Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique

[Azzy]

Ya'll really know how to ignore what someone is posting about.

I get that at some point casting damage spells out of low level spell slots becomes pointless. I get that means that currently you will exclusively use those slots for utility spells. Why wouldn't you?

But that's really not the question I'm asking. I don't care how to best make use of low level spell slots as a high level wizard. I already know how to do that. But the question more is, "wouldn't the edition have been better if low level damage spells still were meaningful options at higher levels?"

Better? No. Slightly different? Yes.

 

[Mistwell]

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?

Those lower level spell slots can be cast in higher level spell slots for more damage than the cantrip, and at those higher levels you have a lot more spell slots to use to the point where it's almost like a cantrip anyway in terms of cost of resources. So, I think in terms or scaling which is a matter of higher levels, typically the cost for that lower level spell to do more damage than the cantrip is not that much more than the cost of the cantrip. IE the lower level spells remain meaningful at higher levels, because you can cast them in higher level spell slots for more damage. Which is as it should be.

 

[TallIan]

Personally I don't like the fluff of damage dealing cantrips, if powerful spells are limited by slots (however you choose to view the fluff of that) something as powerful as a firebolt would be something you wouldn't teach an apprentice spell caster until VERY late in his training. Or for innate caster types, like a sorcerer, the ones that play with firebolt before mastering something like light, or shield will usually end up a sticky mess on the floor. There is s reason trades apprentices make tea for the first year - no on trusts them with anything sharper than a spoon.

That aside, I think that cantrips scaling as they do is a very simple way to maintain balance.

...Or alternatively either

1) Should cantrips not scale any at all?
2) Should spells that end up being strictly inferior to scaled cantrips scale themselves at some point?

1) not letting cantrips scale would make them totally useless after level 5 when most martials get their 2nd attack.
2) Scaling levels spells is, IMO, more complex than simply comparing damage output. Higher level spells are hugely more powerful that lower level spells, and as you level as a spell caster, the lower slots become more utility based. Consider something like shield. At char level 1 it uses half you spell casting ability, so it's not a reliable way to protect yourself, as you level up, those level 1 spell slots become more abundant and less necessary for offense, so using utility and defensive spells becomes more efficient.

Something else to keep in mind is that cantrip damage doesn't gain ability modifier damage (outside of some class features), so will firebolt of going from 1d10 to 2d10 at level 5, swords are going from 1d10+3 to 2d10+8

 

[FrogReaver]

Personally I don't like the fluff of damage dealing cantrips, if powerful spells are limited by slots (however you choose to view the fluff of that) something as powerful as a firebolt would be something you wouldn't teach an apprentice spell caster until VERY late in his training. Or for innate caster types, like a sorcerer, the ones that play with firebolt before mastering something like light, or shield will usually end up a sticky mess on the floor. There is s reason trades apprentices make tea for the first year - no on trusts them with anything sharper than a spoon.

That aside, I think that cantrips scaling as they do is a very simple way to maintain balance.


1) not letting cantrips scale would make them totally useless after level 5 when most martials get their 2nd attack.

I totally agree. I don't think this is a good solution.

2) Scaling levels spells is, IMO, more complex than simply comparing damage output. Higher level spells are hugely more powerful that lower level spells, and as you level as a spell caster, the lower slots become more utility based.

That's a good analysis of the current state of the game. What does that have to do with whether there should be spells that are worse than cantrips ?

Consider something like shield. At char level 1 it uses half you spell casting ability, so it's not a reliable way to protect yourself, as you level up, those level 1 spell slots become more abundant and less necessary for offense, so using utility and defensive spells becomes more efficient.

Again totally true, but I'm not sure what this has to do with the topic. Stating how things currently are again and again doesn't answer whether it would be better if things were different.

Something else to keep in mind is that cantrip damage doesn't gain ability modifier damage (outside of some class features), so will firebolt of going from 1d10 to 2d10 at level 5, swords are going from 1d10+3 to 2d10+8

Valid point but has no bearing on the topic.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

I agree with almost everyone else: this critique is misplaced. The “problem” is actually a feature. I like how they balanced magical vs. martial characters. They finally got it right.

 

[aco175]

I can see something where cantrips gain power in conditions rather than in damage. Cold spells slows longer or blast spells push monsters away. Maybe something where the caster can choose what else the spell does above damage.

Maybe a larger damage die. The 1d6 plus slow 1 round spell becomes 1d8 at 5th level and immobilize 1 round. The 1d10 fire becomes 1d12 which is less than lower damage power would be, but it starts at higher already.

 

[CapnZapp]

Those lower level spell slots can be cast in higher level spell slots for more damage

No, you mean lower level spells. He's talking about spell slots.

You can't cast a level 1 spell slot in a higher level. Level 1 spell slots are always level 1.

 

[Seramus]

But the question more is, "wouldn't the edition have been better if low level damage spells still were meaningful options at higher levels?"

It would probably be slightly worse. If low level damage spells are "meaningful options" at higher levels without taking higher level slots, then casters would feel increased pressure to take those damage spells instead of fun utility spells. And that makes me a sad panda.

 

[5ekyu]

Better? No. Slightly different? Yes.

Agree and also... make an acrobatics roll to avoid the shifting goalposts.

With a title about cantrip auto-scaling plus rhetoric about how cantrips should not surpass low level slotted spells - those set the foundation as cantrip scaling as the focus - not,the transition of the use of low tier spells.

Imo the game would be worse if the low tier offenses stayed competitive at the higher reaches.

Right now, the game style transitions through stages and tiers and that generalky glows into challenges and threats and so on. It evolves over a campaign. I cannot imagine anything more boring than still casting the same spells at 11th, 15th, even 9th for full offense as i did at 3rd.

But i dont have to,imagine it.

Played in point-spell dnd bdfore - not slots - and saw how magic missile spam grew to be the go-to. (A lot was different then, to be fair)

The transitions open up a lot more options for what to do with low level spells, a lot more fun stuff, once they are no longer your "main offense".

For my taste, at least, the evolution is key and a benefit to the game... So, not better but worse if it was different in that way.

 

[Warpiglet]

I am not criticizing OP preferences here per se...but I am with a few others here. Utility and game altering things are a FUN accompaniment to fire bolts...