Quick question regarding the infamous "efreeti wish" loophole...

[Segev]

Sounds like a very good reason not to drag gangsters into your home and then ask them for things to me

(Particularly not immortal gangsters who hate servitude and are all members of an always-LE planar mafia.)

If a game has a spell that says, "Drag an immortal gangster into your home and ask him to do things for you," but casting it always results in him killing me and torturing everybody I care about, I tend to think that spell is a waste of word-count.

[Psyren]

If a game has a spell that says, "Drag an immortal gangster into your home and ask him to do things for you," but casting it always results in him killing me and torturing everybody I care about, I tend to think that spell is a waste of word-count.

You can bind plenty of other things besides hateful immortal gangsters, so writing off the whole spell just because you can't get wishes out of it seems odd to me.

[Segev]

You can bind plenty of other things besides hateful immortal gangsters, so writing off the whole spell just because you can't get wishes out of it seems odd to me.

Strikes me as odd to have hateful immortal gangsters who are designed with a power that expressly is useful mainly to those who bind them.

But oh well. We've already determined that we disagree and aren't persuading each other.


Though again, I'm concerned that the only reason you apply this argument to efreet and not to other things that planar binding can call forth seems to be that efreet can cast wish. "Hatred of servitude" isn't enough to justify a difference between a "reasonable" and "unreasonable" demand, not with the other kinds of creatures that exist out there.

Your argument seems to be more fishing for an excuse to make the denial without house ruling the denial in, rather than actually based on an unbiased reading of the RAW.

[Beheld]

Your argument seems to be more fishing for an excuse to make the denial without house ruling the denial in, rather than actually based on an unbiased reading of the RAW.

You just now figured that out? That's literally the only thing he's ever posted in his entire life.

For god sakes, Psyren's offical position is that if you make an Ice Assassin of an Imprisoned Efferti instantly Frees the Efferti.

[daremetoidareyo]

Strikes me as odd to have hateful immortal gangsters who are designed with a power that expressly is useful mainly to those who bind them.

But oh well. We've already determined that we disagree and aren't persuading each other.


Though again, I'm concerned that the only reason you apply this argument to efreet and not to other things that planar binding can call forth seems to be that efreet can cast wish. "Hatred of servitude" isn't enough to justify a difference between a "reasonable" and "unreasonable" demand, not with the other kinds of creatures that exist out there.

Your argument seems to be more fishing for an excuse to make the denial without house ruling the denial in, rather than actually based on an unbiased reading of the RAW.

That's how interpretation works. I happen to agree generally with psyrens' opinion based on the same loose strands of reasoning. Just because it is an inconvenient counterpoint doesn't mean it's manufactured entirely to spite this exact internet argument. Efreets are no different than rods of wonder: get ready for derails.

[Beheld]

Just because it is an inconvenient counterpoint doesn't mean it's manufactured entirely to spite this exact internet argument. Efreets are no different than rods of wonder: get ready for derails.

But the fact that it is manufacture entirely to spite this exact internet argument does in fact mean it was manufactured entirely to spite this exact internet argument.

Which it was.

[daremetoidareyo]

But the fact that it is manufacture entirely to spite this exact internet argument does in fact mean it was manufactured entirely to spite this exact internet argument.

Which it was.

Asserting it doesn't make it true.

[Beheld]

Asserting it doesn't make it true.

No, but since it was already obviously true to anyone with a brain before this conversation ever started, who cares?

[Segev]

Asserting it doesn't make it true.

Er, normally I agree with this rebuttal, but the last several posts made the case, not merely asserted it.

It's not worth arguing with any vehemence over, though. I just dislike what I see as a biased inconsistency.

[Deophaun]

Nope, sorry, the full context of this relates back to Psyren's claim that no amount of "and I'll do this for you, too" would ever make it a "reasonable" request, because the Efreeti hate servitude. And it's automatically servitude because you used planar binding to call them, and the threat is all you have with planar binding, because the offering side of it doesn't change things. It's always unreasonable, all the time, because you used planar binding.

And Psyren is, surprisingly, 100% correct. Well, actually, 99.99% correct.

