D&D 5E Clarification: Spell use feats

[Grimstaff]

Looking for some clarification on spell use feats, like the one that gives you 1st level wizard spells and can cantrips, for example.

1- what level do your spells operate at? For instance would a 5th level fighter with the feat do 5th level damage?

2- can characters with the feat use stuff like wands and staffs?

3- could a thief or assassin with the feat use a cantrip or other "to hit" spell with sneak attack?


thanks!

 

[Tormyr]

Spells operate at your character level. A fifth level fighter would get the extra die of damage for a cantrip.
Wands and staves can be used by anyone as long as there is not a restriction on the item.
Sneak attack requires a finesse or ranged weapon. Spells do not work.

 

[the Jester]

Sneak attack requires a finesse or ranged weapon. Spells do not work.

Good catch! I had missed that.

 

[Grimstaff]

Nice, thanks!

this all lines up with my assumptions, but it's nice to have clarification on these fuzzy areas.

 

[DEFCON 1]

That being said... I personally would not think that allowing the use of Sneak Attack with a cantrip that requires an attack roll would necessarily be unbalanced. It'd be a house-rule obviously... but for the multiclasser (and also for the Arcane Trickster especially)... being able to use both your spells and your Sneak Attack together (rather than forcing them to switch over to a bow) would be rather reasonable I think. As I will being having an AT in my game shortly... I expect I'll probably allow him to use SA with an attack roll cantrip if he so chooses, and will keep an eye on whether it ends up being a problem.

 

[Tormyr]

That being said... I personally would not think that allowing the use of Sneak Attack with a cantrip that requires an attack roll would necessarily be unbalanced. It'd be a house-rule obviously... but for the multiclasser (and also for the Arcane Trickster especially)... being able to use both your spells and your Sneak Attack together (rather than forcing them to switch over to a bow) would be rather reasonable I think. As I will being having an AT in my game shortly... I expect I'll probably allow him to use SA with an attack roll cantrip if he so chooses, and will keep an eye on whether it ends up being a problem.

A lot of cantrips require a verbal component. That verbal component could be considered to reveal a hidden rogue's location. Which would kill any advantage and therefore the sneak attack. While that would not matter for ally in 5 feet sneak attacks, they may have kept it out for simplicity's sake.

Or, when the rogue can get the drop on someone, it can make sure the weapon strikes at just the right spot to do extra damage whereas a spell just hits and does its damage.

 

[77IM]

I think the rogue's level-scaling sneak attack damage and the cantrip's level-scaling damage are balanced under the assumption that they will not stack.

In general, damage that scales with level does not stack with other damage that scales with level. The only counterexample I can think of is Extra Attack stacking with the monk's unarmed damage scaling and maybe the paladin's smite (although you'd have to smite separately with each attack, and the bonus damage at that point is not high).

I might allow a rogue to learn a custom version of a cantrip that does not scale with level so that they can sneak attack with it. But not with regular level-scaling cantrips.

 

[Kobold Stew]

That being said... I personally would not think that allowing the use of Sneak Attack with a cantrip that requires an attack roll would necessarily be unbalanced. It'd be a house-rule obviously... but for the multiclasser (and also for the Arcane Trickster especially)... being able to use both your spells and your Sneak Attack together (rather than forcing them to switch over to a bow) would be rather reasonable I think. As I will being having an AT in my game shortly... I expect I'll probably allow him to use SA with an attack roll cantrip if he so chooses, and will keep an eye on whether it ends up being a problem.

Yeah -- if there were an attack cantrip that just did 1d6 damage and didn't scale, then it would, I think , be fine for Sneak attack.

Allowing spells to work with SA was something that they had at no point through the play test, though, and the omission seems pretty deliberate.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Yeah -- if there were an attack cantrip that just did 1d6 damage and didn't scale, then it would, I think , be fine for Sneak attack.

Allowing spells to work with SA was something that they had at no point through the play test, though, and the omission seems pretty deliberate.

You are right that the scaling spell damage could be an issue. The "d6 or less" rule for SA doesn't particularly bother me as something I would need to necessarily stick to, as the rogue can also do SAs with d8 weapons (rapier and bow)... so the d8 cantrips I'd probably be okay with. But yeah... the scaling cantrip damage might cause problems. I'll have to see how the rogue's damage output compares with the other characters through levels 1-4, and whether adding additional spell damage dice for the cantrips would make thing out of hand. Good call.