D&D 5E Wish and the requirement removal

[Maxperson]

I disagree that those are the types of requirements the wish spell is intended to refer to. I think casting time and components are the extent of what is intended (and a perfectly reasonable limitation at that).

Unless Crawford wants to chime in, we can only guess at what was intended. By what is written, the portions I am pointing at qualify.

By your interpretation, the DM would need to rein in so many spells when cast as Wish.

That's a player problem, not a wish problem. If the players are constantly getting ridiculous with it, that's a player issue. If they get reigned in more than a couple times and don't figure out that they need to limit themselves more, that's a player issue.

 

[fearsomepirate]

That's the area of effect, not a physical requirement inside the spell such as the object in teleport. The area of effect of teleport was unaffected. It remains 8 creatures or 1 object in range.

The requirement that an affected object be inside the area of effect is still a requirement. If you're going to take an expansive reading of "requirement," such that you no longer need line of effect, the target need not be the sort of creature specified, you don't need to see the target, you don't need to be on the same plane, etc, there's really no limit. The most powerful warrior in the multiverse is powerless against somebody who can cast Heat Metal on him from across the planes. Any Demon Lord can easily be destroyed by a few 17th-level wizard casting an 8th-level Disintegrate at him.

 

[Maxperson]

The requirement that an affected object be inside the area of effect is still a requirement. If you're going to take an expansive reading of "requirement," such that you no longer need line of effect, the target need not be the sort of creature specified, you don't need to see the target, you don't need to be on the same plane, etc, there's really no limit. The most powerful warrior in the multiverse is powerless against somebody who can cast Heat Metal on him from across the planes. Any Demon Lord can easily be destroyed by a few 17th-level wizard casting an 8th-level Disintegrate at him.

You're late to the party. We already handled the "ridiculous player requests" part of this.

 

[fearsomepirate]

You're late to the party. We already handled the "ridiculous player requests" part of this.

I've read the whole thread, and no, you haven't. You've argued that the rules as written erase the definition of a valid target for a given spell, replace it with "anything the player can name," and allow the player to use it this way without any penalty whatsoever, limited only by the DM intervening to stop them from using the RAW. Your subsequent argument that the DM just shouldn't let them use it RAW if he finds it "ridiculous" is an argument for ad-hoc house rules, not rulings.

What we have here is a vague rule, and an argument over what it means. When interpreting a text, it's useful to assume the author isn't insane. Sure, oversights happen, but if the meaning is really "every spell may be targeted at everything and anything, no limits, no penalties," then "oh naughty word, that means you can blast Orcus with Disintegrate despite him being nowhere near this plane!" isn't an "oversight" so much as "the author is nuts."

Seems much more plausible that the "requirements" referred to are the requirements to be able to cast the spell: VSM components, costly reagents, casting time, class levels, preparedness, etc, and don't also imply, "and every target you can think of is now valid."

 

[Maxperson]

Your subsequent argument that the DM just shouldn't let them use it RAW if he finds it "ridiculous" is an argument for ad-hoc house rules, not rulings.

That's actually RAW. The rules tell the DM to ignore or change the rules when they don't make sense. Besides, I don't play with children, so childish wishes like dropping the moon on an enemy simply aren't going to happen. If you have to go to the absurd to try and prove an argument wrong, you've lost.

What we have here is a vague rule, and an argument over what it means. When interpreting a text, it's useful to assume the author isn't insane.

Agreed. It's also good to assume the players aren't insane, either and will try to wish for things that are within the reasonable parameters of a 9th level spell.

Seems much more plausible that the "requirements" referred to are the requirements to be able to cast the spell: VSM components, costly reagents, casting time, class levels, preparedness, etc, and don't also imply, "and every target you can think of is now valid."

If that's what was meant, they would have said so. It would have been very, very easy to just say, "There are no components required for these spells." They used "requirements" for a reason.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Okay, I'll give it a shot. It all makes sense if you use the literal, common English definition of the word "requirements".

If a spell quite simply cannot occur without a certain thing, that thing is a requirement for the spell.

If the spell can happen without a certain thing, but not in the form or effect that you'd prefer, that thing is not a requirement - it's a limitation.

Quoting for emphasis.

 

[fearsomepirate]

That's actually RAW. The rules tell the DM to ignore or change the rules when they don't make sense. Besides, I don't play with children, so childish wishes like dropping the moon on an enemy simply aren't going to happen.

Drop Moon isn't a spell from 1st through 8th level.

If you have to go to the absurd to try and prove an argument wrong, you've lost.

You're the one who said Teleport can be used on a planet, not me. If you have to resort to special pleading to argue why your interpretation that Wish expands every spell to infinite extraplanar range, allows it to target anything of any size, visibility, creature or object type, etc, isn't absurd, your interpretation becomes infinitely less plausible. You have to do better than, "Well mature players wouldn't actually use it the way I say it can be used."

Agreed. It's also good to assume the players aren't insane, either and will try to wish for things that are within the parameters of the spell.

You've argued that the total removal of any limitations on target validity is within the parameters of the spell. A sane player would immediately notice that means you can blast things in the Abyss from your dinner table, because everyone in this thread immediately noticed that, and no more than half of us are insane.

If that's what was meant, they would have said so. It would have been very, very easy to just say, "There are no components required for these spells." They used "requirements" for a reason.

And if what was meant was that you could zap Orcus with Disintegrate without being on the same plane, they could have said "neither you nor your target need to meet the requirements of this spell." But they didn't. So they probably didn't mean that you can use Locate Object on something you've never seen or cast Scry across the planes.

 

[Maxperson]

Drop Moon isn't a spell from 1st through 8th level.

Clearly you aren't reading the thread like you claimed. Someone here offered that up as a teleport spell example under what I am saying.

You're the one who said Teleport can be used on a planet, not me. If you have to resort to special pleading to argue why your interpretation that Wish expands every spell to infinite extraplanar range, allows it to target anything of any size, visibility, creature or object type, etc, isn't absurd, your interpretation becomes infinitely less plausible. You have to do better than, "Well mature players wouldn't actually use it the way I say it can be used."

Yet more proof that you aren't paying attention.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Clearly you aren't reading the thread like you claimed. Someone here offered that up as a teleport spell example under what I am saying.

And you never gave any explanation for why that's invalid RAW, just that you think it's immature and your players are too grown-up to do that.

Yet more proof that you aren't paying attention.

Your words:

Physical requirements = must be able to fit entirely inside a 10-foot cube and can't be held by an unwilling creature. Both requirements. Both physical.

Wish waives ANY requirement in the spell, physical or otherwise. So you the caster don't need to meet the requirement of an object having to fit in that cube.

ANY means ANY. You didn't say that ANY requirements on the target are removed EXCEPT ones you think are immature (and where is that in RAW?). Also, "you the caster don't need to meet the requirement of an object having to fit in that cube" is really bizarre, tortured verbal construction. If you have to resort to such clumsy phrasing to explain why "You don't have to meet the requirements" means "and neither does your target," maybe you're just misreading the spell.

 

[Maxperson]

And you never gave any explanation for why that's invalid RAW, just that you think it's immature and your players are too grown-up to do that.

They are and it is. And it's invalid because it's taking the rules to an absurd extreme. Do that and you've lost. Give me a reasonable example and we can discuss.