1890: Caster's big toes become opposable like thumbs

February 4, 2022 2:44 AM

𝕱or 𝕯oubles 𝕵ubilee, let us all revisit the Net Libram of Random Magical Effects (PDF), still a D10000 table a DM can roll on for incredibly random wild magic surge effects, now available as a site where you can roll on it by just pressing a button. (Previously, in 2019)

As stated before, "𝕴n the game of Dungeons & Dragons, there is a type of spellcaster called the Wild Magic Sorcerer, who, when they use magic, might cause what is called a wild magic surge. Or, an ordinary sort of magic-user might roll a natural 1 when casting, and the DM might decide that's worth a wild magic surge for what some observers report as being 'fun.' And then there is the Wand of Wonder, a magic item whose entire purpose is producing wild magic surges. Good luck!"

Some (more) example results:
0046: Ants seems to course from the caster's eyes.
0534: Caster can teleport 10 times at will but loses a finger each time.
2143: Caster’s knees can bend forward and backward with equal ease.
4780: One of target’s arms is stripped to the bone but works normally.
4856: People often mistake the target for someone who gives a damn.
5062: Target asserts that he’ll die unless he destroys his magic items.
6426: Caster must save or d100 of his bones explode.
6612: Target runs 3 miles at top speed in a random direction.
6642: Target speaks only in an archaic dialect of his native language.
6897: Target’s allies can't look directly at him for 1d4 days.
7927: When target is next struck by magic, he teleports 1d6 miles.
9491: Next weapon nearby to draw blood makes its wielder smell horrible.

The last time this went up, Orrex, the creator of the table decades ago, appeared in the thread! Hey Orrex, in case you find this, thanks again for being really cool.

posted by JHarris (33 comments total)

The last time this went up, Orrex, the creator of the table decades ago, appeared in the thread!

What number gives that effect, I wonder?
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:03 AM on February 4, 2022 [7 favorites]

Be careful of what you roll for. You might get what you wish. Eris is a <redacted>. Hail Eris!
posted by zengargoyle at 4:22 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

Random Number Table. If you want to go hardcore back into the days of picking random numbers this large from paper and not computers.
posted by zengargoyle at 4:36 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

5413 Target can't be injured by wooden weapons while standing in snow

Not much of a D&D player, but I do enjoy random Nethack-style chaos in games and oddly specific magical impairments are my jam.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 4:54 AM on February 4, 2022 [2 favorites]

One I looked at earlier said “a slab, 1 x 4 x 9 appears,” but neglects to give units. Light years could be awkward….
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:33 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

One I looked at earlier said “a slab, 1 x 4 x 9 appears,” but neglects to give units. Light years could be awkward….

Depends on how close it appears.

"If target is wearing shoes, his feet become chicken’s feet. This lasts until they have attained fluency in one additional language."

The randomizer is listening to us.
posted by curious nu at 5:37 AM on February 4, 2022 [2 favorites]

One I looked at earlier said “a slab, 1 x 4 x 9 appears,” but neglects to give units. Light years could be awkward….

Among the various 2001:A Space Odyssey continuity books and movies, 1 x 4 x 9 black slabs are encountered in sizes from a meter-ish to 20 kilometer-ish along their longest edge, with the strong implication that larger and smaller monoliths exist, with "light years" not being out of the question. Although presumably, if they were anywhere within our galaxy, we would have noticed.

So, I'd probably go with three or four meters along the long axis if it happened outside, a meter or so inside, a few kilometers if we were in space.
posted by Xiphias Gladius at 6:24 AM on February 4, 2022 [2 favorites]

One I looked at earlier said “a slab, 1 x 4 x 9 appears,” but neglects to give units.

“That board with a nail in it may have defeated us, but the humans won't stop there. They'll make bigger boards and bigger nails. Soon they'll make a board with a nail so big it will destroy them all!”
posted by oulipian at 6:39 AM on February 4, 2022 [2 favorites]

Target obsessively pursues the one-armed man who killed his wife.

