change in advice is emblematic of a broad change in playstyle that took place in the decades separating AD&D 1st edition and fifth edition Dungeons & Dragons. To oversimplify, players were still ostensibly allies in 1st edition, but life was cheap and campaigns with elaborate plots, complete with character development, were rare. Characters were expected to die early, often, and for petty reasons, all of which meant that intra-party conflict wasn’t nearly as taboo as it is today. If none of the characters had favorable odds of surviving a dungeon crawl anyway, what did it matter if a traitorous rogue was killed by an aggrieved party member, rather than a sphere of annihilation?
This version of wish also introduces one interesting new piece of guidance for the DM: “the greater the wish, the greater the likelihood that something goes wrong.” The idea of the magnitude of the wish being linked to the magnitude of its consequences is narratively satisfying, and inherently provides a unique aspect of risk and reward to the casting of wish.
One final new element of the wish rules also serves to keep the power of the spell in line by discouraging uses of wish outside of certain limited parameters. The Experience point cost from 3rd edition is gone, and the “wish fatigue” present in 2nd edition and earlier returns with a burning vengeance, but only if you use wish to create a wholly original effect. Additionally, using wish to create a wholly original effect also comes with a 1-in-3 chance that the caster is “unable to cast wish ever again.” Those are rough odds… but what a magnificent thing if you use wish to alter reality for the better (or for the worse), but you pay the price of never being able to wish again. Now that’s a plot twist!
Adjudicating Player Wishes
Throughout the ages, wish has advised Dungeon Masters to be cunning with their interpretations of player wishes. This is for good reason; allowing players to wish without restraint is essentially the default end of a game of D&D. Anyone who can’t wish would then essentially be a second-class character, and you would be better off moving to a game system like Exalted, where everyone has godlike power. The restrictions placed upon the spell help mitigate this, of course, but allowing the DM to interpret player wishes how they will is, first, in keeping with our myths of trickster genies and double-edged wishes, and also helps DMs maintain a semblance of control over their campaigns.
If I could only give one piece of advice regarding wishing, I would say: always be generous to players that are willing to be generous to you. If the wizards and sorcerers in your game are using wish to enhance your campaign, let their wishes work to everyone’s benefit. However, the inverse is also true. Never be generous to players that are unwilling to be generous to you. If those reality altering dastards want to wreak havoc with your campaign—and it’s making the game less fun for you—let your inner trickster god flourish and twist those wishes however you see fit.
Of course, in the latter scenario, you would probably be better off having a frank, out-of-character conversation with your players than trying to torment them in-character. Talking things out works much better than playing hardball, in my experience.
If you need concrete advice on managing wish, I highly recommend listening to Todd Kenreck’s Todd Talk on the subject; it’s embedded at the top of this article. Beyond that, I have three pieces of advice for DMs struggling to get a handle on wish.
The Law of Equivalent Exchange
To quote Fullmetal Alchemist, “If one wishes to obtain something, something of equal value must be given.” The text of wish promises something similar. “[The] greater the wish, the greater the likelihood that something goes wrong.”
Presumably, this guideline given in the text of the wish spell is just a guideline to help you twist your players’ words to create a double-edged wish. This works perfectly well. However, imagine if casting wish literally required a sacrifice of some sort. Do you know what the caster would exchange in order to see their vision fulfilled? Once you’ve decided, keep this in mind when determining the outcome of the wish, and keep the real consequences of the caster’s actions in your back pocket to reveal when the time is right.
Alternatively, you could propose this question to the caster directly. Maybe a god of fate speaks to the caster at the moment the wish is spoken, and the character must choose their sacrifice up front. To save a loved one’s life, another loved one must die instead. Who will take the fatal blow? Now, the choice is entirely in the caster’s hands. Now, the casting of a wish is more than just a spell or a story beat, but a potential ethical dilemma.
Make it Worth It
Earning the power to cast wish is no simple feat. It is truly the capstone of a wizard’s power, and an achievement in its own right. Let the wizard have their fun with their phenomenal cosmic power for a bit, so long as it doesn’t ruin anyone else’s fun. From a diabolical point of view, this is also to your benefit. Let the caster get comfortable making little wishes with only minor consequences. Then, when they become cocky enough to try and fundamentally rewrite reality, pull the rug out from under them!
Consider the Other Players
Fifth edition D&D isn’t a symmetrically balanced game. Its balance is imperfect and asymmetric, but ultimately, I believe that’s for the best. Wizards and bards and sorcerers are the only people who get to cast wish, and clerics have something similar in their Divine Intervention feature. All eight other classes in D&D have nothing that approaches the sheer versatility and potential power as wish. And, in a vacuum, this is a huge problem.
