"If you want to deny his Wish, you could twist his wording and make it so that he can cast all his spells at will - but only at some poor bloke named Will." I actually love this more than my words can describe. It disables a wizard if he can only target people named Will, though he can use a second use of the ring to correct it, leaving him with only 1 use to hopefully, use wisely.

If you really want to mess him up give him a town Willington where everyone is called Will, and make him think he can cast all his spells at "Will" as he had intended until his wishes are used up... <insert evil laugh>

However, you have to be really careful. If they wisen up about how to work wishes, you're going to have a glorious momentary scene where the ultimate bad guy of all time goes pale and gulps because they cast a second wish to bestow upon him the name of Will.

Only being able to target someone named Will is great. If you want to go for a more classically evil Wish interpretation, you could have the Wizard lose access to any spells that aren't cantrips. Then he would, by definition, cast all of his spells at will.

Or have the wizard lose access to all spells, because then he can (vacuously) cast any known spell at will.

Another, less problematic twisted interpretation, is to simply do nothing. a) characters already cast spells at their own will as a matter of fact (just subject to mechanical limitations); b) they already can cast spells at someone named Will -- just like at anyone else.

@SamaraMarkcosian if your looking to disable a wizard let him cast all his spells at will, then remove every spell thta isn't a cantrip from his spell list. At least poor will get's a rest.

Another fun twisting: when the he tries using this new ability, he finds thathe can cast all of his spells at once. Not any of his spells he chooses, as he is likely imagining. Though if feeling generous the DM could also just let the wizard skip preparing spells.

he can target Will with all of his spells, even those that normally only have a range of self or require a willing target... I see what you did there.

@dwizum that pun actually wasn't the point XD I guess my subconscious is making up puns automatically at this point :D

@Upper_Case I like that one, especially if it expends all of his spell-slots at once. It basically gives him an "all-or-nothing" attack once per long-rest, the DM can roll to decide which spells hit - and it includes buffs too! Imagine accidentally giving the Boss that you're fighting Invisibility, Fly, and Haste...

@Upper_Case that's gonna be fun for druids or clerics, who know all of their class's spells (#twohourslater). Unless of course you limit it to prepared spells, but that would still be 4 (with a level 1 char with +3 casting stat) up to a few dozen spells depending on the character level ^^

@CortAmmon I would expect two wish spells cast in coordination to majorly alter the outcome of any combatwhen targeted at a single BBEG.

My twisted interpretation would be more along the lines of allowing any currently prepared spell to be cast at will once. That's it. As soon as it is next cast that spell is back to being the usual memorize regurgitate forget. No extra spell slots, just what he has currently prepared at the time of the wish will stick around for an 'at will' casting without having to prepare it. This nerfs the over-powered wish, but still roughly gives them what they want so the player doesn't feel they are being completely cheated by an asshole DM.

@pluckedkiwi that would also be a balanced solution, but I don't think that the phrasing "at will" really allows for this interpretation. Being able to cast a spell once for free is very different from being able to cast it at-will, which is an existing term used to describe e.g. cantrips. Besides, Wishes are very powerful - it's good to adequately educate your players about their use. Learning from mistakes is very memorable, and ideally, the DM only teaches the player a lesson without permanent consequences, so that the Wish was merely wasted without an additional negative impact.

+1 although my "evil interpretation" would be that he has to cast all his spells. Like, literally each and every one, all at once.

Just interrupt all the "Will" word twist theorising: I doubt the wizard character will say "I want my spells to be at will". Would an actual in-universe wording be more like "I want to be able to cast my spells without having to wait and recover". Or something along those lines. The "at will" wording is how the mechanics separate the spells into categories.

@VLAZ sure, if the player phrases the wish like that. If he uses the "at will" phrasing (which btw also makes sense in-world, it's not like D&D invented the term), however, then this is a valid interpretation, and the DM can only twist the words that the player actually used. He (or she) can't assume some in-world translation of the players words and then twist the translation.

the you can already cast spells at will is supported by the wording of contrips which specifies they can be cast at will AND that they don't use a spell slot. so they are not hte same thing.