New campaign idea! Thanks, Libram!
posted by SPrintF at 7:09 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

Although presumably, if they were anywhere within our galaxy, we would have noticed.


Doubtful. The text of 2001 was clear that the monolith was very, very black. An interstellar-scale one would only be noticeable if it occluded something you happened to be looking at.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 7:11 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

I'm sorry, but this strikes me as being from the same sort of "fuck barrel" thinking that gave us the original Deck of Many Things, and which we've been moving away from in terms of game design.

(Short version - the original incarnations of D&D encouraged a certain pettiness in design which wound up meaning that if you rolled poorly or even just made a bad choice, you wound up in the fuck barrel for the amusement of everyone else. The argument was that it was "fair" because supposedly everyone would get a turn in the fuck barrel, but eventually designers realized that no, it's better if nobody winds up in the fuck barrel.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:15 AM on February 4, 2022 [4 favorites]

Most of the time the target of a spell is an enemy, though, right? Seems okay to put NPCs in a barrel for the party's amusement even if the barrel is on fire and rolling down a hill at them.
posted by straight at 8:33 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

So, I'd probably go with three or four meters along the long axis if it happened outside, a meter or so inside, a few kilometers if we were in space.

Clearly, you weren't playing D&D in the 70s/early 80s with your teenaged friends being assholes to each other as DM....
posted by GenjiandProust at 8:35 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

Most of the time the target of a spell is an enemy, though, right? Seems okay to put NPCs in a barrel for the party's amusement even if the barrel is on fire and rolling down a hill at them.

One, the point of the wild magic system is to make magic unpredictable, which impacts casters. I've seen DM advice to use such systems as a way to "balance" magic which is horrible advice.

Two, a lot of spells target either the caster or are intended to be used on characters the caster cares about (either of the P or NP variety.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:46 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

Caster is rumored to have participated in the murder of a deity.

I have questions:
1. How would this propagate?
2. Wouldn't it rely on having a recently-murdered deity handy? Or does it kill a deity and frame the caster, like a kind of pantheonic Noir?
3. Mostly, wouldn't this make the caster seem impressive?
4. It would be much worse if it is "Caster is rumored to have participated in the murder of the most popular person with 100 miles to have died in mysterious circumstances in the last 5 years."
posted by GenjiandProust at 10:05 AM on February 4, 2022

what if i want to get in the fuck barrel
posted by glonous keming at 10:18 AM on February 4, 2022 [6 favorites]

Caster vows to commit deicide before the end of the year.

God isn't dead... yet.
posted by Halloween Jack at 10:57 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

Re: fuck barrel, you're not wrong, but it's often not the right way to think of it?

If you emphasize with your character so closely that you hope greatly for their success and lament their failures, if you look at them as a special person, if you think of them as kind of like your child, then this probably won't be for you. Note: not all of these things have to be true, and there is nothing wrong with playing that way.

But there is often a point, and it could come early or later in a player's roleplay career, where you just want to play a fun character. Sometimes they make bad decisions. Sometimes you as a player know they make bad decisions, but you make them anyway. Sometimes this means your character dies. Sometimes you expect the character to die. For characters like that, the fuck barrel can be a lot of fun.

And then, there are the characters who are borderline. You don't think of them as D&D World You, and you don't think of them entirely as Dumb Person Who's Gonna DIE. For characters like that, the random list could present very interesting roleplay opportunities. Sometimes you can even take advantage of "curses" obtained that way.

The last time I posted this, I mentioned that, for the more lethal items, it might be a good idea to at least give the player a saving throw. Or, as the DM and the one who usually rolls on such a table, if such an entry hits a player, it might be a good idea to fudge it to sometime else. Sometimes as a DM you have to be able to read the room, to know what kind of game it is. Sometimes you have to let the chips fall where they may.

People play RPGs for lots of different reasons. If it's a hard-scrabble game where characters are all desperate and the odds are always stacked against them, a list like this is overkill. If you're playing Paranoia, there's probably a gun that can dispense 1d3 rolls on this table per round, and it'll usually be fired at the other players.
posted by JHarris at 10:59 AM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

In the IRC channel I still frequent, someone has long had a script that relates a scenario like these when someone types '!surge'.