But we don’t play D&D in a vacuum. There are ways to balance this power. The simplest and most symmetrical (and in my opinion, least interesting) way to balance this is to hand out magic items that grant wishes. A ring of three wishes, or a luck blade, for instance. Then, everyone has the power to alter reality!
Or, consider what the wizard gets out of having a wish. What does it accomplish for them from a character standpoint. Is power all they seek? Is it to bring back a lost loved one? Is it to save their ancestral kingdom? Once you distill the power of wish down to this narrative purpose, you can find a way to balance it. How does a fighter gain the power to fundamentally change the world in the way a wizard can with wish? In a way, they already have it.
For example: a 20th-level bard wishes that the evil king were a toad. The consequence? The evil king’s equally evil daughter rules the evil kingdom instead. However, a 20th-level fighter could stride into the evil king’s throne room and cleave his head off with a clean stroke of her greatsword.
Another example: a 20th-level wizard in the midst of a nation-wide famine wishes that the crops in their country flourished instead of suffering from a disease that year. The consequence, the insects that plagued their crops instead plagues a neighboring realm, which declares war on the kingdom. However, a 20th-level fighter could march into that same neighboring realm, which in this reality is flush with food, and demand a share of it—or take it by force.
The power of a wish is to get the DM to pay attention to your character for a time, and then for the DM to decide how to reward or punish whatever ideas you present. Other classes have that too; they just don’t have rules for it.
What unbelievable wishes have you seen in your game? What have the consequences been, either for the player or for the DM?
James Haeck is the lead writer for D&D Beyond, the co-author of Waterdeep: Dragon Heist and the Critical Role Tal'Dorei Campaign Setting, the DM of Worlds Apart, and a freelance writer for Wizards of the Coast, the D&D Adventurers League, and Kobold Press. He lives in Seattle, Washington with his partner Hannah and their sweet kitties Mei and Marzipan. You can usually find him wasting time on Twitter at @jamesjhaeck.
We had a campaign that was destroyed by a character's Wish spell. Our characters in that campaign were the children of our characters from the previous campaign. In the previous campaign our characters had created a guild known as the "Guardians of Faerun", and they amassed a huge following and became the most powerful guild in the entire land. At the start of our new campaign, the Guardians of Faerun were destroyed by archdemons and the children were the only survivors. Well, this character decided to use a Wish spell gained by talking to an ancient god to bring all the former Guardians who had already died back to life at the height of their individual powers. So the next session we go back to our base and there's some 10,000+ people there, not to mention a couple thousand dead people who became traitors to the Guardians when they were at their most powerful and were immediately killed by the living Guardians.
Unfortunately this player's Wish made it so hard for the DM to manage the campaign that he called it quits two weeks later.
What you mean to say is you had a campaign destroyed by your DM. The ultimate effects of world altering wish spells are determined, including whether they happen or not, by the DM. Unless a DM is using home-brew rules, it would be hard for the DM to deny a use of a wish to duplicate a spell of 8th level or lower, or similar such effects--that is it.
But, when a player makes a grand, campaign altering wish, such as bringing back all the former Guardians, etc., it is only something that can be done if the DM rules it can be done. And, in such cases, before allowing such a wish to take effect, the DM should think through carefully of the consequences to the campaign of permitting it and what the DM will do to address such consequences. Your DM should have ruled that either the wish spell fizzled out or only some lesser effect occurred unless he had a plan (or reasonably thought he could come up with a plan for your next gaming sessions) to address the consequences of granting the player's wish in its entirety.
Honestly, I feel like Wish shouldn't be a thing in D&D.
The problem I have with it is as a "capstone" ability of being a Wizard, it contributes too much to the "linear fighter, quadratic wizard" problem that has plagued D&D for ages. Literally as the fighter gets a 4th attack, the wizard can bend the fabric of reality to their will, with no material costs required. Want to cast Resurrection as a wizard? You can with Wish! For zero diamonds and an action, you can raise someone from the dead. Great job, cleric... oh, wait. Want to never die? Wish a Clone into existence, one for each party member.
Want double the spellcasting power? Just Wish for a Simulacrum. Now the party has 2 wizards with god-like powers. The Simulacrum ran out of spell slots? Just refresh with a new Wish and a Simulacrum replaces the old one, fully-healed and recharged with slots for the next day's battles.