See, there are always exceptions, and an infinite number of efreeti means there are also an infinite number who are ok with servitude. There are even an infinite number that enjoy it and the debasement that comes with it. The trick is, if you leave it up to planar binding to randomly pick one, you're going to be angering a very large population of efreeti before you ever find someone who's happy about the arangement, if you ever do. What you need is the name of a specific efreet that likes being bound and forced to do another's bidding. You need to find a sub.

It shouldn't be too terribly difficult. An efreet like that very well may want his name out there. You just need to visit the right taverns and explore a different kind of dungeon.

[Segev]

I simply don't agree that the phrase "hates servitude" means they're immune to planar binding. By that logic, any NPC can be, because they are individuals and they hate servitude. The spell may as well not exist; you won't find anybody who doesn't "hate servitude" because, well, the DM doesnt' want you to have the spell but he won't say so so is making this universal exception up. But he isn't, because that's just how it is; why would you think otherwise?

Really, I just think you have to acknowledge that the problem is in the fact that wish can grant unlimited-value magic items, and that Candles of Invocation are improperly priced. Then house-rule those problems away, as they are easy to specifically identify and fix.

After that, planar bind that efreet. Deal with the risks. By all means, run it as risky and tricksy; three exp-free wishes out of a much lower-level slot should come at risks and costs. But not at "nope, you can't do that" hidden behind things that aren't really there. If you want to say "no," just make efreeti unable to do it. Or have more HD. Or tell the player not to do it. You just aren't allowing it. Don't pretend it's all there in the manual that you can't actually do it despite the rules saying you can.

[daremetoidareyo]

And Psyren is, surprisingly, 100% correct. Well, actually, 99.99% correct.

See, there are always exceptions, and an infinite number of efreeti means there are also an infinite number who are ok with servitude. There are even an infinite number that enjoy it and the debasement that comes with it. The trick is, if you leave it up to planar binding to randomly pick one, you're going to be angering a very large population of efreeti before you ever find someone who's happy about the arangement, if you ever do. What you need is the name of a specific efreet that likes being bound and forced to do another's bidding. You need to find a sub.

It shouldn't be too terribly difficult. An efreet like that very well may want his name out there. You just need to visit the right taverns and explore a different kind of dungeon.

This is perfectly rational.

Chances are that psyren agrees with most of this, but would prefer less tavern and dungeon for crackpot planar librarian and truenamer rescuequest (the crossbow didn't cut it). But yeah, you don't get to handwave the dealing with extra planar critters especially if the text and fluff related to them is explicitly encouraging punitive implications open to interpretation. I mean, you're already reading the monster mechanics, keep reading till you get to less obvious low hanging fruit than the malicious efreet wishgranter.

[Deophaun]

I simply don't agree that the phrase "hates servitude" means they're immune to planar binding.

They are not immune to planar binding. They get called just like the rest of 'em and forced to sit in a tiny circle while they are at your complete mercy. It's also not the only thing about them that causes friction when you planar bind them. When you state:

By that logic, any NPC can be, because they are individuals and they hate servitude.

You are ignoring their entire personality and culture. Also, you're ignoring formians. And modrons. But that's another thing entirely.

It's not that you cannot get an efreet to do what you want through planar inding. It's that you have to work to get an efreet that will do what you want through planar binding. Heck, when I did this with a glabrezzu, I interrogated a quazzit and a succubus first to find the name of one that wouldn't be missed to avoid many of the potential issues mentioned here. Then I called him, killed him, turned him into a Corpse Creature, and Commanded him. Dread Necros got wish, baby!

But if you just planar bind blindly, you should have no expectation that you will get what you want.

[Anlashok]

I don't really quite get that interpretation of reasonable. Whether or not something is reasonable seems mostly independent of the creature. Especially its mental state.

It's reasonable that I try to keep my house clean. That I intrinsically and fundamentally hate doing the dishes and sweeping the floors doesn't make it less reasonable, it just makes me lazy.

[dascarletm]

See, there are always exceptions, and an infinite number of efreeti means there are also an infinite number who are ok with servitude. There are even an infinite number that enjoy it and the debasement that comes with it. The trick is, if you leave it up to planar binding to randomly pick one, you're going to be angering a very large population of efreeti before you ever find someone who's happy about the arangement, if you ever do. What you need is the name of a specific efreet that likes being bound and forced to do another's bidding. You need to find a sub.

Nitpick:
Just because there is an infinite number of efreeti does not mean there is an infinite variation of efreeti.
The same line of logic would say that if you have an infinite set of 1's some of those will be 2's.

Not that I disagree with you per-say, just nitpicking... sorry.

[Beheld]

I don't really quite get that interpretation of reasonable. Whether or not something is reasonable seems mostly independent of the creature. Especially its mental state.

It's reasonable that I try to keep my house clean. That I intrinsically and fundamentally hate doing the dishes and sweeping the floors doesn't make it less reasonable, it just makes me lazy.

It's really easy. See first you have to claim that XP less Wish isn't a problem for balance, then you have to make up whatever lies you have to tell to get to that conclusion. And if you have to claim that Ice Assassins have 1/day SLA Freedom, because they refuse to serve you even when the thing they want to kill is Imprisoned and the only way to get it is to serve you, and that all commands of any kind are unreasonable, then that's what you have to do.

[Deophaun]

I don't really quite get that interpretation of reasonable. Whether or not something is reasonable seems mostly independent of the creature.

Easy test:

Is it reasonable to demand a plumber perform brain surgery?
Is it reasonable to demand a neurosurgeon to perform brain surgey?

You are asking the same thing of two different people. Reasonableness absolutely is dependent on the creature.

Nitpick:
Just because there is an infinite number of efreeti does not mean there is an infinite variation of efreeti.
The same line of logic would say that if you have an infinite set of 1's some of those will be 2's.

Not that I disagree with you per-say, just nitpicking... sorry.

While true in principle, I hang this on the implication of the "Always X alignment means 95%" general rule which I am likely misquoting.

[dascarletm]

While true in principle, I hang this on the implication of the "Always X alignment means 95%" general rule which I am likely misquoting.

I'll counter with alignment having no bearing on willingness to be subservient. (Maybe lawful, but you could still have lawful people that don't want to be subservient.)

[Deophaun]

I'll counter with alignment having no bearing on willingness to be subservient. (Maybe lawful, but you could still have lawful people that don't want to be subservient.)

True again. However, the subservient part is also part of package that includes being cruel vengeful, which a LG efreet would not be.

But it's more that if something literrally made out evil or good can go against their fundamental nature, an efreet has a much lower bar to clear to change its personaliy.

[Psyren]

Strikes me as odd to have hateful immortal gangsters who are designed with a power that expressly is useful mainly to those who bind them.

But oh well. We've already determined that we disagree and aren't persuading each other.


Though again, I'm concerned that the only reason you apply this argument to efreet and not to other things that planar binding can call forth seems to be that efreet can cast wish. "Hatred of servitude" isn't enough to justify a difference between a "reasonable" and "unreasonable" demand, not with the other kinds of creatures that exist out there.

Your argument seems to be more fishing for an excuse to make the denial without house ruling the denial in, rather than actually based on an unbiased reading of the RAW.

I get where you're coming from with that assessment, but I don't see it that way. I apply this ruling to Efreet in particular because I believe the designers included such singular language in the Efreet entry for that very purpose. They could have easily wrote instead that "Efreet respect strength and will gladly co-operate with anyone strong enough to subjugate them" or text along those lines, or even just left their attitudes blank beyond their alignment and hatred of Djinn; they did not.

As for other wish-granting monsters, they generally contain similar caveats. You quoted Deophaun, who brought up Glabrezu - they include helpful lines like "Like succubi, glabrezu tempt victims into ruin, but they lure their prey with power or wealth rather than passion" and "The demon can use this ability to offer a mortal whatever he or she desires—but unless the wish is used to create pain and suffering in the world, the glabrezu demands either terrible evil acts or great sacrifice as compensation." It's therefore quite easy to imagine that a wish that does none of these things - such as one for a general-purpose magic item with no caveats or restrictions on its use - would be viewed as unreasonable.

[Cosi]

I thought the discussion of this point ended when we pointed out to Psyren that Noble Djinn exist, and can also grant your wish for a overpowered magic item. Or did I forget how Psyren broke the rest of the system to stop that from happening?

