Shield cantrip
- Thread starter Yunru
- Start date
Sure, but so are offensive cantrips at that point too (or even earlier in vanilla).
Satyrn
First Post
I edited in a bit more of my thoughts.
I'm also hesitant of giving players more AC buffs in general. I never hand out magical armor with plusses, for example. I wouldn't want to see a fighter in full plate take Magic Initiate, and getting this significant a boost even at high levels.
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
They might be better in an abstract sense, but their fill a different role. This suggested cantrip not only fills the same role as the standard Shield spell, but it does the exact same thing without costing a spell slot.
I think +2 AC and negating magic missile damage as a reaction is a strong enough cantrip on its own.
Actually, rather than +2 AC, I’d have it give you 1/2 cover. I’d have actual shields do that too, though.
BacchusNL
Explorer
I would re-work it into something that affects a single enemies attack roll, instead of a +ac until next round. Being able to shield up when you are surrounded by enemies, even at a lower value, as a cantrip seems way to good to me.
I would go with something along the lines of "Flash" - Reaction: Emit a sudden flash of blinding light, giving -2 to the next attack roll of an enemy in front of you that needs eyes to see.
you can obviously further work it out with proffenciecy scaling, make it a cone attack ect
I would go with something along the lines of "Flash" - Reaction: Emit a sudden flash of blinding light, giving -2 to the next attack roll of an enemy in front of you that needs eyes to see.
you can obviously further work it out with proffenciecy scaling, make it a cone attack ect
Last edited:
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
No better than proficiency with shields. Worse, in fact, since shields give you +2 AC without costing your reaction.
Quickleaf
Legend
Personally, I wouldn't do this for the reason [MENTION=6801204]Satyrn[/MENTION] mentions alone (multi-class / Magic Initiate feat abuse). However, there are two other considerations:
First, your proposed reaction shield cantrip is better than the Defensive Fighting Style. And I don't see making mages better at defense all-day-long than warriors as a desirable change in D&D.
Second, you're letting a cantrip counter a specific 1st-level spell. Effectively, in a mage vs. mage battle magic missile becomes obsolete because the shield cantrip has no spell slot cost, whereas magic missile does. I don't see allowing cantrips to negate spells, let alone lower level spells negating higher level spells, as a desirable change.
Last edited:
Satyrn
First Post
Aye. That's another consideration that'd stop me implementing the OP's version.
I could contemplate using a version of it thattgranted an AC calculation of 10 + Proficiency Bonus + Dex modifier, though.
Quickleaf
Legend
I'd also careful about that. Compare to the 1st-level shield of faith spell (bonus action, +2 AC, concentration).
While I'm sure there's a way to balance a shield-esque abjuration cantrip mechanically, I think the real problem is at the concept level. Wizards and sorcerers – those casters who have access to the shield spell (yes, and eldritch knights) – are not meant to have superior defenses to other characters. Superior defenses are generally the domain of heavy armor wearing characters (typically fighters & paladins) and rogues (thanks to high Dex and Evasion). And there's a gameplay/teamwork reason for that. When you start to look at ways to consistently boost a sorcerer/wizard's AC, you're chipping into some very core conceptual bedrock that D&D is built upon.
Similar Threads
