If Wishes Were Gold, then Dead Bards Would be Fort Knox
So I've been thinking about how it's more common for people to use Wish as a meta spell to cast other spells than to, you know, WISH ... along with all the different comments people have made about the lack of utility of gold in 5e, and I thought that there might be a commonality on these issues that I had previously missed.
And if there isn't a commonality, I'm gonna create one! That's my superpower! To paraphrase the single best example of that Bard in your campaign, Air Supply....
I know how to make different things seem the same
I know all the rules and then I know how to break 'em
And that D&D is the name of the game
But I don't know how to stop these bad jokes
And I'll always be a know-it-all
And I can't stop myself from doing it...
Making meaning ....out of nothing at all
Out of nothing at all, out of nothing at all
Out of nothing at all, out of nothing at all
Out of nothing at all
Making meaning ... out of nothing at all
So I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the issues people have with this is related to the concept of the paradox of choice - the idea that an abundance of choice is not necessarily a good thing, and can cause anxiety and unhappiness and, on occasion, paralysis in terms of decision-making. (Okay, this concept is actually more nuanced than the popular version that's been presented, but it's close enough for horseshoes, hand grenades, and my essays).
A long time ago, in a D&D edition far, far away, I ran a campaign where I gave the party a "deus ex machina" magical item. Essentially, it was a "get out of jail free" card that could be used one time, and only one time, as kind of an unlimited-powered wish as a failsafe for the party. You may already know where this is going. The party had encounters. Characters died. There were numerous opportunities to "use" the magic item that would have saved the party untold suffering and grief.
But they didn't. Afterwards, the players told me that while it was a cool campaign and idea, they absolutely HATED having that one use magic item, because they always thought there might be a better use for it .... and then they felt robbed because they never used it! They would have preferred to not have it, and not stress about the perfect use of it!
Which is similar to how I always felt about wishes. ESPECIALLY in 1e. I mean, sure, it was nice to have the whole "use a wish to raise a score one point up to 16" rule that was fairly common. But other than that specific example .... the sheer limitlessness of the power in so many ways (except those ways, like ability scores, in which it was limited) made them nearly unusable - at least, for me. Even putting aside the caveat that powerful wishes tended to bring out sadistic DM interpretations, the nearly-unlimited scope of the wish made it less likely that I would use it. Which is why I think later editions specified more particular uses for the wish- after all, it's easier to select from a menu of choices, that to be told you can have anything you want.
I mention this because I was thinking about the different threads on gold and its uses (or lack thereof) in 5e. More often than not, there is a discussion (and/or argument) between those who want more detailed rules for spending gold, and those who argue that gold has so many uses you don't need more rules. Even with publication of more material (such as Tasha's) there simply doesn't seem to be enough uses under the rules to soak up all the gold in a standard D&D campaign- which is why you'll see suggestion for moving to a silver standard (for example).
Personally, I tend to fall in the camp of not needing rules for gold, as my campaigns always have uses for gold. This is most likely because I am used to campaigns that spend gold on things other than magic items, and I have rules and heuristics for doing so, and my players usually have well-defined goals for their PCs that involve the use of gold. And maybe the reason I have these heuristics is because I started playing long ago, when there were rules and goals ... for using gold!
But I'm putting it out there for general discussion. Is spending gold in your campaigns a big issue? Do you think that the best solution is to reduce the amount of gold (either by reducing the amount, raising prices, or move to a silver standard), or to have additional rules for spending gold that go beyond what we've already seen? Is the additional material we've seen so far sufficient, or insufficient, for the gold problem in your campaign?
So I've been thinking about how it's more common for people to use Wish as a meta spell to cast other spells than to, you know, WISH ... along with all the different comments people have made about the lack of utility of gold in 5e, and I thought that there might be a commonality on these issues that I had previously missed.
And if there isn't a commonality, I'm gonna create one! That's my superpower! To paraphrase the single best example of that Bard in your campaign, Air Supply....
I know how to make different things seem the same
I know all the rules and then I know how to break 'em
And that D&D is the name of the game
But I don't know how to stop these bad jokes
And I'll always be a know-it-all
And I can't stop myself from doing it...
Making meaning ....out of nothing at all
Out of nothing at all, out of nothing at all
Out of nothing at all, out of nothing at all
Out of nothing at all
Making meaning ... out of nothing at all
So I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the issues people have with this is related to the concept of the paradox of choice - the idea that an abundance of choice is not necessarily a good thing, and can cause anxiety and unhappiness and, on occasion, paralysis in terms of decision-making. (Okay, this concept is actually more nuanced than the popular version that's been presented, but it's close enough for horseshoes, hand grenades, and my essays).
A long time ago, in a D&D edition far, far away, I ran a campaign where I gave the party a "deus ex machina" magical item. Essentially, it was a "get out of jail free" card that could be used one time, and only one time, as kind of an unlimited-powered wish as a failsafe for the party. You may already know where this is going. The party had encounters. Characters died. There were numerous opportunities to "use" the magic item that would have saved the party untold suffering and grief.
But they didn't. Afterwards, the players told me that while it was a cool campaign and idea, they absolutely HATED having that one use magic item, because they always thought there might be a better use for it .... and then they felt robbed because they never used it! They would have preferred to not have it, and not stress about the perfect use of it!
Which is similar to how I always felt about wishes. ESPECIALLY in 1e. I mean, sure, it was nice to have the whole "use a wish to raise a score one point up to 16" rule that was fairly common. But other than that specific example .... the sheer limitlessness of the power in so many ways (except those ways, like ability scores, in which it was limited) made them nearly unusable - at least, for me. Even putting aside the caveat that powerful wishes tended to bring out sadistic DM interpretations, the nearly-unlimited scope of the wish made it less likely that I would use it. Which is why I think later editions specified more particular uses for the wish- after all, it's easier to select from a menu of choices, that to be told you can have anything you want.
I mention this because I was thinking about the different threads on gold and its uses (or lack thereof) in 5e. More often than not, there is a discussion (and/or argument) between those who want more detailed rules for spending gold, and those who argue that gold has so many uses you don't need more rules. Even with publication of more material (such as Tasha's) there simply doesn't seem to be enough uses under the rules to soak up all the gold in a standard D&D campaign- which is why you'll see suggestion for moving to a silver standard (for example).
Personally, I tend to fall in the camp of not needing rules for gold, as my campaigns always have uses for gold. This is most likely because I am used to campaigns that spend gold on things other than magic items, and I have rules and heuristics for doing so, and my players usually have well-defined goals for their PCs that involve the use of gold. And maybe the reason I have these heuristics is because I started playing long ago, when there were rules and goals ... for using gold!
But I'm putting it out there for general discussion. Is spending gold in your campaigns a big issue? Do you think that the best solution is to reduce the amount of gold (either by reducing the amount, raising prices, or move to a silver standard), or to have additional rules for spending gold that go beyond what we've already seen? Is the additional material we've seen so far sufficient, or insufficient, for the gold problem in your campaign?
Last edited: