The wizard found an innocent I looking wand, and we decided that it sometimes casts a spell normally, sometimes augments it and sometimes causes trouble. I don’t want it as extreme as a Rod of Wonder, or the d1000 libre of random spell effects. Any suggestions?
The wizard found an innocent I looking wand, and we decided that it sometimes casts a spell normally, sometimes…
The wizard found an innocent I looking wand, and we decided that it sometimes casts a spell normally, sometimes…
You just decide as a GM in accordance with your principles?
Sure! I just like hearing the outpouring of genius which often happens here.
When you try and harness the power of the innocent looking wand roll+ INT.
10+ It casts the spell and Augments it in some way, Choose:
The spell’s effects are maximized or
The spell’s targets are doubled
7-9 It casts the spell as expected, though you either:
Draw unwelcome attention or put yourself in a spot.
On a Miss, The wand disturbs the fabric of reality as it is cast, the GM will tell you how.
That’s the way I started thinking, but I want to avoid replacing the cast a spell roll or duplicating the effects of that move.
I also looked through the Vornheim magic effects d100 table, but it’s a bit OP for this. I might make a move which just leverages the ranges above 10.
When you cast a spell through the Belch of Arsalon, on a 12+, the spell works so much better than normal. On an 11, it works as expected. On a 10, roll d12 and consult the table of random nonsense.
Oooh Oooh, I know!
When you cast a spell through the Belch of Arsalon, roll 2d6 +d6 INT(best)
on a 10+, the spell works so much better than normal, tell us how.
On a 7-9, it works as expected.
On a Miss, roll d12 and consult the table of random nonsense.
I just don’t like rolling twice for every spell. Especially when you roll a 6- but still “cast the spell”. It gets weird.
Sub
Tim Franzke I intend the move to be triggered by the casting roll, not cause another. I think Nathan Roberts intended it to replace the casting roll, which is also cool.
It’s meant be a gamble.
When you cast you roll an additional d6 and use that one to determine what happens?
1 – better effect
2 – slightly different effect that is still beneficial
3-4 nuthn
5- slightly worse effect
6- it goes totally bonkers
?
When you cast a spell through the Belch of Arsalon, roll 1d6+1d8 instead of 2d6. Whenever the number showing on the d8 is 7-8, the GM chooses one:
– The spell is augmented. They’ll tell you how.
– The spell works as normal, and it has unintended consequences. The GM will tell you what.
This move overlays the wizard’s Cast A Spell move.
The advantage to this move is that it’ll cast a spell as normal more often, but when it does, the result is absolutely out of your hands as a player.
GMs use the first option to give players a boost. Maybe augment the spell’s effects (increased damage etc.), maybe the spell is AP, maybe it gives a +1 forward to an ally.
Use the second option to make a hard move with the wand as leverage on fictional positioning. It teleports an orc at your face, take damage. It creates a crack in the floor, revealing a lower level, announcing future badness. And so on.
You can refine the move more. On a 7, the player chooses a boost from the list. On an 8, the GM chooses. Or if you don’t want the wand to be more effective use 2d6, and on the second die, make it 5 and 6.
Alternately, here’s an interesting one that scales over time:
Take a chart of random spell effects, ordered from minor at 1 to major at 18. When you misfire with the wand, count down the list to the number you just rolled, cross it off, and have the effect happen. Skip the crossed off numbers as you count, resulting in gradually increasing effects.
Travis Scott has it with taking a clue from the Barbarian!
rereads
Argh.
When the d8 shows a number higher then the d6; might be easier. Just taking the Barbarian wording.
Ha! Great minds think alike! I was thinking about the Barbarian, too!
When you cast a spell using the Seemingly Innocent Wand as focus, roll 1d6+1d8 instead of 2d6. Follow the results from the Cast A Spell move, and in addition:
– on a 12+, the spell is augmented in power or scope, the GM will tell you how.
– If the d6 scores higher than the d8, the wand’s weird magicks escape from your control. The GM will tell you what happens.
Some comments:
– Please note that these can take place at the same time (e.g. Both dice come up with a 5, and the character has +2 INT); it’s intended!
– The 12+ result is not at all uncommon on a d6+d8, in my experience.
