D&D 5E Attack cantrips are a waste of the DM's time

[JamesonCourage]

Yup. Most didn't. But enough did for my group to have an ample dataset of negative experiences; enough to arrive at the conclusion that such spells were collectively vetoed (after iterations of house rules to try to hammer them into functional shape) at the table (in many cases not due to handling time or mental overhead but due to inexplicable balance issues with the spells). Off the top of my head is Fire Seeds, Disintegrate, Slay Living, Ray of Exhaustion, Touch of Fatigue, Poison, Ghoul Touch, Chill Touch, the Dispel <Alignment> line...and there were plenty of 3rd party products that had the touch attack > partial save mechanic.

Ah, more than I remember, but some of those do ring a bell (Poison). Though Slay Living doesn't particularly bother me.

At any rate, yeah, I'd get rid of the attack + save combo. Make it one or the other. As always, play what you like

 

[Hussar]

Did you catch a follow-on saving throw; eg is there a ranged attack (presumably vs AC as there is no "touch AC") and then a saving throw a la 3.x? That would be terrible! Or did it seem like it was Attack vs AC? While it would be easy enough to do, it would be a gigantor whiplash of a change (a good one in my estimation but huge nonetheless...and one that would, naturally, provoke controversy) to redo the current combat interface to a unified Attack vs Defense (AC, Fort, Ref, Will) framework.

Its quick clear at this point that the Strength, Intelligence, and Charisma Saving Throws are not finding much headway in 5e. Each of them working as a proxy for Fort, Ref, and Will respectively would be a welcome change for ease of use and attribute parity.

I don't think so. I don't recall any follow up saving throws. It was always, Roll to Hit, (usually miss) and then damage, AFAIR.

Listen to the podcast though. The absolute WORST luck in die rolling you'll ever see.

 

[Manbearcat]

@Hussar Hmmm...must be Attack vs AC then as there are no NADs in 5e.

Thanks, I'll check it out.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I'm not a big fan of NADs, but I think we would benefit from a return to Fort, Ref and Will saves. I was thinking it might solve the current saving throw problem that spell DCs get better, but most saving throws do not. If you were to sum two ability modifiers to get your saving throws (Fort = Str+Con, Ref=Dex+Int, Will=Wis+Cha) then they would be on the same scale as DCs (Single Ability +1-5) and also spread ability uses around. The only problem is the damned Int/Wis conundrum as usual - perception ought to affect Ref, but clearly Clerics use Wis and that's why it's willpower. Either make perception *clearly* Int-based, or Clerics use Charisma please

 

[Manbearcat]

I'm not a big fan of NADs, but I think we would benefit from a return to Fort, Ref and Will saves. I was thinking it might solve the current saving throw problem that spell DCs get better, but most saving throws do not. If you were to sum two ability modifiers to get your saving throws (Fort = Str+Con, Ref=Dex+Int, Will=Wis+Cha) then they would be on the same scale as DCs (Single Ability +1-5) and also spread ability uses around. The only problem is the damned Int/Wis conundrum as usual - perception ought to affect Ref, but clearly Clerics use Wis and that's why it's willpower. Either make perception *clearly* Int-based, or Clerics use Charisma please

I wouldn't be averse to any of those changes (I would prefer the unified Attack vs Defense model for ease of use and implement/magic item components, but so be it). I like the idea of moving Charisma to the primary stat for Divine spell-casting. That works well.

Couple those changes with offloading the attribute portion of Initiative from Dexterity to Intelligence and we could call it a day (alacrity of information processing, spitting out a command and ordering your muscles to move being as important, if not more, a component of "reaction time" as the physical compenent).

 

[Sadrik]

I'm not a big fan of NADs, but I think we would benefit from a return to Fort, Ref and Will saves. I was thinking it might solve the current saving throw problem that spell DCs get better, but most saving throws do not.

I agree, I really like the idea of the six saves but I dont think for whatever reason they will get implemented properly. We are a year in and this is such a basal thing that it ought to have been resolved early on so I dont have the confidence that they will do anything about addressing the problems of ill defined saves. It is a hard design choice and whichever way they go I am sure it will make some people uncomfortable, but just leaving it as is makes people uncomfortable too. Perhaps they have made their design decision and I just dont like it. lol.

Perhaps it is good to define their design decision. STR saves are underused and areas where they could be put to use are not being utilized, such as grappling. Then INT/WIS/CHA saves having no clear delineation. Sometimes compulsion effects are resisted with CHA sometimes WIS, look up each spell effect to determine which. In my opinion, WIS should convert completely to perception and awareness, moving all remnants of willpower to CHA. Very clear delineation there. INT is a wasted save. Disbelieve should be an INT save in my opinion. Figure something out INT save, notice something WIS save, and resist something mental CHA save.

 

[Sadrik]

make perception *clearly* Int-based

Unfortunately this cannot happen. While I conceptually like it, it wont work. Animals cannot have a crappy perception.

Disbelieve like I mentioned above can be INT though. I think an animal that notices an illusion (WIS) would have little chance to determine if it is real or not (INT).

 

[I'm A Banana]

Personally...

.....I don't think perception and stealth should hinge on ability scores at all.

(*ducks thrown vegetables*)

 

[Gryph]

Personally...

.....I don't think perception and stealth should hinge on ability scores at all.

(*ducks thrown vegetables*)

No veggies from me, I agree with you. Perception in particular is wonky when tied to an ability score. You will always end up with some set of classes that will have nonsensically good perception because of their class dependence of the relevant attribute; and other classes that will struggle to have a good perception score where it would make sense.


As far as the OP, my rule of them for attack roll vs. saving throw is whether it makes sense to me for the spell to target AC. If it does then I prefer an attack roll by the caster in not, then a saving throw by the target. So most of the cantrips with their rays and lances seem like attack roll spells to me.

As an aside and a matter of personal preference, I would prefer casters to not have xbow proficiency and use cantrips instead and I would rather they be d6 damage. Then I would also the light crossbow be a d6 also.

 

[Wulfgar76]

While I am definitely a fan of some spells using attack rolls, I defintely do not want to see a return of NADs, or even Fort-Ref-Will saves. I still really like the idea of a save for each stat:

STR save - resists - monster grapple attacks, hazards like falling boulders
DEX save - resists - any spell or hazard where you dodge out of the way
CON save - resists - any spell or hazard that attacks the body or life force
INT save - resists - illusions and any hazard where a keen intellect would help you
WIS save - resists - mental attacks, fear, or any other effect that does not clearly fit into any other save
CHA save - resists - charm effects, any effect that overcomes your personality