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
Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
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="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7536013" data-attributes="member: 12731"><p>Nope - I (and others) have been infinitely patient with you. Make up your mind with what you have. </p><p></p><p>If you can't immediately decide I have given you considerable leeway I don't want to discuss this further with you, since then my conclusion is that you don't <em>want</em> to admit your every avenue has been met, discussed and found wanting.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think it's bad design that save DCs eventually outstrip saving throw bonuses (that is, having to make a DC 23 save with only a +1 modifier). I understand that most gamers just shrug, since it doesn't affect them for easily understood reasons. In short, I accept an argument like "It's not important to me", or "it's not bad enough to worry about". What I don't accept, however, is the argument "it isn't bad design". </p><p></p><p>In this case, however, it isn't as simple and obvious. </p><p></p><p>As I've said, I agree it would be bad game design if there was a limited resource that was unequivocally feebler than an unlimited resource. </p><p></p><p>But as has been shown to you, <strong>no such case actually exist.</strong> </p><p></p><p>Some spells cast in level 1 slots deal less damage than cantrips, but other spells can't be compared to cantrip and far exceed cantrips in utility.</p><p></p><p>Some level 1 spells deal only (or mostly) damage, and less so than cantrips, but can then be upcast to surpass cantrips.</p><p></p><p>The number of spells that can be compared directly to cantrips in that they deal only (or mostly) damage, and yet can't be upcast, is so small that it's a stretch to call it "bad design". </p><p></p><p>The chief reason for this is that "bad spells" doesn't equal "bad design" in general. Sure, we all dislike how certain signature spells feel worthless or wastes of space. But the mere existence of a bad spell is not bad design. </p><p></p><p>This can trivially be shown: that spell can be given to a monster to reduce its deadliness. If the monster is big enough, even a "bad spell" can present a clear danger to the heroes (just less danger than an optimal spell). There is value even in bad spells. </p><p></p><p>As an adjunct to this: if you couldn't avoid bad spells, you might have more of a case. But the fact is, players simply don't use bad spells, or spells generally in unfavorable circumstances. Some spells you just don't cast. Other spells you stop using when cantrips surpass them. </p><p></p><p>Is this excellent game design? Perhaps not. But is it so bad it needs fixing? This is far from certain. </p><p></p><p>I personally find that there are far bigger fish to fry.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7536013, member: 12731"] Nope - I (and others) have been infinitely patient with you. Make up your mind with what you have. If you can't immediately decide I have given you considerable leeway I don't want to discuss this further with you, since then my conclusion is that you don't [I]want[/I] to admit your every avenue has been met, discussed and found wanting. I think it's bad design that save DCs eventually outstrip saving throw bonuses (that is, having to make a DC 23 save with only a +1 modifier). I understand that most gamers just shrug, since it doesn't affect them for easily understood reasons. In short, I accept an argument like "It's not important to me", or "it's not bad enough to worry about". What I don't accept, however, is the argument "it isn't bad design". In this case, however, it isn't as simple and obvious. As I've said, I agree it would be bad game design if there was a limited resource that was unequivocally feebler than an unlimited resource. But as has been shown to you, [B]no such case actually exist.[/B] Some spells cast in level 1 slots deal less damage than cantrips, but other spells can't be compared to cantrip and far exceed cantrips in utility. Some level 1 spells deal only (or mostly) damage, and less so than cantrips, but can then be upcast to surpass cantrips. The number of spells that can be compared directly to cantrips in that they deal only (or mostly) damage, and yet can't be upcast, is so small that it's a stretch to call it "bad design". The chief reason for this is that "bad spells" doesn't equal "bad design" in general. Sure, we all dislike how certain signature spells feel worthless or wastes of space. But the mere existence of a bad spell is not bad design. This can trivially be shown: that spell can be given to a monster to reduce its deadliness. If the monster is big enough, even a "bad spell" can present a clear danger to the heroes (just less danger than an optimal spell). There is value even in bad spells. As an adjunct to this: if you couldn't avoid bad spells, you might have more of a case. But the fact is, players simply don't use bad spells, or spells generally in unfavorable circumstances. Some spells you just don't cast. Other spells you stop using when cantrips surpass them. Is this excellent game design? Perhaps not. But is it so bad it needs fixing? This is far from certain. I personally find that there are far bigger fish to fry. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
Top