– For the “Trouble” part, I’ve left it very loose intentionally it might be that it attracts unwanted attention, it might be that it tears the fabric of reality asunder. It’s definitely possible to provide more guidance in the move, or constrain it somehow. One could even tie the worse effects(tearing the fabric of reality asunder) to a 6-.
Random musings:
If you want the wand to be VERY troublesome, you could say that the trouble happens when the d8 is higher than the d6. This will mean that almost every use of the wand will bear trouble, though. It’d be possibly less disruptive than it would be on the barbarian, as your mage could always choose not to use the wand, but then why give it to them in the first place? Unless you tell them they can learn to master the wand, and propose a Compendium Class to them!
(Ok, now I’m thinking of cool moves for the class. If you’re interested I’ll write something up!)
That might actually be how to do an instinctive magic user…
When you cast a spell with the Wand of Obnubilation, use dice with two different colors. Take the lower number of the two, count it off from the list, skipping crossed out numbers. The effect takes place and is crossed off.
If the light die is lower:
1. A spray of twinkling lights dazzles the target
2. The target of the spell is compelled to skip and hop until it wears off.
3. You feel lucky: use 1d6+1d8 for your next roll.
4. The caster’s voice is charmed; “listening to that beautiful voice” can be used as leverage until it wears off.
5. The target becomes as light as a feather until the spell wears off.
6. The spell’s effects are doubled, whatever that means for this particular spell.
7. These spell lists reset.
8. The next person to touch you is struck with awe and is unable to harm you until it wears off.
If the dark die is lower:
1. The spell fizzles, smokes, and sparks
2. Metal butterflies appear, jangling loudly
3. You turn invisible and inaudible for a few minutes.
4. Your feel your luck drain away, use 1d4+1d6 for your next roll.
5. The target switches place with their shadow
6. The spell goes horribly right
7. The spell opens a gateway to an unpleasant place
8. Permanent spells become temporary, temporary spells become permanent.
Hmmm, this is getting all rather convoluted. I like simple. What about?
When you cast a spell through the Belch of Arsalon, roll to Cast Spells
* On a Hit if you roll Doubles, the spell is augmented in some way: the spell works so much better than normal, tell us how.
* If you roll singles – Hit or Miss – the spell works as expected.
* On a Miss, if you roll doubles the spell miscasts in some crazy fashion, the GM will tell you some random nonsense.
That’s why I come here all the time: To watch everyone brainstorm. Awesome work. These are all great. I think the doubles idea should yield the most tolerable probability, and reminds me of DArpg stunts. I printed out the Net Libram of magical effects and will just cross out anything too crazy or boring as I go. Yay!
When you Cast a Spell **using the Belch of Arsalon and roll doubles on a hit, the spell works much better than expected; describe how. When you roll doubles on a miss, the wand casts its own spell as described by the GM.
Less words fit on the loot card better yay
Ooh, what’s the image of the wand on the card?
None on the original. Maybe I should ask Edward Baueris what it should look like.
I have the impression doubles might be a bit rare, but then again, maybe I just don’t notice double results coming up. Whatever suits you best 😀
Would you mind if I worked on my proposal, and created a suite of wand + compendium class? I’d credit you with proposing the original idea and starting the thing, of course.
Alberto Muti That sounds great! Just for background, the name of the wand comes from the loot cards on Jason Morningstar’s Slave-Pit of Drazhu adventure. The original description left it a mystery, but he has since given it the ability to shoot Fire Oil in World of Dungeons.
Our first use of the thing made a 1HP zombie explode into paste, painting the room, but I warned the player that the next use might be dangerous or simply fart, as was eponymously appropriate.
Go forth and create something great, but give it a new name, I reckon!
I was thinking of a new name already: mind if I mention you? Horam sounds like a legit fantasy wizard name (this would be in addition to proper credit, not in substitution of course ^^).
I might even submit it to Mondo Sotterraneo, the Italian DW Fanzine.
Alberto Muti OMG I AM WIZ-ARD YES PLZ
.,.PS No, I don’t mind. That would be fine, thanks.
🙂
Alberto Muti With 2d6, doubles should occur 1/6 of the time, which seems reasonable.