Wish also breaks the reality of D&D for me. Why wouldn't every lich and archmage ever use Wish to create Simulacra of themselves?
In the paragraph reading “For example: a 20th-level bard wishes that the evil king were a toad. The consequence? The evil king’s equally evil daughter rules the evil kingdom instead. However, a 20th-level fighter could stride into the evil king’s throne room and cleaves his head off with a clean stroke of her greatsword,” the word “cleaves” should instead read “cleave.”
I once ran a one shot scenario where the Players ascended a Mountain to gain the use of a single Wish Spell. The dungeon gave them some hard choices and explored each hero's personality. They all came with their baggage and personal wants, but so far every time I ran the campaign the Players always wish for something the kindly villagers at the bottom of the Mountain wanted.
Maybe I just have nice players :)
Well, you're not wrong. The DM overextended himself. He thought he could handle the spell as the player stated and expanded on what the player asked of his own volition to prove a point, which was his failure.
POSSIBLE SPOILERS
It's an interesting time for this conversation, since there's a movie in theaters at this very moment that provides some guidelines on massive-reality altering magic. If you're a Demi-god or a giant monster, you can accomplish more with a wish than a mortal wizard, however brilliant, and with fewer consequences. That seems like it should give DMs and players a decent frame of reference going forward.
It is not a capstone ability of the wizard in any way. It is a spell that would have to be learned or discovered like any other spell. Also, most DMs would generally require the spell caster to go on a grand quest to discover/learn how to cast Wish. Also, it is not something only just for spell-casters, as non-caster classes can cast wish either through magic items or scrolls, or meeting powerful entities that grant them wishes.
Also, the infinite simulacra "exploit" (which suggests a problem only for people who should be playing video games instead of table-top RPGs) can simply be shut down by the DM, and most do. Also, at least in AL play, and in other guidance, the simulacrum is considered to be the original caster for purposes of the Wish spell. So, if the simulacrum were able to cast Wish and it used it to duplicate the Simulacrum spell, since the spell states there can only be one active duplicate of "you," the simulcraum would end up destroying themselves to create a new simulacrum--so you would waste a Wish spell to end up right back where you started. And, of course, the original caster could use Wish to cast the Simulacrum or Clone spells in the first place (perhaps if they lacked the material components or the time to cast the regular versions of the spell) since Wish is specifically allowed to duplicate spells of 8th-level or lower. And, many archmagi in published adventures DO have a simulacrum or clone (sometimes they have many, many clones, such as in the latest adventure), but they do not need to use a Wish spell to create either. As for a lich, they cannot create clones of themselves since clones must be of living creatures and liches are undead. Technically, a lich should not be able to create simulacra either since the spell only work on beasts or humanoids, and liches are of the undead monster type.
Since it can recreate spells without needing material components, what are some spells where that would be useful?
Resurrection is the only one coming to mind.
The most 'unbelievable' wish I ever saw in a game was actually given to me printed up on two sheets of paper, in fluent 'legalese' in an attempt to plug every single potential loophole or exploit possible, and I think this was all 'cause someone wanted what amounted to 'all the best stuff' for the party, so a Vorpal Sword, Staff of the Magus, Hammer of Thunderbolts, all the big name stuff. So, there was a clause that it was spontaneously created instead of stolen, appeared motionless instead of in mid-air flying at someone's neck, etc, etc.
That was when I decided, y'know what, this is ridiculous. From then on, Wishes operated like every other spell; it did what you wanted it to do, provided it was within the spell's capabilities, and if you tried to go beyond the spell's capabilities, it just went *pfft* and was wasted, like any other spell when you try to make it do something it can't. No loophole abuse, no legalese ... no headaches. In 3e, at least. I'm pretty much in the 'wishes do not exist' camp anymore, because it's just too much trouble for too little payoff.
BTW, in the original genie myths, they didn't grant 'wishes', per se. You could command three tasks of them, and yeah they were magical beings with impressive capabilities, but they didn't have PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWER itty bitty living space.
The lack of material components is, I think, more a convenience than a big money saver... at tier 4, a 1,000 gp diamond isn't that big of a deal, is it? But you might not have the right material components on you. (Or any material components. And your hands are bound.) The real value of this is that suddenly EVERY spell below level nine, whether you have it prepared, whether it's even in your spellbook, whether it is even on your spell list, is available to you if you need it. Never thought you'd need control weather, aren't carrying around "incense and bits of earth and wood" as a result? You can still do it the one time you really need to. Actually, being able to cast resurrection AT ALL as a Wizard? Nifty. And you don't have to worry about whether you have whatever material component you need. I think a lot of campaigns handwave away material components (you have a component pouch, you have what you need), but if not, this is an important technicality to keep the DM from saying "you didn't pick up 'pinch of powdered iron,' so you can't use your wish to create an antimagic field."
