Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique

Blue · Dec 9, 2018

FrogReaver said:
Using a spell slot for damage should generally always be better than the available at will option. That isn't really the case with cantrips and level 1 and level 2 spells. I find that to be a design flaw in 5e. I don't know how to fix it but I think cantrips should never outpace even a level 1 spell IMO.

Thoughts?

I personally feel that cantrips are orthogonal to 1st-9th casting. They form a separate known list, not even a wizard can get more in their book. They are something similar to spells, but innate. What they aren't are the pre-5e notion of "0 level spells".

If they were 0-level spells, I'd agree with you. Why should a 0th level be better than a 1st?

But instead I see them as a separate grouping that serves two design purposes.

1. Allow casters to be magical. Unlike the "hey, I'll use my crossbow or throw darts" of earlier editions, a caster has a number of magical abilities, combat and otherwise, that they can use to immerse themselves in the magic and not rely on mundane solutions. As such, these magical solution need to not fall too far behind the mundane solutions otherwise they will get replaced with the mundane solutions.

2. The allow reduction in number of spell slots per level to help with the quadratic mage/linear fighter issue while still allowing the caster to contribute meaningfully in the expanded 6-8 encounter adventuring day of 5e.

All of that said, this is a person feeling and I don't know if the design space really agrees with what I'm saying.

FrogReaver · Dec 9, 2018

CapnZapp said:
That's actually not the whole truth.

Not since you are talking about slots, rather than spells. A level 1 spell slot is much more versatile and flexible than a "cantrip slot", at least for the main casters we're talking about (read "wizard and cleric").

Long story short - you're focusing too much on raw damage IMO. I'd accept the fact that there comes a time when level 1 slots aren't useful to deliver damage. In fact, as many posters have pointed out, this might actually be a valuable property of this edition.

Once you factor more than hp loss into value, however, your "natural answer" becomes way more complex than you're letting on. And it might just be that the simplest solution is to do nothing at all: just don't use low-level slots for damage-dealing and you're fine.

The non-damage low level spells are fine. As everyone has pointed out they are useful. Having low level spells do a little better damage than cantrips makes them useful but shouldn’t drastically affect game balance. It doesn’t make wizards quadratic. It doesn’t make them do significant more daily damage. Honestly the backlash on this idea is irrational.

Blue · Dec 9, 2018

CapnZapp said:
Addendum: to answer how to actually fix it, my best suggestion is to limit the number of cantrips you can use.

Perhaps something as simple as "you can cast a number of cantrips equal to your spellcasting ability modifier +3. You regain all spent uses after taking a short or long rest".

This might not change much from your perspective, but it does change the balance slightly (in the favor of spells over cantrips).

But mostly it fixes a personal bugbear of mine - how casters can cast Firebolt or Acid Splash all day long, every round for hours on end, and how this breaks world verisimiltude. Need to dispose of a corpse? Just dissolve it with an endless number of acid cantrips! Need to break out of sheriff's jail? Just burn a hole in the wall! After all, a "cantrip" than can kill a grown man in one or two blasts (a commoner), can't be said to have "no effect" on the environment! *blech*

We have very different feels - which is all to the good! For me, the fact that casters never need to "descend to the mundane", be it to light their pipes or to shoot a crossbow because they are out of offensive spells - helps to drive home the high fantasy nature of 5e.

Blue · Dec 9, 2018

FrogReaver said:
Why is everyone making points to me about things I am not saying?

Since this is so difficult Let’s start here, should a level 1 spell be better than a cantrip? I think he natural answer is yes. One takes a resource one doesn’t.

Shield's +4 when I need it will always be better then a bit of damage. Shield is a good example of spells that stay relevant at higher levels. Cantrip damage also stays relevant - via scaling.

I'm saying this to point out that you aren't comparing cantrips and 1st level spells, you're comparing cantrips and 1st level damage spells, and even there you're only comparing them at higher character levels when damage has scaled up.

FrogReaver said:
So how much would low level spells damage need to scale to accomplish this. Level 3 and up spells I think are fine. Level 1 and 2 spells need somewhere between 1 and 3 damage dice (or # of attacks for multi attacking spells) in order to remain an option later.

Having spells automatically scale up with character level was part of the quadratic wizard issue. Having low level damage spells stay relevant, and then just adding on top of that with more slots of higher levels, leads to that. Instead they scale up now with spell slots.

So, if you were to frame it in a *5e* way, it would be: Should cantrip damage exceed damage of 1 st level spell damage upcast using a caster's highest slot?

FrogReaver · Dec 9, 2018

Blue said:
Shield's +4 when I need it will always be better then a bit of damage. Shield is a good example of spells that stay relevant at higher levels. Cantrip damage also stays relevant - via scaling.

I'm saying this to point out that you aren't comparing cantrips and 1st level spells, you're comparing cantrips and 1st level damage spells, and even there you're only comparing them at higher character levels when damage has scaled up.

Having spells automatically scale up with character level was part of the quadratic wizard issue. Having low level damage spells stay relevant, and then just adding on top of that with more slots of higher levels, leads to that. Instead they scale up now with spell slots.

So, if you were to frame it in a *5e* way, it would be: Should cantrip damage exceed damage of 1 st level spell damage upcast using a caster's highest slot?

Nope. That’s a different resource being expended. A first level spell slot is still a resource getting expended vs a cantrip that expends no resource. When a resource gets expended it should be stronger than when no resource gets expended

FrogReaver · Dec 9, 2018

Blue said:
Shield's +4 when I need it will always be better then a bit of damage. Shield is a good example of spells that stay relevant at higher levels. Cantrip damage also stays relevant - via scaling.

I'm saying this to point out that you aren't comparing cantrips and 1st level spells, you're comparing cantrips and 1st level damage spells, and even there you're only comparing them at higher character levels when damage has scaled up.

Having spells automatically scale up with character level was part of the quadratic wizard issue. Having low level damage spells stay relevant, and then just adding on top of that with more slots of higher levels, leads to that. Instead they scale up now with spell slots.

So, if you were to frame it in a *5e* way, it would be: Should cantrip damage exceed damage of 1 st level spell damage upcast using a caster's highest slot?

Having damage scale up by level on every spell was the quadratic wizard problem. Having it scale up on 1st and 2nd level spells to make them better than cantrips doesn’t cause that problem

Satyrn · Dec 9, 2018

Leatherhead said:
Do you want quadratic wizards? Because that's how you get quadratic wizards.

New wizard subclass idea! School of Algebra.

Leatherhead · Dec 9, 2018

FrogReaver said:
Having damage scale up by level on every spell was the quadratic wizard problem. Having it scale up on 1st and 2nd level spells to make them better than cantrips doesn’t cause that problem

By the time your cantrips are outdamaging 2nd level spells, a wizard has unlimited first and 2nd level spells anyway.

FrogReaver · Dec 9, 2018

Leatherhead said:
By the time your cantrips are outdamaging 2nd level spells, a wizard has unlimited first and 2nd level spells anyway.

A couple potentially. I would actually say the issue starts at 11th level. It gets exasperated at 17th.

Mouseferatu · Dec 9, 2018

To me--and I imagine to others--the idea of some spell levels scaling automatically while others do not is far more inelegant and intrusive than what we have. Even if I agreed that it felt "off" to have cantrips do more damage than some low level spells at higher levels, this particular solution would feel even more so.