Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique

FrogReaver said:

The issue is resource free vs requiring a resource.

Click to expand...

I can very much see both sides of this argument. It would feel "better" if the lower level damaging spells remained a viable character choice even at higher character levels however I don't think its a problem worth fixing that they do not.

I think the best solution is to do what others here suggest, swap out the damage spells for non-damage spells that remain viable for all levels. This fits in the rules and the only downside is that some spells are left by the wayside as you move up in levels.

I think the easier solution to do what you are trying to accomplish (keep low level damaging spells viable) is to add a rider to all of the problem spells saying that they may be cast as a bonus action once the character reaches the point where the cantrip from that class "levels up" in damage. You could have the 1st level spells do this when you get your first cantrip upgrade, 2nd level when you get your second updgrade, etc. Since you can already cast two spells a round anyway (if one is a cantrip) this only barely changes the rules but allows the spells to still have some value in combat and be a valuable spent resource.

DS

I look at the sleep spell as a good example. At low levels it’s an amazing spell. At high levels it’s garbage.

Does that make sleep a bad spell, absolutely not. It simply has its time in the sun...and then casters are wise to swap it out later on in their careers.

The first level damage spells are no different. Very good at early levels. At high levels as cantrips scale, they are swapped out for other spells. That’s not a problem...it’s a feature

FrogReaver said:

That also makes the non damage spells better and they don’t need to be better

Click to expand...

I don't really think that's a problem. I mean, I wouldn't want to create a separate rule for damaging spells of 1st and 2nd level since that would end up being messy having rules for some spells but not others that scale. By converting 1st level slots to 2nd level slots, it creates something that is straightforward and simple. Besides, I'd like sleep and colour spray to have a little more staying power (although at the levels I proposed converting slots to higher levels they still may not be especially effective). And if spells like charm person and fog cloud can target additional targets or affect a greater area then so be it.

Stalker0 said:

I look at the sleep spell as a good example. At low levels it’s an amazing spell. At high levels it’s garbage.

Does that make sleep a bad spell, absolutely not. It simply has its time in the sun...and then casters are wise to swap it out later on in their careers.

The first level damage spells are no different. Very good at early levels. At high levels as cantrips scale, they are swapped out for other spells. That’s not a problem...it’s a feature

Click to expand...

I once saw my group take down a Young Red Dragon with a sleep spell. He had been flying and breath-dive-bombing them, and they had managed to knock him down to about 60 hit points. In desperation, the party wizard readied a level 3 sleep spell for the next pass, and rolled 60+ on 9d8. Dragon fell 60 feet to the ground, took damage, and the fighter and rogue took him the rest of the way. While I agree it can be traded out for more effective spells, don't forget that, like the Power Word spells, it works off of current hit point totals, not max, and lasts for 1 minute with no save. It's basically a lower-level power word stun...

By my perspective, the issue is less about auto-scaling cantrips, and more about auto-scaling utility spells.

At low levels, you can cast Burning Hands or Shield from your level one spell slot, and they both give a level-appropriate effect. At high levels, you still get a level-appropriate effect from casting Shield in a level one spell slot, but casting Burning Hands in that spell slot is basically a waste. If the benefit of casting Shield was as trivial as the effect of Burning Hands, then we could all just agree that level one spell slots are a meaningless resource to high-level casters, and ignore them; but Shield is still useful at high levels, which means we know what that spell slot is worth, and Burning Hands does not return that value.

Cantrips are mostly fine as they are (from a mechanical standpoint), but low-level damage spells are such a terrible option that they make cantrips look overpowered by comparison.

FrogReaver said:

1) Should cantrips not scale any at all?

Click to expand...

You could do it, but it would require re-working the HP system such that ~10 damage remained relevant at higher levels. It's probably more effort than it's worth.

You could also keep cantrips static, if you let spellcasters upgrade to level 1 or 2 spell effects at higher levels. If a level 5 wizard stopped casting Fire Bolt at-will and started casting Burning Hands at-will, then damage would scale appropriately, and you wouldn't have to worry about your at-wills overshadowing your limited resources.

FrogReaver said:

2) Should spells that end up being strictly inferior to scaled cantrips scale themselves at some point?

Click to expand...

There's no reason to limit it to lower-level spells. All damaging spells should auto-scale, in order to remain level-appropriate for their spell slot. If Fireball and Haste are both worth a level 3 spell slot when you're level 5, then you should get the same relative effect from each of them when you're level 13.

Of course, that would probably mean re-balancing spell damage to better keep it under what a fighter can do. You can't auto-scale Burning Hands up to Fireball level, since it would give you so many more spell slots to work with. Off the top of my head, I would say that all of your fire spells do 2d6 damage per maximum spell slot, but it would need more research to be sure. The basic idea is that a level 9 wizard could deal 10d6 damage to a single target at-will (per Fire Bolt), but 10d6 in a small cone with a level 1 spell slot (per Burning Hands), or 10d6 damage in a 20' burst with a level 3 spell slot (per Fireball).

The paladin union will ask to have the same benefit on smite.
Smiting with a first level slot at level 13 should do more than 2d8!

FrogReaver said:

Only the points that have nothing to do with what I’m saying. Being able to upcast level 1 spells had no bearing on whether casting them at level 1 should do more than a cantrip.

Click to expand...

