D&D 5E Changing How Wizards Use Cantrips

[MoonSong]

So reading through the comments, I can see now the issue with combining the number of memorized spells and cantrips. I think I would keep it with starting with 4 cantrips in a wizard's spellbook. I might have the number a wizard can memorize being equal to their proficiency bonus. Wizards can learn additional cantrips by choosing one as one of their two spells they gain each level, finding new ones on scrolls to scribe in their spellbook, or research. I also kinda like @Ashrym 's idea as well.

I would do similar with other prepared casters, such as clerics and druids. They can prepare a number of cantrips from their spell lists equal to their proficiency bonus. Maybe even give clerics a domain cantrip.

I think a better number is to start with two and only allow more of them prepared at the same levels a sorcerer would learn an extra cantrip. Preparing and changing cantrips everyday is a versatility multiplier, so the numbers have to be lower than what a sorcerer would have at that point, otherwise you step on sorcerers (and tome warlocks). Having more cantrips is part of what makes the classes tick.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

I think a better number is to start with two and only allow more of them prepared at the same levels a sorcerer would learn an extra cantrip. Preparing and changing cantrips everyday is a versatility multiplier, so the numbers have to be lower than what a sorcerer would have at that point, otherwise you step on sorcerers (and tome warlocks). Having more cantrips is part of what makes the classes tick.

Yea, I'll need to think on that a bit. It's just cleaner to use something like proficiency bonus, but it would absolutely step on the toes of Sorcerers and Tomelocks.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

So here's what I'm thinking. Most casters (Bards, Clerics, Druids, Warlocks, and Wizards) can know / prepare a number of cantrips equal to 1 + half their proficiency bonus (rounded up). This is pretty close to the numbers they would have anyways. Clerics gain an additional domain cantrip, as do Circle of the Land Druids. Warlocks would get a Patron cantrip based on their choice of patron.

But sorcerers get a number of known cantrips equal to their proficiency bonus +2. This keeps it the same at lower levels, but gives them a couple more by level 20.

I don't know. Still thinking about it, but I kinda like it. I also feel like I'm tweaking things just to tweak them at this point. So I'm going down a rabbit hole, and perhaps @5ekyu was more perceptive of what I was doing (or more rather understood I was heading somewhere without knowing where or why) than I gave him credit for.

 

[Nebulous]

So, as I am using tracking Ammunition now in Roll20, which I do love having the computer do it, I realize that the ranged character is pretty gimped when it comes to the casters with cantrips, especially when say the wizard is doing 2d10 endlessly at 5th level.

I have had an issue with endless magical reservoirs of cantrip magic for a long time now, but I think it needs to dealt with. There's some good ideas in this thread. Maybe limited the amount of damaging cantrips is an option, and leave the utility magic alone. I cannot tell you how many times a wizard says, "Well, I will firebolt it every round for an hour until such and such is completely destroyed."

NO. No. No. I don't want my D&D to work like that.

 

[Dausuul]

I cannot tell you how many times a wizard says, "Well, I will firebolt it every round for an hour until such and such is completely destroyed."

NO. No. No. I don't want my D&D to work like that.

Just curious - do you not have fighters doing the same thing with melee weapons?

 

[Horwath]

So, as I am using tracking Ammunition now in Roll20, which I do love having the computer do it, I realize that the ranged character is pretty gimped when it comes to the casters with cantrips, especially when say the wizard is doing 2d10 endlessly at 5th level.

I have had an issue with endless magical reservoirs of cantrip magic for a long time now, but I think it needs to dealt with. There's some good ideas in this thread. Maybe limited the amount of damaging cantrips is an option, and leave the utility magic alone. I cannot tell you how many times a wizard says, "Well, I will firebolt it every round for an hour until such and such is completely destroyed."

NO. No. No. I don't want my D&D to work like that.

I see that you skipped; 3.5e Reserve feat category, pathfinder and 4E.

and as @Dausuul mentionedy hitting something with a hammer

At-will damage cantrips are great addition(we can discuss about damage scale)
at least it will cut down on elven wizards as shooting a longbow every round is 17 categories less demeaning than shooting a crossbow.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I cannot tell you how many times a wizard says, "Well, I will firebolt it every round for an hour until such and such is completely destroyed."

NO. No. No. I don't want my D&D to work like that.

If someone tried that in my game I'd probably just have them make a Con check to see how many exhaustion levels they accrued from casting cantrips for an hour straight. DC 30 would be zero exhaustion, with every 5 less adding a level of exhaustion.

There's such a thing as using the right tool for the right job. This example however is like trying to batter down a door using a rapier, IMO...

 

[the Jester]

What do people think? Is there any issue or balance concern that I haven't considered with this mechanic? Any foreseeable problems to be prepared for? Has anyone ever tried this?

I see this as highly problematic on two fronts.

First, you are essentially giving the wizard free extra prepared spells. While two extra first level options aren't that big a deal, six extra options of any level most certainly could be. Instead of having to carefully choose your spells- something that I think is a meaningful choice for casters who prepare spells- you have added flexibility sufficient to make that choice significantly less meaningful. Sure, this comes at the cost of no cantrips, but a smart wizard focused on optimal combat could simply always prep fire bolt as his only cantrip and save those other prepared spells for a handful of additional utility. Why choose between fireball and fly when you have enough spell slots to do both without missing out on anything else?

The second issue is with a wizard who doesn't pack any cantrips. Once out of slots, he's basically like a 1e magic-user, reduced to throwing daggers or shooting a crossbow. Taking cantrips away (or rather, giving the option to go cantrip-less) means that the wizard runs out of spell slots earlier (because even the least challenge requiring magic requires a spell slot), and that means that he is not able to contribute to the same degree in later encounters. He isn't dealing his expected damage round after round; he's all alpha strike all the time followed by a big bag of suck.

Now, the counter to this argument is, "Well, then, prepare a cantrip or two." Which is fine- if every wizard uses that option. But the option to not do so is a trap. And trap options sucks. That's why they pretty much eliminated them from 5e. There's no "take a feat to gain 3 hps" in 5e. That's a design choice that I think this option undermines; it allows a pc to intentionally or inadvertently set himself up to suck. Sure, it's possible for a wizard to choose terrible spells and cantrips in the base 5e rules, but you'd really have to set out to do it.

So yeah. Not to my taste, though I understand the intention. What if, instead, you just let wizards scribe more cantrips into their books and prepare the standard number separate from their leveled spells?

 

[commandercrud]

Here's my house rule. Can cast a number of cantrips per day = your spellcasting modifier + proficiency bonus. If you try to cast more than that, make a CON save. If you fail, take 1 HD damage, the spell fails, and you can't try again until the next day.