... The number didn't match. The text also didn't appear in this document.

Is there *another* of these?!
posted by rubah at 11:14 AM on February 4, 2022

If you're playing Paranoia, there's probably a gun that can dispense 1d3 rolls on this table per round, and it'll usually be fired at the other players.

The thing is that's not what I mean by "fuck barrel" dynamics - Paranoia lays it out openly that everyone is out to get everyone else - including the game master. Fuck barrel mechanics are designed to randomly fuck over players for making reasonable decisions. The Deck of Many Things is a prime example of of this - it has more negative cards than positive cards, negative cards usually have little to no recourse, while positive cards often have their benefit hidden behind a negative effect (for example, one card grants a level - provided you win the next encounter in single combat.) Another example is the sphere of annilation in the Tomb of Horrors, hidden behind a carving of a head with its mouth open, with no warning.

This is a vast difference from creating a character built around fucking around, and ultimately finding out when the GM gets tired. Fuck barrel mechanics were designed to intentionally fuck players for just playing, and it's a good thing they're dying out.
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:38 AM on February 4, 2022 [2 favorites]

(Side note: Regarding Paranoia...I'm sort of responsible for introducing lawyers to Alpha Complex.

I am so very sorry.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:40 AM on February 4, 2022

At the risk of extending an un-fun derail.... My point is you don't have to use it as a fuck barrel. Its intended use, I'd say, is not as a fuck barrel. It's fun! It brings unexpected twists to the game! It gets players thinking about unusual things and their implications!

Our group has greatly enjoyed using this chart, used in moderation. You don't use it every time someone rolls a natural 1 on something magical; a 5% chance per magic use is way too common. You don't outright kill PCs with the chart unless it's that kind of game or that kind of character. There are lots of minor effects on the list that don't kill characters.

It can be fun as, as you call it, a fuck barrel, if it's that kind of game. That's why I brought up Paranoia. (Paranoia XP had its own mechanism for this kind of thing, in the form of player tics.) You can ruin a game with unthinking application of a chart like this. So don't do that.
posted by JHarris at 12:18 PM on February 4, 2022 [1 favorite]

I like the idea and think that it can be fun if used very selectively, but I don't like the list much because half or more of the effects aren't immediately perceptible. So either the DM announces a spoiler for something that will actually happen later (like "Next meal prepared by caster harms the sanity of any who eat it,") or it takes all the drama out of casting a Wild Magic spell in spite of the risk that something crazy or disastrous might happen and instead a Wild Magician is just someone that has random weird things happen around them all the time and they think, "Oh, that must be another side-effect of one of the twenty spells I cast this week."
posted by straight at 12:52 PM on February 4, 2022

Another example is the sphere of annilation in the Tomb of Horrors, hidden behind a carving of a head with its mouth open, with no warning.

This is were a Rod of Cancellation becomes fun.
posted by clavdivs at 1:33 PM on February 4, 2022

"fuck barrel" has aged about as well as this list has.
posted by tigrrrlily at 7:04 AM on February 5, 2022

Another example is the sphere of annilation in the Tomb of Horrors, hidden behind a carving of a head with its mouth open, with no warning.

Right? What use is a nine foot pole?
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 8:41 PM on February 7, 2022

It can be fun as, as you call it, a fuck barrel, if it's that kind of game.

This is where I think you're missing the point. A character designed around fucking around and subsequently finding out as the GM drops the hammer is by definition not in the fuck barrel, because the player is fully aware of this. The same goes for games like Paranoia, because it's made clear up front that the players and the GM are at cross purposes with one another.

No, the "fuck barrel" is about a player having their character fucked over, often to the point of unrecoverability, for taking an action that was reasonable, and without the player's consent. These sort of charts are often built in that spirit, creating a bunch of effects that can alter how a character is played drastically with no real chance to stop it. DMTuber Zee Bashew had a demonstration of one of the more infamous sorts of tables (the grievous injuries table) in his recent collection of clips - as well as what that sort of play does to a group these days, with Week 2 showing the GM all by himself.

