D&D 5E Wish: additional 9th level slot

[jmucchiello]

Just because it isn't in the DMG list of magic items, doesn't mean it cannot possibly exist.

I'm more curious about folks saying spell slots don't exist as an in game construct. People who study magic know they can cast two first level spells between eight hour rests. This is quantifiable. (At least in 3E with the extra slots for high spell casting ability, the quantity was possibly less consistent between different spellcasters.) Not only can it determined, but it is consistent among many spell casters. Those wizards, sorcerers, clerics, and druids who can cast spells of 2nd level, when first able to, can only do it twice per "day". It is consistent. How is it impossible for spell slots to be part of the in-game world?

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

This kind of wish is a naked power grab by one player, at the expense of the other players who'd be over-shadowed by such a spell caster.

I'd take a dim view at such player behavior. No ruling would be necessary.

 

[Ace]

This kind of wish is a naked power grab by one player, at the expense of the other players who'd be over-shadowed by such a spell caster.

I'd take a dim view at such player behavior. No ruling would be necessary.

Are your player's highly oppositional to each other like in Hackmaster or something ? Generally if the wizard got an extra spell slot this benefits everybody not just him.

Typically D&D parties are cooperative with the occasional exceptional of the evil PC or an all evil party. All for one, one for all is part if the ethos. Also even in 5e spell casters tend to outpace everybody else at that level anyway so one more slot won't matter.

 

[Ace]

You don't wish for a spell slot. You wish for a pearl of power of 9th level. Must harder for that wish to be twisted. (Not impossible, but the fact that you can lose the pearl should make it a wash.)

GM's who feel the need to twist the wish spell, not including demon or djinn wishes of course, really ought to ban the wish and spell entirely from the game. This way they don't have to be opposed to the players or act as opposition and can get back to the more neutral arbiter role of judge or dungeon master which IMO here works better for lasting fun.

Truth be known the way people tend to play D&D it probably should be level capped like B/X and most of the troublesome spells removed anyway. Far too many DM's lack the mastery to handle high level play and while they could get that mastery, the interest isn't there.

5E headed in the right direction trying to create a D&D where the content gets used instead of just read but it seems the high level stuff isn't much in use and could be replaced by stuff people actually will use.

Heck I suspect something like the old Epic 6 D&D third variant is better suited to real play than high level D&D. The players will have a chance to use most of the stuff they have and DM's will have a much less steep learning curve.

Its not really D&D without those high level options but if very few are using them, why bother with them?

 

[Ace]

A 22 ability score won't destroy the game. That doesn't mean that a DM should necessarily allow it one to successfully wish for it.

In my current game, the wizard character merged with the fallen God of Secrets (essentially Vecna). It gave him a number of strong benefits, including +1 Int for every level he gained thereafter. He's now 20th level with a 30 Int. He's absurdly strong, but I can still challenge him.

None of the above is necessarily a reason to allow wish to increase ability scores. Personally, I would allow increasing ability scores with wish, but only at a risk. However, I feel that a DM would be perfectly justified in ruling that permanent benefits like this are beyond the scope of a wish.

This is not directed at you in any way especially since you seem quite comfortable with high level play but your post gives me a good opening.

Its just its not possible for player's to wreck a campaign only to behave in ways that take away others fun. Lost of fun can be had with high powered characters even outright silly Monte Haul stuff and a D&D game with extra 9th level spells and power galore isn't a bad game. Its just different.

Its helps to understand that the player's actions are the story and the crazy antics they do are why you are there not your DM PC's or storyline.

Too many DM's these days fear wrecking the game worlds story which absurd. If you care about story integrity and control go write fiction or go play a computer game. Otherwise enjoy the crazy and be happy your groups cares/.

Also its not like you can't you know ask a player to dial it down or to give the power back. Good DM's are good communicators

Other ways to fix troubles include making the world a parallel world or just saying "there was once an age of wild magic. That is no more." for the next game and setting new limits.

Its easy to get control of a game.

Lastly. D&D especially the current edition is a fantastic game but it isn't for everyone and its options are crying out to be used.

