Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
L&L: Putting the Vance in Vancian
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 5833184" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>The one thing I'd love to see with regards to these "at-will" magical cantrips you gain with feats is for it to be stated quite clearly either in the cantrip explanation (or perhaps in the DMG) what the numbers could be for the DM to attribute consistent and balanced damage dice to their use.</p><p></p><p>For example... <em>Mage Hand</em> as a spell/cantrip traditionally has done no damage. However, there have always been ways that magic-users have "explained" the method for using <em>Mage Hand</em> so that it could be used to cause damage. Whether this was telekinetic punches, knocking things off shelves to drop on people's heads, directing vials of alchemists fire, etc.</p><p></p><p>It'd be great if there was a standard damage rating for all abilities gained via these feats. Like any basic magic feat could cause 1d4+INT damage depending how its used for example. So that whatever ability you got from whatever feat you took... if you found a way to use it offensively, the damage caused were balanced against each other and the 'spells' a Vancian wizard might have.</p><p></p><p>Use a <em>Tenser's Floating Disk</em> as an offensive attack? Does 1d4+INT damage. Use <em>Mage Hand</em> as an offensive attack? 1d4+INT damage. Use <em>Ghost Sound</em> offensively (like creating loud screams in the ears of the monster?) 1d4+INT damage. Give the casters the benefit of thinking of cool, weird ways to use their magic in addition to the standard method of what these cantrips would do. The benefit is... you don't ask the player to have to take TWO of these feats... one an offensive at-will attack, the other, a cool "non-combat" effect feat.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 5833184, member: 7006"] The one thing I'd love to see with regards to these "at-will" magical cantrips you gain with feats is for it to be stated quite clearly either in the cantrip explanation (or perhaps in the DMG) what the numbers could be for the DM to attribute consistent and balanced damage dice to their use. For example... [I]Mage Hand[/I] as a spell/cantrip traditionally has done no damage. However, there have always been ways that magic-users have "explained" the method for using [I]Mage Hand[/I] so that it could be used to cause damage. Whether this was telekinetic punches, knocking things off shelves to drop on people's heads, directing vials of alchemists fire, etc. It'd be great if there was a standard damage rating for all abilities gained via these feats. Like any basic magic feat could cause 1d4+INT damage depending how its used for example. So that whatever ability you got from whatever feat you took... if you found a way to use it offensively, the damage caused were balanced against each other and the 'spells' a Vancian wizard might have. Use a [I]Tenser's Floating Disk[/I] as an offensive attack? Does 1d4+INT damage. Use [I]Mage Hand[/I] as an offensive attack? 1d4+INT damage. Use [I]Ghost Sound[/I] offensively (like creating loud screams in the ears of the monster?) 1d4+INT damage. Give the casters the benefit of thinking of cool, weird ways to use their magic in addition to the standard method of what these cantrips would do. The benefit is... you don't ask the player to have to take TWO of these feats... one an offensive at-will attack, the other, a cool "non-combat" effect feat. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
L&L: Putting the Vance in Vancian
Top