D&D 5E [Guidance] What, +1d4 to every check ever?

[Joe Liker]

That feature is one of the things that sets bards apart. A cleric shouldn't be able to imitate that most of the time with a 0th level spell starting at level 1, IMO.

I suppose you are entitled to that opinion, but that's all it is. The spell would not exist if the designers of the game agreed with you. I could say I don't think elves should get a +2 Dex bonus because that is the purview of halflings, but ... (and I don't actually feel that way, btw).

No one ever said it was an auto-success.

I really should know better than to use hyperbole, no matter how obvious. I apologize.

My dislike for the ability has far more to do with the annoyance of having people constantly announce its use than it does with its affect on balance.

Several solutions to this problem have been offered throughout the thread. It needn't be annoying if you suggest ways for your players to do it more subtly.

 

[Falling Icicle]

The spell would not exist if the designers of the game agreed with you.

The designers aren't perfect.

I really should know better than to use hyperbole, no matter how obvious. I apologize.

No apology necessary. I was nit picking.

Several solutions to this problem have been offered throughout the thread. It needn't be annoying if you suggest ways for your players to do it more subtly.

I told my players to just add the 1d4 and that there was no need to have to keep announcing the spell constantly, but that still doesn't resolve all of my issues with the spell. I still think it's too powerful for a cantrip. It's not game-breaking or anything, I just feel that it makes things like being proficient seem much less important.

I also feel that when I just let the players add the 1d4 to almost every roll without having to do anything, it gets taken for granted. I prefer for magic to be more of a marvelous thing. I'm not saying that I don't like at-will cantrips - I do. But everything else, whether it's fire bolt or mage hand, is something that seems cool when the players do it. But guidance gets so overused that it doesn't even feel wondrous at all.

 

[seregil]

I told my players to just add the 1d4 and that there was no need to have to keep announcing the spell constantly, but that still doesn't resolve all of my issues with the spell. I still think it's too powerful for a cantrip. It's not game-breaking or anything, I just feel that it makes things like being proficient seem much less important.

I also feel that when I just let the players add the 1d4 to almost every roll without having to do anything, it gets taken for granted. I prefer for magic to be more of a marvelous thing. I'm not saying that I don't like at-will cantrips - I do. But everything else, whether it's fire bolt or mage hand, is something that seems cool when the players do it. But guidance gets so overused that it doesn't even feel wondrous at all.

While you are certainly free to let your players get it all the time, as I stated above, it simply is not realistic to say that the cleric can constantly recast the spell every minute. They can certainly get it on any on any deliberate roll (e.g. pick locks) and even I would even let it be given to a thief about to sneak off to check something ahead.

However, any check that they can't plan for (e.g. a perception check during travel) can't get the extra 1d4 because the cleric can't predict when it will be needed and he can't cast it constantly.

And, as mentioned, a cleric that would spam blessings 'just in case' would be disciplined by his hierarchy or agents of his deity. His powers are given to him to further the goals of his deity and walking around saying 'bless you' every minute will certainly not help the prestige of his faith. As you say, magic should be magical and I would add holy power should be holy and awe inspiring. Using it constantly to give you +1d4 on your using the spittoon doesn't strike me as a respectful use of the power of a god.

Again, this is me and your table is yours but I believe that the spell simply can't be spammed that much. That being said, is the actual spell overpowered for a cantrip? I can't say until I have played a while but, on paper, it doesn't seem too bad.

My 0,05$ CDN.

 

[Evenglare]

This is the exact same crap that came up when pathfinder introduced at will cantrips with regards to create water.

You can create as much water as you want an infinite amount of times. Now, how many of you play in pathfinder where you have seen clerics and druids spam create water? Probably not many, and if so, then those players would probably be asked to leave the group or be situationally aware when is a good time to use it. With me? If the spell is being spammed to the point of being cheap, then I simply say the god does not grant you the spell. If you don't like that then you are free to find another group. Fortunately for me I have never had this situation crop up on me so maybe I just have a group that respects the world of the game and doesn't play it like a video game. Who knows? But if this is a problem talk to your player about it or impose restrictions or house rules.

 

[Falling Icicle]

While you are certainly free to let your players get it all the time, as I stated above, it simply is not realistic to say that the cleric can constantly recast the spell every minute. They can certainly get it on any on any deliberate roll (e.g. pick locks) and even I would even let it be given to a thief about to sneak off to check something ahead.

However, any check that they can't plan for (e.g. a perception check during travel) can't get the extra 1d4 because the cleric can't predict when it will be needed and he can't cast it constantly.

