Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Banishing Eldritch Blast
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hawk Diesel" data-source="post: 7518755" data-attributes="member: 59848"><p>Yes, cantrips are in themselves class features. But that also presumes that all cantrips are of a similar level of power. They are to some degree interchangeable. Just as all 1st level spells have some degree of balance against one another. But Eldritch Blast is mechanically different. Are there other cantrips limited to a single spellcaster list? Sure! We have Vicious Mockery for the Bard, Shillelagh for the Druid, and Sacred Flame for the Cleric, just to name a few. However, do any of these cantrips get even a fraction of support from the mechanics of their respective classes? No. And why is that? Because Bards are not associated with Vicious Mockery, or Clerics with Sacred Flame, in the same way that Warlocks are to Eldritch Blast. It is a core aspect of their identity both mechanically and descriptively. To me, that suggests that the relationship is more than a spellcaster to a cantrip. Hence why I believe it is more akin to a Rogue and their Sneak Attack, Monk to Martial Arts, ect.</p><p></p><p>As for investment, I once again disagree. A rogue takes one level in rogue and they get sneak attack. However, a warlock needs to sacrifice one of only two cantrip slots to get Eldritch Blast, as well as access to a slew of relevant invocations that have no ability to apply to cantrips other than Eldritch Blast. </p><p></p><p>Sure, if I don't want sneak attack, I can choose not to play a Rogue, or just refuse to use that class ability (though why would you go with a rogue if that was the case?). That is also a choice. But Warlocks and Eldritch Blast are too entwined both conceptually and mechanically not to recognize that this fits better as a class feature rather than a cantrip. It's not built like a cantrip, its not supported like a cantrip... so why do we call it a cantrip? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Fair point. In 3.x metamagic was available via feats. However, the Sorcerer could cast a few select spells spontaneously and had more spell slots, where wizards had to prepare which spell would go in each spell slot. But since 5e has made all caster spontaneous casters, Sorcerers have also lost the core facet of their identity. If they were not given metamagic (which I would argue represents a similar brand of "on the fly" magic that the 3.x Sorcerers seem to exude), then I believe that Sorcerers would not have a place in 5e. Not without returning to the previous structure used to memorize and </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>True, but without wildshape they are just worse Nature Clerics. But I have much greater problems with Wildshape which are beyond the scope of this thread.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I can understand this. But in the same way you can have Sneak Attack without focusing on improving it via archetypes or feats, a Warlock should have Eldritch Blast without being required to focus on improving it. And I agree more themed invocations around their Patron's could be cool. The problem is that I don't think the Patrons are <em>mechanically</em> distinct enough to provide a foundation for building such invocations, even if their are quite conceptually distinct. This makes it hard to limit an invocation to a single patron, as they are not really so different as to be able to see an Invocation only working for one Patron and not another. As to the summoning, that is also tricky. Summoning has always been very powerful and easily abused, as well as having the potential to slow down the game or take the spotlight away from the others at the table. But I agree it would be thematic and appropriate if the mechanical issues could be addressed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hawk Diesel, post: 7518755, member: 59848"] Yes, cantrips are in themselves class features. But that also presumes that all cantrips are of a similar level of power. They are to some degree interchangeable. Just as all 1st level spells have some degree of balance against one another. But Eldritch Blast is mechanically different. Are there other cantrips limited to a single spellcaster list? Sure! We have Vicious Mockery for the Bard, Shillelagh for the Druid, and Sacred Flame for the Cleric, just to name a few. However, do any of these cantrips get even a fraction of support from the mechanics of their respective classes? No. And why is that? Because Bards are not associated with Vicious Mockery, or Clerics with Sacred Flame, in the same way that Warlocks are to Eldritch Blast. It is a core aspect of their identity both mechanically and descriptively. To me, that suggests that the relationship is more than a spellcaster to a cantrip. Hence why I believe it is more akin to a Rogue and their Sneak Attack, Monk to Martial Arts, ect. As for investment, I once again disagree. A rogue takes one level in rogue and they get sneak attack. However, a warlock needs to sacrifice one of only two cantrip slots to get Eldritch Blast, as well as access to a slew of relevant invocations that have no ability to apply to cantrips other than Eldritch Blast. Sure, if I don't want sneak attack, I can choose not to play a Rogue, or just refuse to use that class ability (though why would you go with a rogue if that was the case?). That is also a choice. But Warlocks and Eldritch Blast are too entwined both conceptually and mechanically not to recognize that this fits better as a class feature rather than a cantrip. It's not built like a cantrip, its not supported like a cantrip... so why do we call it a cantrip? Fair point. In 3.x metamagic was available via feats. However, the Sorcerer could cast a few select spells spontaneously and had more spell slots, where wizards had to prepare which spell would go in each spell slot. But since 5e has made all caster spontaneous casters, Sorcerers have also lost the core facet of their identity. If they were not given metamagic (which I would argue represents a similar brand of "on the fly" magic that the 3.x Sorcerers seem to exude), then I believe that Sorcerers would not have a place in 5e. Not without returning to the previous structure used to memorize and True, but without wildshape they are just worse Nature Clerics. But I have much greater problems with Wildshape which are beyond the scope of this thread. I can understand this. But in the same way you can have Sneak Attack without focusing on improving it via archetypes or feats, a Warlock should have Eldritch Blast without being required to focus on improving it. And I agree more themed invocations around their Patron's could be cool. The problem is that I don't think the Patrons are [I]mechanically[/I] distinct enough to provide a foundation for building such invocations, even if their are quite conceptually distinct. This makes it hard to limit an invocation to a single patron, as they are not really so different as to be able to see an Invocation only working for one Patron and not another. As to the summoning, that is also tricky. Summoning has always been very powerful and easily abused, as well as having the potential to slow down the game or take the spotlight away from the others at the table. But I agree it would be thematic and appropriate if the mechanical issues could be addressed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Banishing Eldritch Blast
Top