You then point out that these systems can be "fixed", which is true - but also has problems. One, fixing these systems takes work - you have to look over the results and make sure that they are fair and not disproportionate, perhaps balancing a result or just getting another result if the first is too much. Which comes to the second point - why not just build and use systems that aren't designed to upend characters from the start? Your defense also illustrates another reason fuck barrel design went out of favor - the design would pressure people into accepting abusive play out of a sense of "that's how the game is", which in the long run drives people out of the hobby.

Fuck barrel design is toxic by its nature, and it died out because of that.
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:34 AM on February 8, 2022

Our group had a lot of fun with this table. It didn't get rolled on more than a few times in all. It gave us a lot of memorable and fun moments. I don't think it's a "fuck barrel" (a term I dislike) in it's proper use.

I think it has a place if the players agree it has one, and mine were enthusiastic about it, as a way to produce situations that would never come up in play otherwise. They are not always so enthusiastic about my ideas, so I'm pretty sure they weren't faking. That reaction proves there is a place in the world for this chart. That, of course, doesn't prove it has a place at your table.

I brought this back to the front page in the hopes that people would see the fun in it, and be responsible enough to use it appropriately. On reflection, it's possible the duration feature in the random roller is possibly partly to blame for reactions, since it often implies that events that would probably assumed to be of short duration are basically permanent? Or maybe my choice of examples were lacking--most of the effects are not that terrible.
posted by JHarris at 5:20 PM on February 8, 2022

Damn. This post is longer than my list.
TLDR: Thanks to everyone for the feedback, and I'm gratified that some still find my lists useful/amusing, even if others find them less so.

Lots to address here.

First, thanks to JHarris for being kind enough to remember me with a shout-out. Much appreciated!
Second, thanks also to everyone who has chimed in, because nearly all feedback is helpful, even when one's opinion of the list is less than glowing!
Third, I added the "duration feature" in an attempt to balance some of the more destructive Surges, in the interest of not torpedoing anyone's campaign world.

Now, onto the main course.

When wild magic was introduced, I really saw it as a cautionary tale, a sort of "What are you, crazy? Don't do that!" game addition. It was supposed to be dangerous and disruptive, and that's what appealed to me about it. In particular, I've always been fond of game mechanics that offer increased power for a (potentially significant) price. I accept that the game has evolved since then, but that's how I saw wild magic, and this potential danger remains its primary charm for me.

Since the beginning, most of the criticisms I've received have fallen into one of three categories:
1. The list is too powerful. I submit that this is because people tend to jump to the 0000 result, which is indeed quite potent on both lists, and they form an impression based on that result. I've done a number of tests over the years, sampling 10 or 50 or 100 or 500 results at random, and I found that very few actually result in the destruction of the game world. Most are fleeting, or relatively minor, or reversible, or even beneficial.
2. The list is too silly. A lot of it is, sure. Thanks for noticing!
3. The list will invariably lead to destruction because surges are too common. This criticism strikes me as the most interesting. The easiest way to address it is to reduce the frequency of surges. Don't like a 5% chance? Make it a 1% chance, or a .5% chance. That'll solve the problem right there, but it also reveals the real problem IMO.

Many of the discussions that I've read online reveal that players love surges, and they love causing them. There's nothing at all wrong with that style of play, but it probably means that my lists are a poor fit for that character or campaign world. Smaller lists can readily be found online, many of which offer lower power surges, or school-specific surges, or the like. These might work better in a world where a sorcerer likes to tempt fate 10 or 20 times per hour.

Regarding the fuck barrel, I think JHarris summed it up nicely:

A character designed around fucking around and subsequently finding out as the GM drops the hammer is by definition not in the fuck barrel, because the player is fully aware of this.

To put it in other terms, by way of a deep and ancient cut: "Shana, they bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say let 'em crash."