Now I love grittier play and If you are a DM's with no interest in high level play or in my case have players who lack of interest in gaming long enough character development and leveling, why not play something else like Savage Worlds or whatever that suits the groups needs better. There here are tons of games for grittier play that are not D&D many like D6 System free and legal to download

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Are your player's highly oppositional to each other like in Hackmaster or something ? Generally if the wizard got an extra spell slot this benefits everybody not just him.

Typically D&D parties are cooperative with the occasional exceptional of the evil PC or an all evil party. All for one, one for all is part if the ethos. Also even in 5e spell casters tend to outpace everybody else at that level anyway so one more slot won't matter.

That power boost is a 9th level slot. Ninth level. Look at the wizard capstone. Look at what the player is trying to grab.

Ho ho, no, it does not benefit the party at all. It's one player attempting to lord it. And if allowed, the other players would want power boosts too causing all manner of problems. Not to mention all the Liches and Archmages would have thought of this millennia ago.

Nah, it's a problem player situation. It's anti-immersive. It's gaming the system. I for one wouldn't entertain it.

[Edited]
A key indicator I use is 'resentment'. Will adding something to the game cause resentment? Resentment is a red warning flag that something needs fixing.

Now when I DM I want to concentrate on stuff like building plot, challenges, social dynamics, consequences and cool rewards.

This suggested change to the game adds zero of that. It's purely meta to the narrative. What I think the player really wants is a 21st+ level power - the 'Boon of High magic' which grants another 9th level slot. So, my response to a hypothetical player request is:

'Get to 20th level, then earn another 30,000xp. Then it's yours.'

 

[Fanaelialae]

Just because it isn't in the DMG list of magic items, doesn't mean it cannot possibly exist.

No, but it does place it firmly in the purview of the DM. If you wish for a regular Pearl of Power IMC, I won't turn it down, though there could be unintended consequences. OTOH, if you wished for a 9th level PoP my response would literally be, "sorry, that's not a thing".

IMO, a PoP that allows you to recharge a 5th level slot is the most powerful that should probably exist as a magic item. Hence, a PoP that allows you to recharge a 9th level slot falls somewhere between artifact and impossible. My reasoning for this is that spells above 5th level are heavily regulated in 5e, with abilities like Arcane Recovery written so as to not allow the recovery of such slots. Someone (I think in a different thread) distinguished spells below 6th level as being low magic while those above 5th level are high magic, and that really struck a chord with me. You can gain more low magic quite easily, but only the most powerful (epic) mages can acquire additional high magic (via the epic boon). This is why a custom PoP tops out at 5th as far as I am concerned.

 

[jmucchiello]

I don't understand the folks who think having a 2nd 9th level spell slot would be catastrophically unbalancing. The main effect of having a 2nd 9th level spell, I think would happen, is the player would be more willing to unleash their first 9th level spell compared to PC who doesn't have a 2nd one. That's a minor concern to me. Not party breaking.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I think the issue is less about "is this going to break my game?" and more about "is this something I think mortal magic should be able to do?"

Personally, the reason I have rules for how it works is that I house rule away that ridiculous 33% chance you can never cast the spell again crap (or rather, I change the loss to "a year and a day"). If I were playing it RAW I would let the spell do a whole lot more, since you are only ever going to get a few castings.

 

[prabe]

I think the issue is less about "is this going to break my game?" and more about "is this something I think mortal magic should be able to do?"

Personally, the reason I have rules for how it works is that I house rule away that ridiculous 33% chance you can never cast the spell again crap (or rather, I change the loss to "a year and a day"). If I were playing it RAW I would let the spell do a whole lot more, since you are only ever going to get a few castings.

That's a reasonable houserule. If I remember it, I might well implement it.

I think a different issue is, if it's possible, why isn't everyone doing it? It doesn't seem likely that the PCs are the first people to see whatever exploit they're looking to use, if it's real. If you allow one PC to use Wish for a second 9th-level slot, then it seems to me as though there should logically be other wizards who have wished for that, and maybe a third, or a fourth, etc.