[Psyren]

I thought the discussion of this point ended when we pointed out to Psyren that Noble Djinn exist, and can also grant your wish for a overpowered magic item. Or did I forget how Psyren broke the rest of the system to stop that from happening?

Psyren didn't break anything; you're quite free to attempt to bind djinn until you find a noble one.

[Cosi]

Psyren didn't break anything; you're quite free to attempt to bind djinn until you find a noble one.

Oh, right. Because Noble Djinn are a subset of Djinn, you can't call for one. Despite the fact that you can call for an Efreet (which are a subset of Genies, and outsiders, and "creatures you can call with planar binding", and creatures). So you didn't break anything per se, your interpretation is just insane.

EDIT: Can someone point to one of Psyren's interpretations that is unambiguously (or even ambiguously) better for the game than not doing that? Because I seriously can't think of any.

[Florian]

Oh, come on guys, that can´t be too hard to understand. Any rules instance that incorporates the "Fluff" into hard rules turns said fluff into said hard rules and that is that. The moment we start to discuss what "reasonable" means is the moments we should notice that things have gone wrong somewhere...

[Psyren]

Oh, right. Because Noble Djinn are a subset of Djinn, you can't call for one. Despite the fact that you can call for an Efreet (which are a subset of Genies, and outsiders, and "creatures you can call with planar binding", and creatures). So you didn't break anything per se, your interpretation is just insane.

How so? Efreet have their own separate entry and are explicitly different creatures. Noble Djinn don't have an entry, and are furthermore explicitly described in the rules text as being part of the Djinn population (1%). The MM is quite clear.

[Cosi]

How so? Efreet have their own separate entry and are explicitly different creatures. Noble Djinn don't have an entry, and are furthermore explicitly described in the rules text as being part of the Djinn population (1%). The MM is quite clear.

And Efreet are not part of the Genie population because...

Seriously, none of your arguments are good. Every single thing you say to make wish not work makes something else stupid. You've turned ice assassins into unstoppable terminators, broken planar binding two different ways ("nothing is reasonable" and "you can get any random creature with a shared descriptor"), and demanded that settings not include anything larger than a large town (the largest settlement with a GP limit that precludes purchase of a Candle of Invocation). You should sit back and consider that your position is totally insane.

[Florian]

And Efreet are not part of the Genie population because...

Seriously, none of your arguments are good. Every single thing you say to make wish not work makes something else stupid. You've turned ice assassins into unstoppable terminators, broken planar binding two different ways ("nothing is reasonable" and "you can get any random creature with a shared descriptor"), and demanded that settings not include anything larger than a large town (the largest settlement with a GP limit that precludes purchase of a Candle of Invocation). You should sit back and consider that your position is totally insane.

Sorry, Cosi, he did give voice to the fluff that comes with those spells and raised concern about what that could mean. Things are simply not as clear cut as some people make them out to be.

[Cosi]

Sorry, Cosi, he did give voice to the fluff that comes with those spells and raised concern about what that could mean. Things are simply not as clear cut as some people make them out to be.

How is this an argument for Psyren's position? He's broken like five different things (ice assassin, city sizes, 3.0 -> 3.5 conversions, planar binding creature selection, planar binding service selection) in an effort to prevent one thing from being broken. Regardless of how you feel about interpreting things, Psyren's methodology is objectively worse than the alternative.

[Florian]

How is this an argument for Psyren's position? He's broken like five different things (ice assassin, city sizes, 3.0 -> 3.5 conversions, planar binding creature selection, planar binding service selection) in an effort to prevent one thing from being broken. Regardless of how you feel about interpreting things, Psyren's methodology is objectively worse than the alternative.

*Shrugs*

There is no position there. All the things mentioned share one thing in common: They are open interpretation. That´s about it.
To use your own words: Anyone who argues against that is a liar.

For me, Psyren makes some good points, but ultimately they are just that: Points in an argument about spells that are worded pretty badly and each gm has to find a means to make them work when they come up in actual play.

[Psyren]

And Efreet are not part of the Genie population because...

Djinn != Genie.

Seriously, none of your arguments are good.

Your opinion is noted.