Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

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

I would agree. I'll probably cap cantrips at 11th and grant casting of cantrips as a bonus action at 17th. I understand the infinite cantrips is meant so casters have something to do at all times in combat, but they already can match or exceed warriors in damage potential (the cantrips), and of course, higher level spells can vastly overpower them (as it always has been, and should be IMO).

Ultimately, however, I guess I could still argue the other side: if a single die of damage potential is too much, there is probably a bigger issue at play. Honestly, if cantrips never scaled at all, they would still be there for something to do.

 

[FrogReaver]

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.

By the time you name the feature something nifty and have it come out in the published phb and have everyone play with it for years, then doing anything else would seem inelegant.

 

[FrogReaver]

I would agree. I'll probably cap cantrips at 11th and grant casting of cantrips as a bonus action at 17th. I understand the infinite cantrips is meant so casters have something to do at all times in combat, but they already can match or exceed warriors in damage potential (the cantrips), and of course, higher level spells can vastly overpower them (as it always has been, and should be IMO).

Ultimately, however, I guess I could still argue the other side: if a single die of damage potential is too much, there is probably a bigger issue at play. Honestly, if cantrips never scaled at all, they would still be there for something to do.

I don’t like the idea of a wizard casting a spell and cantrip ona single turn. I’d rather see 1 stronger spell than a spell and a cantrip.

 

[Mouseferatu]

By the time you name the feature something nifty and have it come out in the published phb and have everyone play with it for years, then doing anything else would seem inelegant.

You mean the same way cantrips--which have their own feature name, are in the PHB, and we've been playing with for years--seem perfectly elegant to you now?

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

I don’t like the idea of a wizard casting a spell and cantrip ona single turn. I’d rather see 1 stronger spell than a spell and a cantrip.

Well, RAW, if the casting time is a bonus action for any level spell, a caster can already cast a spell and a cantrip in a single turn.


With my idea of making all cantrips at 17th character level and higher cast as bonus actions (if the player selects to do so--they might want to do something else with their bonus action), you would at best get to cast two cantrips in a single turn. Of course, in hindsight, that would allow casters to deal even greater damage (via two cantrips) than the one they are already allowed.

So, yeah, I probably wouldn't do it either after some further thought, but for a different reason LOL.

 

[CapnZapp]

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.

*shrug*

Low level spells don't need more damage. Just stop using damage-dealing spells in low-level slots.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

New wizard subclass idea! School of Algebra.

Final Fantasy Tactics beat you to that 20 years ago with the Calculator job/class.

 

[Radaceus]

True, but at high level, your save DC becomes relatively much better (monster saves stay relatively low). So while the DPR (damage per round) of a 1d10 low-level cantrip might not be much more than half of the average of 5, the DPR of a 4d10 high-level cantrip is easily 80% of the average of 22.

And so while the damage dice is "only" quadrupled, the actual DPR might have increased by a factor of seven.

(Example simplified for clarity)

Regardless, a cantrip failed save means no effect or damage.

And 22(4d10) damage at 17th level is no different than someone firing a bow, or swinging a sword at the same level, and stacked next to a melee class that spell attack cantrip takes one action of the spellcasters action economy, whereas, a weapon attack benefits from extra attack.

This is pretty much incorrect. Many cantrips require an attack roll, not a save. Since casters are about as likely to hit as warriors, this makes casters at higher level pretty good damage dealers with cantrips alone.

This is pretty much incorrect, only 6 cantrips require an attack roll (Chill Touch, Eldritch Blast, Firebolt, Produce Flame, Shocking Grasp, Thorn Whip). From SCAG, Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade have a situational side effect which does not require a saving throw.

Magic Stone, Primal Savagery, and Shillelagh are exception to the above, but they do not scale. Primal Savagery, and Shillelagh being Druid only as well.

of the 6 scaling spell attack cantrips:

• Bard gets 0 but does get access to Magic Stone
• Cleric gets 0
• Druid gets access to 2 (Produce Flame, Thorn whip), but also gets access to the 3 non-scaling weapon attack cantrips
• Sorceror gets access to 3* ( Chill Touch, Firebolt, Shocking Grasp)
• Warlock gets access to 2* ( Chill Touch , Eldritch Blast)
• Wizard gets Access to 3* ( Chill Touch, Fire Bolt, Shocking Grasp)

*Also gets access to the 2 situational cantrips from SCAG (Booming Blade, Green-Flame Blade)

So we are really looking at 3 classes here, Sorceror, Wizard, and Warlock, who have access to a 1d10 scaling spell attack cantrips.
The cantrips being Firebolt for the Sorceror and Wizard, and Eldritch Blast for the Warlock.

Again, action economy, the arcane caster firing that one shot, versus the melee classes Extra Attack. Quickened spell is an option, a few bonus action casting cost spell slots might be used, but these are finite resources where the Extra Attack always happens. Warlock invocation enhancement, Agonizing Blast, ups the damage a bit, but the former limits still apply.

Also, they still have to hit with the attack roll. Higher level mobs have better defenses ( AC, resistances, immunity).

I think the real argument for OP comes with high level stats on chargen, or when feats, and multi classing are allowed ( or even perhaps allowing arcane spellcasters to wear armor ...looking at you Mountain Dwarf Wizard!), if you have issues with the at will attack of your casters, then do not allow feats and MC. Personally, I've never seen this be an issue. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, the adversaries are using the same cantrips...

 

[Hussar]

I question the OP's basic premise actually. The basic premise is that cantrips become more damaging than 1st and 2nd level spells. So, in play, we're likely limited to cantrips doing 3d10 for the most part, no? Very high level play doesn't come up all that often, so, for the sake of argument, let's ignore it.

1st level wizard spell damage:

Burning Hands 3d6 to multiple targets (considerably more damaging than any cantrip)
Magic Missile 3d4+3 no saving throw and no failure. Probably on par with a cantrip really.
Thunderwave - 2d8 to up to potentially 48 targets (extremely unlikely, but, that is the maximum) (far more powerful than any cantrip)

So, other than magic missile, all the direct damage wizard spells at 1st level are still considerably more effective than any single cantrip.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

This is pretty much incorrect, only 6 cantrips require an attack roll (Chill Touch, Eldritch Blast, Firebolt, Produce Flame, Shocking Grasp, Thorn Whip).

My apologies. When I read your other post I thought you were implying Cantrips were save-based, and neglecting to include all the attack-based ones. But, You forgot Ray of Frost.

At any rate, whether requiring an attack roll or a save, cantrips can deal zero damage if either the attack misses or the save is made. I think that is the key point we both understand.