So if someone triggers a surge purely through random chance, then it seems to me that a good solution is to reduce that chance, as stated above. But if someone deliberately causes a surge, then I have little sympathy when their intestines teleport three feet to the left.

However, things evolve over time, and so it is with the list. I've been working for quite a long time on a new edition that expands the list to 30,000 results, with 1/3 affecting the caster, the target, or the area. There's also an additional 10,000 that affect a non-living target. Moreover, I'm expanding the "Duration Feature" to 1000 results, so that the GM can easily generate a terminating condition for a surge. Granted, the sorcerer may not immediately know what that condition is, but that's part of the fun. It's also not simply a table of 1000 lengths of time; it's a list of 1000 ways that the victim can undo the surges, which I hope will add roleplaying potential. Heck, this part of the list might be useful in counteracting curses not caused by wild magic, too.

I'm also adding a list of 1000 ways that the victim can delay the onset of the effect, so that they can happily go about their business as long as they don't do the one thing that will unleash the surge. So, for instance, as long as the sorcerer doesn't insult a goblin, she'll be fine. But when she does...

All of that stuff has already been completed, consolidating and adding to the two existing 10K lists. The last part that I've started on recently is a 4K list of very low-level surges, 1000 each for caster, target, inanimate target, and the area. These surges are very unlikely to disrupt a campaign, as most have a very short duration (a few rounds) or very small impact (e.g., a gentle breeze blows through the area). I thought it would be fun to create a cantrip-level list, but I suppose that it would work well for low level sorcerers in general, or for high level sorcerers triggering surges on low level spells. Still working on this part of the overall list.

One criticism that I have never found persuasive is that the list is too random. People seem to want a list of fire-based surges and water-based surges and divination-based surges and so on, and I encourage others to create such lists. It is, after all, a list of random magical effects. It is not a list of carefully curated situation-specific effects. Wild magic is like a box of chocolates, so let the sorcerer beware.

The whole concept IMO has a very "sorcerer's apprentice" vibe, in which even a seasoned practitioner is ultimately meddling with powers beyond their control. Or, to put it another way, "Do not call up what you cannot put down." If a character isn't willing to risk having their house launch into orbit, then maybe they're not ready for wild magic.

But hey, that's just me. I'd guess that about 11 out of 20 people really dislike my lists, and that's fine. I wrote them for the other 9.

Thanks for reading!
--Orrex
posted by Orrex at 7:47 PM on February 27, 2022 [3 favorites]

Thanks for dropping by again, and that sounds interesting, to me anyway! Although I don't think I was the one who said what you quoted, to be strictly accurate.
posted by JHarris at 2:39 PM on February 28, 2022 [1 favorite]

Hey, Orrex. Thanks for the comments. I have a question. When you get a result like "Caster can't sleep indoors when it's raining," or "Target can't be magically detected by anyone of the same sex," does the character instantly become aware that this is the case? Or do you tell the players in a meta way so that they know what happened even though the characters don't?

What I'm wondering is how do you make results like that feel like the consequences of using wild magic rather than just some random thing that happens later in the campaign that players may or may not guess was caused by using wild magic?
posted by straight at 3:05 PM on February 28, 2022 [1 favorite]

Whoops, you're right. That was NoxAeternum. Apologies!
posted by Orrex at 3:06 PM on February 28, 2022

Hi straight!
Of course I haven't game-tested all of the results, but for surges like the one you describe, I've usually had the affected character check intelligence; if they succeed, then they realize (or have a strong intuition) that they're dealing with a past surge. I'd likely repeat this when it occurs, until the character succeeds.

Or, if the affected character continues to fail the roll and it's important for the party to know, I might have the other characters check in the same way.
"Hey Zilberplotz! I'll bet this is because you fouled up that spell last week."
Something like that.

I don't typically tell the character exactly what's up, but I'll let the players know the details once the character has an idea about it. And sometimes I've told the players outright, when it seems like that'll be more fun.
posted by Orrex at 3:14 PM on February 28, 2022 [2 favorites]