Would you play a character with this starting move?
When you unleash a spell from a wand, staff, rod or other magical container, roll+INT.
On a hit, the spell is cast.
On a 7-9, choose 1
– casting the spell from the container draws unwelcome attention
– Spend 1 charge of the container
Imagine things like a staff of magic missile (3 charges, 1 weight) to be used with that. The character would of course start with 2 or 3 such items.
Other characters can cast spells with this but it costs 1 charge (and maybe a roll too?)
10 thoughts on “Would you play a character with this starting move?”
Some further explanation.
My typical example of my problem with the Collector class is that a “Collector of magical staffs” can solve so many problems with their class move with just the same explanation every time.
The basic character concept however is cool right? A character traveling around the world and collecting magical artifacts to use. With the collector that is weird though, when they finally find the one artifact they were questing for they now have it, but it works differently then all their other staffs.
So the character would need to be based to interact with the way that the staffs/wands etc. work. They have a swiss army knife to deal with problems but it doesn’t have every tool imaginable.
Acquiring new staffs would not create mechanical dissonance as it slots directly into your class move and you would have advanced moves that would allow you to get extra uses out of spell containers.
How does that sound?
It would of course also imply that this thing is more common in your dungeon world, creating a specific type of fiction.
I think a character like who has run out of items with charges would have a very difficult time being interesting, unless that was a specifically bad spot they’re in for a while (like the fighter losing their weapon).
I think it’d be interesting basically having no control over what new spells you get, you could see some really neat things and have to adapt to them.
Less interesting to me than other versions of “cast a spell.” More options on the 7-9 would be more fun, and I would like a “on a hit the spell is cast, 7-9 choose 2, 10+ choose 1” especially if you add options like, “the spell’s effects are greatly amplified or diminished,” “the spell rebounds to additional target(s)” etc.
Kevin Farnworth that would be the problem yes. The same is true for archers too though.
Cool idea but just do it as a way magic works in the fiction for a regular wizard.
I don’t understand what you are saying Marshall Miller.
Sorry, the pulling spells from vessels or incorporating items into your casting is a cool detail but you could just as easily say use those details when the GM asks you what casting the spell looks like without adding an extra mechanical layer.
Well, you had a staff of magic missile. Now you make camp and suddenly you can cast fireball from a staff that magically appears but you can’t cast magic missile from your magic missile staff anymore? It creates fiction that isn’t consistent I fear.
You could have a move that recharges uses during downtime as an advanced or starting move, but requires other resources besides time. Perhaps some kind of strange resource the character must collect?
Blood, souls, precious gems and metals, emotions, memories, something it is interesting or dramatic for them to collect and use, encouraging them into interesting situations or sacrifices.
If your wand/staff/etc has 0 charges, can you no longer cast the spell or can you no longer pick the “spend a charge” option on 7-9? Can I get charges back?
I definitely like what the move implies fictionally. I imagine a world where little spell containers are a common part of daily life (at least for the well to do). And it begs the question of “who’s making all these wands?” Or “who made all these wands and why did they stop?”
Comments are closed.