#3 of 8 specialist wizard playbooks I am currently working on is now available for your perusal and feedback.

#3 of 8 specialist wizard playbooks I am currently working on is now available for your perusal and feedback.

#3 of 8 specialist wizard playbooks I am currently working on is now available for your perusal and feedback.

I present to you, a draft for The Abjurer


Thanks for taking the time to look. Feedback is welcome!


6 thoughts on “#3 of 8 specialist wizard playbooks I am currently working on is now available for your perusal and feedback.”

  1. Invulnerability Sphere feels kinda meh.  I have to choose 2 damage types when I take the move, and then spend level-ups to expand these?  And magical versions are right-out?  If I specialize in defensive magic, I want to be bad-ass at defense.

    I’d go much bigger, but still make them plan ahead.  Maybe like this:

    “When you spend some time (an hour or so) attuning your personal defenses, pick two of the following damage types and roll +INT.  On a 10+, hold 3 protection. On a 7-9, hold 2 protection. Spend 1 protection to negate one instance of that type of damage that you would suffer. 

    On a miss, hold 2 protection but the GM will choose one of the damage types picked. Your sphere is ineffective against that damage type.

    Maybe add that you get +Armor equal to protection, or just that you have +1 Armor while you have protection.

    Edit: Just saw Punishing Defense.  Nice.  I’d recommend an advanced move that lets you deflect such damage, or store it for later, or that turns it a fireshield-like effect that hurts others who try to harm you. 

  2. OK, critique on most of the other moves.  Obviously this is all just my opinion, take it with a grain of salt, etc.  I think you’re hitting the key ideas of what an abjurer should be able to do… mostly I’m quibbling with the details of implementation.

    I didn’t like Magical Defender at first, but I really like it the more I think about it.  Maybe add a line about having to tell us what it looks like when you spend hold?

    In general, I don’t see the need for the “-1 ongoing to cast a spell” limitation. I assume they’re meant to apply to the various abjurer moves, right?  But why?  I’m giving up offense & proactivity for defense & reactivity.  Just seems like a needless penalty.

    Armored… Not a huge fan of wizards-in-armor.  An abjurer strikes more as the aikido-master of magic: peaceful, serene, prepared.  Having magical defenses makes more sense to (like the +Armor from Invulnerability Sphere).

    Counterspell… Could you make it more broad, like Defy Danger?  “When you weave magic to deflect or dispel magic, roll +Int. On a 10+, it’s like you say. On a 7-9, the GM will offer you a hard bargain, lesser result, or unfortunate consequence.”

    Warding… hard to picture what the “complication” would be.  What I went for in my own hack is that when you draw a ward against something, pick 3:  It can’t enter the warded area // It can’t leave the warded area // It’s senses can’t pierce the ward // It’s magic can’t pierce the ward.  Then on a 7-9, the GM decides (in secret) which one of the three didn’t work.

    Shared Sphere… if you take my advice above, I’d recommend that there still be just 1 pool of protection shared between you.  Maybe word it so that you can spend 1 protection to simultaneously protect both of you?

    Banish… Strongly dislike the option of “will not seek revenge on you.” Like, if I banish Orcus and choose that one, he isn’t going to seek revenge on me?  Fat bloody chance.  Also not sure about the other choices. Like, I sorta see how the dynamic could work to raise tension, but it’s kinda opaque.  How about: On a 10+, you immediately banish it from this reality for now. On a 7-9, it resists your spell, becoming locked in a battle of wills with you. You may try again or relent, your call.

    Imprison… nice!  But maybe make the 10+ result basically the same as the forcecage spell (can’t cast a spell and it can hear your thoughts, but otherwise indefinite). 

    Arcane Lock… the description (“magical magnetism”) makes me think it’s a pretty weak force.  Which makes me think it’s not very useful.  Maybe make the language stronger if that’s your intent? 

    Forceful Dissipation… I really like this one.

    Sheltering Sphere… maybe describe the fictional triggers or limitations? Like, how big is it?  Is it imobile? Do I need to etch some runes or something? 

    Forever Imprisoned… maybe make there be some requirement other than (or in addition to) the permanent debility?  Like the victim’s true name, a drop of their blood, their prized possession.  Ooh! Maybe this is the abjurer’s Ritual… tell the GM what you want to imprison for all time and he’ll tell you “sure, you can do that, but…” and pick 2-4 things.  (Minor: maybe Eternal Prison would sound better?)

    Other Stuff… maybe some sort of contingency spell?  I guess Invulnerability Sphere sort of gets at this, but something where you can say “if X happens to me, it’s gonna be all sorts of bad for whoever did it.”

    Also, some sort of nondetection/protection from scrying spell would be sweet.  Though you might work that into Warding. 

  3. Jeremy Strandberg Thanks so much for all your feedback. I am definitely appreciative. I’ll certainly be making some changes based on what you’ve said. Thank you again for taking so much time to look at this. Would you mind to take a look at my Spectrumancer and Conjuror sometime? Let me know if you need any links. Thanks!

  4. Jeremy Strandberg How about something like this:

    [  ]Contingency

    Set a condition and a magical response, then discuss it with the GM. The GM will tell you the requirements to set it up. For example “When I die, use Eternal Imprisonment on whatever killed me.” The GM may require a ritual of some kind or special materials to cast the Contingency. The Contingency is set up until you spend time to change it. You may only have one contingency at a time.

  5. Yeah, that’s the sort of thing I was thinking. Maybe play with the wording a bit, but definitely sound concept.  I like the fact that it’s a ritual (i.e. meet these requirements and it’ll work) rather than a roll.

    I’ll try to take a look at the other specialists later this week.  I’ll let you know if I can’t find them.

  6. Thanks Jeremy Strandberg I have drafts for Casters from each of the casting schools except Necromancy so far. I’ll be posting them over time as I get the others fixed up. Will try to refrain from overwhelming the community with my playbooks all at once.

    I’ll work on the wording for Contingency a bit more. It’s a solid idea and harkens back to the days of olde. Thank you for the suggestion.

Comments are closed.