This exact thing happened in one of our first campaigns. A wizard simply tried to cast TAB on another PC. Instead the he Air turned into Destroy and Transform in a radius of 100s if miles permanently, right over the center of the Empire we were trying to save. It was one of the most memorable and exhilarating moments in all our time. It led to many new campaigns as we tried to recover from the loss of the Empire’s core, as well as to campaign where we tried to end the magic. So when I read your statement above, I’m all, like, “awshum!!”
1 Like
I’m with Kublai on this one. The WoM isn’t a campaign ender, it’s a campaign starter. My own example is when a character tried to summon an undead sorcerer so he could learn sorcery, ended up summoning a lesser deity, and now we’re trying to find an army to go fight the thing. It was an intense session
I gotta say, whatever facets you had, that’s a pretty terrible interpretation. I mean, with destroy air personal and 100s of miles, I’d go with a horrifying storm centered on the PC. Or a couple other concepts, but game destroyer would be low on my list. That said, first thing I’d say after announcing the spell effect would be, “so, how do you guys think this affects the sitch?”
EDIT: ninja’d twice over…
1 Like
Eldritch Shield.
I was lucky enough to test out a caster at Gen Con, and even with the loss of Will dice, Tax was a bigger issue for the wizard than trying to pass the test, especially with FoRKs allowed.
Eldritch Shield.
The same eldritch shield that has an Ob 4 to get a 1D shield? Granted you can prepare that ahead of time in situations where you think you’ll be in danger later on, but if you run into your archnemesis at the local Starbucks on a lazy Sunday morning you can either cast Eldritch Shield or just White Fire your opponent. After all, they both have the same chance of success or of demon summoning. Sure, there’s a good chance of also frying the barista or the guy pretending to work but really just showing off the latest Airbook, but that’s the way things go sometimes.
I definitely agree with Peregrine here… in the previous revision, Sorcery can get some crazy, obviously OP results, but in this revision, it’s almost suicidal to be a sorcerer. Maybe if the OBs could be just a little lower, so that spells intended for combat don’t have a 1/4 chance of failure and therefore a 1/12 chance of disaster. Maybe there could be a margin of failure with no chance of disaster or just a mechanism to reduce the 1/3 chance of disaster when a spell flubs.
I don’t think there should be less margin of failure. I’m fine with them failing. I however am not a fan of the random failure results.
We only had garbled transmission once in BWR. The group were in the Big Bad’s newly completed tower. The comedy wizard failed his spell and he ended up destroying magic for an instant.
We’d already established that the evil Mordak had been supplementing regular construction with his magic. But the tower was mostly done before he’d moved in.
So the tower started to collapse. From the top with them inside.
This was a major set-back for the villain but the players suffered it too!
We’ve never seen an unwanted summoning.
When a wizard fails to cast in BWG and the DoF does not give a summon or garble is there any other consequence for failure or just the tax?
I’ve thought about letting Sorcery benefit from preparation through the use of Circination - in the same way that a Summoner can prepare a gate circle. Effectively this is "patiently"x10 as the circle can take a while, but I do like the flavour and it means that big magical workings require a lot of time and security (which can give other people interesting, related, things to do).
Sorcerers have plenty of low obstacle spell options.
No, nothing but Tax at that point.
That’s pretty generous really.
I mean imagine if you needed to roll a 1 or 2 on the DoF to invoke the enmity clause or introduce a heavy time based complication.
Well, I’d suggest not using White Fire, then. Shards is quite useful. The Fear is still a good option. And heck, that’s why you always keep a good shiv or truncheon on hand. When magic is a smidge too risky right now, because you don’t want to incinerate yourself or innocent bystanders and solidify your reputation as a villain, just smack a bitch. Then the twat at the bar can go back to reading his airbook.
I definitely agree with Peregrine here… in the previous revision, Sorcery can get some crazy, obviously OP results, but in this revision, it’s almost suicidal to be a sorcerer. Maybe if the OBs could be just a little lower, so that spells intended for combat don’t have a 1/4 chance of failure and therefore a 1/12 chance of disaster. Maybe there could be a margin of failure with no chance of disaster or just a mechanism to reduce the 1/3 chance of disaster when a spell flubs.
Well, if you’re too concerned to give 'er a go in play, and absolutely need a house rule of some form, then why not say a sorcerer can spend a persona to roll two DoFs, and may take the more choice result, or two persona to roll three. I think three is a little excessive, but it’ll get the job done. Or yes, make the DoF results instead the MoF results. Fail by more than 4, and terrible consequences ensue. Anyway, that junk belongs in sparks. I think things work fine as is.
What is really needed is a quest to retrieve the fabled Staff of the Magi. +3D to Sorcery!
The Eldritch Channeler from the Magic Burner is a good example! I would recommend that items that give +3D be tied to particular spells (e.g., a Wand of Firefan or Chaos Ward Gem), but that’s just my personal preference.
Is there anyone who’s actually played a new BWG sorcerer that has any issues?
Dro rolled two unwanted summoning results in one playtest. The ghouls ended up fighting over his sorceress’ soul.
Pics or it didn’t happen!
I absolutely agree with the second paragraph quoted above. Magic should be flavorful, IMO, not just “death with a different name”. However, I also believe it shouldn’t just be “sneak with a different name” either, or the ‘renaming’ of any other skill. Magic should feel unique and special, mystical and incomprehensible. I’ll likely be limiting access to some skill-enhancing spells in my upcoming campaign, as well as writing plenty of my own additions.
Which is, of course, fine. If you don’t like a rule, change it! Especially with stuff like magic. Magic falls under the “setting” category. Anything setting-related can be changed quite easily to suit individual campaigns. Don’t like random effects of spell failure? Ditch the rule! No harm done.
Personally, I like the random effect tables, but with one caveat: random effects should only result from direct PC actions, and the players should be generally knowledgeable of the inherent dangers of the actions they are performing. For example, take the random encounter tables from old school D&D. Used incorrectly, they can ruin campaigns. But when used in response to PCs taking deliberately risky actions – such as venturing out into dangerous wilderness – they can create a lot of tension, while keeping the GM completely impartial. If you get jumped by a panther in the jungle, it’s not because the GM was trying to be a dick. Nope, he’s just as interested in telling a good story as you are. You fell victim to a random table because you took a risky action.
The Magic Wheel is similar. It’s very impartial. In the Burning Wheel setting (and I know the books don’t have a definitive setting, but there is a strongly implied one), magic is risky. It’s different from magic in many other RPGs. This is flavor, and it’s pretty good flavor at that.
As for random tables resulting in TPKs … if the random table was used correctly (rolled on at a relevant time, when the PCs took a risk with full knowledge of what they were getting themselves into), what’s the problem? If a random table is used correctly, it can only serve to benefit the campaign. TPKs can happen with planned encounters too. Perhaps the only time this fails is when a random table is poorly written, but I think the Magic Wheel is fine.
I just want to point out that Chameleon is not just Sneak-by-a-different-name. Check out the special ability is also provides after the “In addition…”.