D&D General Limiting Utility Cantrips

[kigmatzomat]

You assume too much. It wasn't a wizard that was spamming cantrips, it was our warlock.

Warlocks are designed to spam cantrips. Its their reason d'etre. They get a handful of spell slots per rest. If they arent a hexblade, spamming cantrips is all they get.

Might as well be mad about fighters spamming "swing sword" or rogues spamming "sneak attack".

5e design was ethos was "give casters fewer leveled spells than prior editions but give them at-wills so they dont spend most fights just 'delaying' or being mediocre crossbow users"

 

[Umbran]

I have to admit - I've not seen this problem.

Casters don't know that many cantrips, and typically use some for basic combat use. Casters thus don't tend to be able to foil a wide breadth of issues with spamming utility cantrips. Or, if they can, it is because they have forsaken much for it.

And if they solve some problems... that's okay! So, I don't worry about challenging them that way. No biggie.

That last may be an issue of mindset - some GMs aren't happy when PCs have a common answer to a problem ready to hand - and would prefer the PCs have to deal with the issue repeatedly. I instead figure if they are investing resources (like a spell choice) in it, then I should allow them to have the win they bought with that resource.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

I don't really think they need to be nerfed. I dislike the flavour of damage cantrips. That's way more boring than using Mage Hand to disable a trap. So nerf damage cantrips that get spammed round after round before you nerf a spell that might get used semi-creatively. So I voted 'Other' but maybe should have voted 'leave them alone'.

But, if you wanted to nerf utility cantrips, World Without Numbers has 'cantrips' that are, essentially, free-use for story-telling and fluff but can only be used to 'solve a problem' once per session.

So, use prestidigitation to warm your tea or show kids some cool magic tricks or whatever. But if you are going to use it to influence a noble in order to bypass a skill challenge, that's a 1/session ability.

 

[Horwath]

You assume too much. It wasn't a wizard that was spamming cantrips, it was our warlock.

And although I wrote it for an NPC in my campaign, I was allowed to use it for my Abjuration wizard when it was someone else's turn to sit in the DM chair. It was perfect for dealing with enemy cultists even at higher levels: an incoming 17th level Eldritch Blast or Toll the Dead is no joke.

might as well delete the warlock then, EB is like 80% of the class, unless hexblade.

 

[TiQuinn]

might as well delete the warlock then, EB is like 80% of the class, unless hexblade.

Yeah, I actually don’t have an issue with the combat cantrips. I see more issues with the utility cantrips, and really guidance is the biggest culprit for me though I understand that’s been handled in the 5.5 edition nicely.

 

[CleverNickName]

might as well delete the warlock then, EB is like 80% of the class, unless hexblade.

Like I wrote above: the point is to encourage creativity and strategy, not to shut the casters down.

 

[Horwath]

Yeah, I actually don’t have an issue with the combat cantrips. I see more issues with the utility cantrips, and really guidance is the biggest culprit for me though I understand that’s been handled in the 5.5 edition nicely.

guidance is a low level gimmick to have better chance to disable traps or climb a rope.

It's not a reactionary spell, you cannot use it after a check is called, you need to plan for the check in advance. Also it has V components so it might ruin your stealth.

sure cleric can spam it 24/7 to get +1d4 on next ability check, not having other concentration spell and ruining party's stealth potential.

 

[Burnside]

Guidance, RAW in both 2014 and 2024, requires Concentration, cannot be used as a Reaction, requires touch, and has a Verbal component meaning it ruins Stealth and it's obvious you're casting a spell - so if somebody casts it to help with a Persuasion or Deception check, the NPC should see that happening and freak out. If the DM enforces all that, it's totally fine.

Mage Hand is good but if Mage Hand is really resolving challenge after challenge, there might be DM creativity issues.

Light is really good IF it's the sort of campaign where light is a big deal. Still, the player gave up choosing something else in order to take it - and it generally makes it very hard to hide if you're using it.

I can't think of any other utility cantrips that can even be argued to be OP.

A lot of spell-heavy classes are not great at Skills. Utility cantrips help these players feel like they can contribute outside of combat. I've never considered nerfing them.

 

[TiQuinn]

guidance is a low level gimmick to have better chance to disable traps or climb a rope.

It's not a reactionary spell, you cannot use it after a check is called, you need to plan for the check in advance. Also it has V components so it might ruin your stealth.

sure cleric can spam it 24/7 to get +1d4 on next ability check, not having other concentration spell and ruining party's stealth potential.

Yeah, I find it to be a bad spell as it was written. Why wouldn’t you spam it as much as you can? The concentration and stealth aspects are very situational; there are many, many times that the PCs won’t be in stealth, or needing to worry about concentration.

I’m not a fan of spells and abilities that circumvent or trivialize core parts of the game cheaply. Everyone uses skills, you have bonuses to skills based on your abilities and expertise. Having a near constant +1d4 is just such a “no duh” thing that I question its existence.

 

[Shiroiken]

I feel all cantrips, not just utility cantrips, should be limited per day. Of course, I also feel that increasing cantrip damage was a bad idea too.