Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Arkhandus" data-source="post: 3664702" data-attributes="member: 13966">And that is your problem.&nbsp; You reject any kind of objective measure of balance and broken-ness, and only accept a rare few particular classes/creatures as broken without any logical reason why you ignore the other ones that also cause great problems.&nbsp; You will never accept that anything is broken, unless it fits your extremely narrow definition of broken-ness as &quot;anything that duplicates or resembles Pun-Pun.&quot;&nbsp; It is impossible to have a rational discussion with you as long as you reject anything less than Pun-Pun as being broken.And Wish isn't broken, since it normally incurs a heavy cost.&nbsp; Dweomerkeeper is broken because it ignores the standard, built-in balancing costs of existing spells.&nbsp; Infinite free Wishes really can do some significant stuff.&nbsp; And within the rules as written, most uses of Wish will not cause any adverse side-effects for the caster.&nbsp; Especially if he words things a lot less stupidly than &quot;I wish for a mountain of gold!&quot;Any caster with an Intelligence of 19+ should have the intelligence to word a Wish properly so as not to suffer wierd, unfortunate consequences when he's staying within the normal boundaries of the spell's limits.&nbsp; By the rules, he only suffers nasty consequences if he tries to Wish for something beyond the normal limits of Wish.&nbsp; Houseruling it differently does not change the actual printed rules, so a houseruled version does not prove that X or Y is, or is not, broken.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Arkhandus, post: 3664702, member: 13966"] And that is your problem. You reject any kind of objective measure of balance and broken-ness, and only accept a rare few particular classes/creatures as broken without any logical reason why you ignore the other ones that also cause great problems. You will never accept that anything is broken, unless it fits your extremely narrow definition of broken-ness as "anything that duplicates or resembles Pun-Pun." It is impossible to have a rational discussion with you as long as you reject anything less than Pun-Pun as being broken. And Wish isn't broken, since it normally incurs a heavy cost. Dweomerkeeper is broken because it ignores the standard, built-in balancing costs of existing spells. Infinite free Wishes really can do some significant stuff. And within the [B]rules as written[/B], [U]most[/U] uses of Wish [I]will not[/I] cause any adverse side-effects for the caster. Especially if he words things a lot less stupidly than "I wish for a mountain of gold!" Any caster with an Intelligence of 19+ should have the intelligence to word a Wish properly so as not to suffer wierd, unfortunate consequences [I]when he's staying within the normal boundaries of the spell's limits[/I]. By the [B]rules[/B], he [I]only[/I] suffers nasty consequences if he tries to Wish for something [I]beyond the normal limits[/I] of Wish. Houseruling it differently does not change the actual printed rules, so a houseruled version does not prove that X or Y is, or is not, broken. [/QUOTE]

Verification