You keep asserting that, but haven't actually supported it. Being able to upcast a level 1 spell is absolutely relevant to how useful that level 1 spell is at higher levels, and whether or not it needs a damage boost vs cantrips at any given level.

I’m not convinced such properties make level 1 damage spells better than cantrips but it’s a good point because if true then it resolves my stated issue.

Click to expand...

They don't have to be strictly better to be worth using. They just need to be situationally better, which they objectively are.
Half damage on a save is better than slightly higher average damage on a failed save when the target has high saves.
Hitting everything in a cone is better when there is a hallway full of fairly low-hp targets, or even tough targets that you can weaken all of for what is next to no cost, and then let the tank block their path of reprisal.
Hitting without any roll involved for fairly reliable damage that almost nothing in the game is resistant or immune to is better when you are facing an opponent whose resistances you don't know, or who is resistant to most damage types, or who is just hard as hell to hit, or when forcing a concentration save is more important than how much damage you do (usually bc you can't reliably do enough to put the enemy down anyway, with what you have left), etc.

The fact that the spell can be boosted with a more limited resource is also valuable, in and of itself.

I thought it was trivial. If a resource limited ability doesn’t do more than a resource unlimited ability then there’s never a reason to use the resource limited ability.

Click to expand...

As I described above, that isn't true. It just has to be different from what you can do without limitless abilities, in ways that will sometimes be more beneficial than using the limitless ability. This is true of most 1st level spells. For any where it isn't true, that is an issue with that specific spell, not with cantrip scaling.

CapnZapp said:

And let me add that that even if "limited should trump unlimited" should be true/evident etc, I've argued that while cantrips might outdamage certain level 1 spells, that doesn't mean cantrips are necessarily better than level 1 slots.

Click to expand...

Nor does it mean that they're better than a spell that they out-damage.

doctorbadwolf said:

You keep asserting that, but haven't actually supported it. Being able to upcast a level 1 spell is absolutely relevant to how useful that level 1 spell is at higher levels, and whether or not it needs a damage boost vs cantrips at any given level.

Click to expand...

Of course I've supported it. My reason was that a level 1 spell slot is a resource and anything that requires a resource should be better than something that doesn't. You may disagree and think that's incorrect. That's fine, let's discuss why. But don't be acting like I'm not providing support for my positions.

So if my reason for stating that abilities that use resources need to be better than abilities that do not then mentioning anything about a different resource being used to do something better than a cantrip is totally a point that has no bearing on what I'm saying.

FrogReaver said:

Of course I've supported it. My reason was that a level 1 spell slot is a resource and anything that requires a resource should be better than something that doesn't. You may disagree and think that's incorrect. That's fine, let's discuss why. But don't be acting like I'm not providing support for my positions.

So if my reason for stating that abilities that use resources need to be better than abilities that do not then mentioning anything about a different resource being used to do something better than a cantrip is totally a point that has no bearing on what I'm saying.

Click to expand...

I’m sorry, but I can’t parse your second paragraph. Can you restate what you’re saying more clearly?

I still don’t know what your reason for stating the above actually is. You just...state it.

You seem to be saying that because “level 1 spells should do more than cantrips”, “level 1 spells being able to be upcast isn’t relevant”?

Which is false, but at least sensible if that is what you’re saying.

Being upcast is part of what level 1 spells can do. Therefor, the fact they can be upcast is relevant.

But also, what is your reasoning for the assertion that any resource should always be better than any atwill ability? Again, it isn’t self-evident. Why is “situationally more beneficial” not acceptable?

Then there are the other points I made that you’ve ignored.

[MENTION=6795602]FrogReaver[/MENTION] said:

1) “My reason was that a level 1 spell slot is a resource...”
—-this is undeniable;
2) “...anything which requires a resource should be better than something that does not.”
—-on its own, most people, myself included, would agree with this design philosophy.

The problem is that your position has nothing to do with 1st level spell slots: it’s about 1st level spells, which are not the same thing, and are not included in either of the statements quoted above.

Counter-arguments have included
A) Cantrips have slots, too - that is a resource, too. See point #2, above
B) 1st level spell slots are versatile, and can be used to cast a greater array of spells as needed. Cantrip slots cannot be changed. Versatility is better than unchangeable.
C) The value of a 1st level spell slot decreases at a greater rate than the value of the cantrip slot. A Wizard will gain 2 cantrips over their entire career, but 20 additional spell slots.

Take any spell caster that has exhausted their spell slots for the day, and ask them if they would like a single, 1st level spell slot: every single one of them will say “yes.” If as you argue, cantrips are better, then those casters should all say “I’ve got my cantrips, I’m good.” The fact that they won’t proves that those slots have value

But, again, your position is actually: (paraphrasing) “1st lvl spells which do damage, when cast with 1st lvl spell slots, should always do at least as much damage as a cantrip because it requires a 1st level spell slot resource.”

So we add another,
D) 1st lvl spells can be cast using higher lvl slots (more versatile); and can, at 5th lvl (using a 3rd lvl spell slot), do damage comparable to a cantrip cast by a 20th lvl caster.

You dismiss other resource costs as irrelevant, and you refuse to assign any value to versatility. Cantrips are inflexible and limited, and do no damage if they miss or are resisted; spell slots are flexible and, at later levels, plentiful; 1st lvl spells are more reliable and more flexible - they can be changed or even up-cast to greater effect.