I didn't mean to give the impression that guidance applies all the time to every single check. I am well aware of the fact that it doesn't. But it does apply a large majority of the checks that players make outside of combat. The rogue picks a lock or disarms a trap. Guidance. The fighter climbs. Guidance. The fighter swims. Guidance. The wizard rolls a history check to recall lore. Guidance. The rogue is about to go pick pocket someone. Guidance. The barbarian is about to intimidate a prisoner. Guidance. Etc. Etc. Etc. I'm not just speculating or theory crafting. I've experienced it in the games I've played.

If anything, the fact that it doesn't apply all of the time makes it almost as annoying. That may sound counter-intuitive, but hear me out. If it did apply to every single check, I could just forget about it and let the players always add the 1d4. But, since there are quite a few situations where it doesn't apply, I have to consider whether or not the players could use guidance in that particular moment and remind them not to add the 1d4. That gets just as annoying as people announcing it constantly. If anything, it's more annoying for me as the DM because then it puts the burden of remembrance on me rather than the player. Either way, it's a real nuisance.

And, as mentioned, a cleric that would spam blessings 'just in case' would be disciplined by his hierarchy or agents of his deity. His powers are given to him to further the goals of his deity and walking around saying 'bless you' every minute will certainly not help the prestige of his faith. As you say, magic should be magical and I would add holy power should be holy and awe inspiring. Using it constantly to give you +1d4 on your using the spittoon doesn't strike me as a respectful use of the power of a god.

I don't think it's right to punish a player for using a spell as written and intended. If the gods didn't want clerics to be able to cast guidance at-will, then they never should have created that spell.

This is the exact same crap that came up when pathfinder introduced at will cantrips with regards to create water.

I never had a problem with at-will create water in Pathfinder. I never saw a player attempt to abuse that spell. After all, what would be the point? Creating whole swimming pools full of water doesn't really accomplish anything. Getting +1d4 to a check, on the other hand, is a significant benefit that players will try to get as often as they can. You don't have to be an optimizer or power gamer to realize that guidance is a free bonus.

 

[Evenglare]

I never had a problem with at-will create water in Pathfinder. I never saw a player attempt to abuse that spell. After all, what would be the point? Creating whole swimming pools full of water doesn't really accomplish anything. Getting +1d4 to a check, on the other hand, is a significant benefit that players will try to get as often as they can. You don't have to be an optimizer or power gamer to realize that guidance is a free bonus.

The argument was that you could shape stone or lock someone in a room and fill it and drown them, by passing HP and anything else. Completely effortless victory in many cases if you have a clever party.

 

[Joe Liker]

If anything, the fact that it doesn't apply all of the time makes it almost as annoying. That may sound counter-intuitive, but hear me out. If it did apply to every single check, I could just forget about it and let the players always add the 1d4. But, since there are quite a few situations where it doesn't apply, I have to consider whether or not the players could use guidance in that particular moment and remind them not to add the 1d4. That gets just as annoying as people announcing it constantly. If anything, it's more annoying for me as the DM because then it puts the burden of remembrance on me rather than the player. Either way, it's a real nuisance.

I actually don't think it's a good idea to just take the extra d4 without any formality at all, for exactly the reasons you state.

That's why I advocate making the cleric's player physically hand the d4 to the target's player. It's a tactile and visual reminder of what's happening, and it's approximately as much effort as I imagine casting the cantrip to be. And if they try to do it at an inappropriate moment, you will be reminded and can start that discussion. My guess is, you won't have to have that discussion more than once or twice.

If the players are wont to overuse the spell, even appropriately, the physical act might become so tiresome that they might ease off a little bit. Just something to try.

 

[doghead]

I'd love it if to receive the benefit of Guidance the recipient had to acknowledge the source ("thanks be to Pelor") or something -- that would help both add to the depth of the world (making the characters recognize that they are receiving divine aid) and (I expect) also constrain the spell's use, because (I expect) some players simply would not want to acknowledge the in-world gods in this way. (I once tried to play a cleric this way with healing spells; it was not very popular, and other players would rather not be healed than acknowledge the help of the god in question.)

Thats hilarious.

And quite clever. I don't think that its unreasonable that a deity would require recognition of its divine blessings.

DCC includes mechanisms for reducing the effectiveness of divine spells cast on those of differing alignments. I some cases, IIRC, the caster also risks greater disapproval (sort of divine penalty points) for casting spells on followers of deities of opposite alignments. Its one of the little quirks of the system that I like.

thotd

 

[Falling Icicle]

The argument was that you could shape stone or lock someone in a room and fill it and drown them, by passing HP and anything else. Completely effortless victory in many cases if you have a clever party.

That's clever, but it seems to me that if you've managed to trap an enemy in a stone room, you've already won.

 

[Darkstar360]

After playing a cleric and using this cantrip a lot I can see some of the objections to it. Would this work, it only works on non proficient​ ability checks? Basically, it helps the unskilled only with divine favour.