Have yet to see WISH used in a game, and the game I am DM'ing will be some time before anyone reaches a level to gain it. Having said that, I am not a big supporter of the WISH spell. I will be noodling over whether it should be part of our campaign, frankly.
EDIT: Although, having now read Nebuchidnezzar's response above, I will follow those guidelines, should I ever actually encounter a situation to adjudicate Wish.
I think DMs can tend to be too harsh on players using Wish. If you’re running a game where a character has access to Wish from the beginning, you’ve already messed it up. Wish is a reward for long-term engagement in the DM’s story — it’s ceding part of the authority over that story to the PCs. In that sense, it’s the ultimate flavor spell; Prestidigitation on steroids. You should not have DM’d your way into a situation where a character’s controlling player is feeling compelled to use Wish to break the boundaries of the world you’ve created — good DM’ing would nudge them towards using it to achieve their character’s ultimate personal goals. Basically, if your players are trying to use Wish to lazily cheat or be jerks, it’s because they haven’t gotten invested enough.
There’s a reason the Wish mechanic of Avengers: Endgame was so compelling. It was all the trouble the characters had to go through setting up an elaborate, multiple-layers-deep time heist just to get the power to MAYBE fix their greatest failure that had such an impact in that story. Basically, I’m of the opinion that if your PCs have made it through all the trials and tribulations you threw their way, all the obstacles you placed to getting the degree of omnipotence that Wish provides, you owe it to them to have at least one freebie to show that their efforts payed off.
To state an opinion, you examine all the different options on the table in depth and being at first totally unbiased towards any of those, only THEN you proceed to explain why, you would choose a specific one.
The article consists of a short recap of Wish history, how it worked before 5e, and extremely superficial treatment of 3e: Exp loss is not just marking down a number... only a terrible Dm would simply do that. Exp is literrally your character's knowledge, if you cast a wish spell, and lose knowledge, it means your character loses memories(temporarily) and combat, social, magic etc... abilities. Exp comes from quests, combat and social encounters, so a Wizard that loses knowledge might lose spells he learned recently, memories of recent events or even capabilities if he loses a level.
If he had examined more in depth, and THEN compared it to 5e saying, "In my opinion being tired cause of the spell's great power flowing through my body is more epic than losing knowledge or memories" i wouldn't have answered with as much spite and just politely diagreed. But he didn't.
"The Experience point cost from 3rd edition is gone, and the “wish fatigue” present in 2nd edition and earlier returns with a burning vengeance, but only if you use wish to create a wholly original effect."
The spell reads "The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect other than duplicating another spell weakens you." So the fatigue doesn't just occur with an original effect, it also occurs producing any effect other than duplicating another spell. Thought I'd point it out so you can fix it.
I wished for my penis to grow back after it was bitten off by a troglodyte a few campaigns back.
Duplicating the effect of the seventh level spell Regenerate, totally legit!
There was a spell in older editions (or maybe just 2nd, I can't recall at this point, been too long) called Permanence. The entire function of the spell was to make another spell effect permanent.
I understand that in this edition, and the way magic 'works' that permanence as a concept for magic is extremely powerful (and always was really, but hey, they had a spell for it!).
Now I know that some spells have an actual description included in them to make an effect permanent, but those spells are very limited (for obvious reasons, as partially indicated by the above comment on the 5e power scaling of spells), but...
Thoughts on using Wish to replicate the concept of a Permanence spell to make a spell effect permanent?
Note: the spell effects that could be made permanent were not instant effects like fireball or meteor storm, but such things like a limited enchantment like invisibility, or haste, or an area effect that has a time limit, etc.
If I were GM and a player asked, I'd probably allow it, but only for those spells that had the stipulations about making their effects permanent. Anything else is probably getting into the realm of unspecified effects for the Wish spell.
Where is this strange rule from about how one should state an opinion? You sure did not follow it when stating your own opinion. No one is required to examine alternative opinions, or even give a reason for why they hold their opinion. You seem to be confusing a news analysis with an opinion piece.
And, whether or not Mr. Haeck failed to follow your imaginary rules about giving an opinion does not justify your behaving like a rude jerk. Just because someone writes or says something you disagree with is not an excuse for you to behave poorly.