NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CrimsonCarcharodon" data-source="post: 7559635" data-attributes="member: 6904790">Okay, let's look at this change. If a caster uses a cantrip every third round, which is about right for the games I've run and played in, and using spell slots in the other two rounds, they're going through two slots every three rounds. With your change, using cantrips is going to be far less effective, so they're more likely to be using a spell slot every round.So, assuming four rounds of combat per fight, and six fights per day, you've got 24 rounds total. With scaling cantrips, that's 16 spell slots being used. Without scaling cantrips, that's 24 slots used. So to keep casters from running out, you'd need to add eight more spell slots at least.Right now, with scaling cantrips, it's not just damage output. You can use a cantrip like Firebolt to try and tag multiple enemies at once. Sure, it may not do much damage, but if you hit three enemies and deal a bit of damage, guess what? The ranger may get the use of Colossus Slayer, especially if the wizard went first in initiative. Or maybe an enemy only has a few hit points left - like ten or twelve. Maybe the caster can take them out without having to burn a spell slot.Are cantrips as good as spell slots? No. But there are better ways to address casters running out of slots than nerfing cantrips. Especially if you say that cantrips are already underpowered because you feel useless without spell slots. You want to add more slots, go for it. But I don't understand why you'd need to do both.I honestly think that, with this change, your casters will run out of slots more quickly and thus be even less effective as a result. So you'd essentially be doing the exact opposite of  what I assume your goal is with this rule change.</blockquote>

Verification