Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 7833148" data-attributes="member: 6750235">After giving it more thought, I would still go with restricting cantrips versus scaling up spell damage.&nbsp; It's easy and it resolves any issues one might have with cantrips out-damaging low level spells.I am extremely reluctant to give spell casting a boost in general.&nbsp; It's too easy to give too much advantage. While I wasn't a fan of 4e, one of the things I liked about it (and I think there were positive influences on the game that reached into 5e) was that there was a clear intent on what type of role a class might have in the party (without forcing the need for a specific class).&nbsp; Whether a person agrees with the success of that or not (in 4e or anything subsequent) doesn't really matter so much as the intent in 5e is still leaning in to the controller concept.&nbsp; That means AoE's and status effects and not heavy damage.&nbsp; Adding damage seems like it's the opposite of the class role for wizards, bards, clerics, and druids on top of risking too much of a boost to spellcasters.&nbsp; Warlocks already have invocations for eldritch blast and sorcerers already have metamagic so it's also redundant even if those classes do fall more into a damage style.Most major spell castsers fall into the control and support styles.&nbsp; They may have damage options, but they really don't need stronger damage options.&nbsp; Weaker damage options in cantrips doesn't actually take away from their main foci.My 2cp.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ashrym, post: 7833148, member: 6750235"] After giving it more thought, I would still go with restricting cantrips versus scaling up spell damage. It's easy and it resolves any issues one might have with cantrips out-damaging low level spells. I am extremely reluctant to give spell casting a boost in general. It's too easy to give too much advantage. While I wasn't a fan of 4e, one of the things I liked about it (and I think there were positive influences on the game that reached into 5e) was that there was a clear intent on what type of role a class might have in the party (without forcing the need for a specific class). Whether a person agrees with the success of that or not (in 4e or anything subsequent) doesn't really matter so much as the intent in 5e is still leaning in to the controller concept. That means AoE's and status effects and not heavy damage. Adding damage seems like it's the opposite of the class role for wizards, bards, clerics, and druids on top of risking too much of a boost to spellcasters. Warlocks already have invocations for eldritch blast and sorcerers already have metamagic so it's also redundant even if those classes do fall more into a damage style. Most major spell castsers fall into the control and support styles. They may have damage options, but they really don't need stronger damage options. Weaker damage options in cantrips doesn't actually take away from their main foci. My 2cp. [/QUOTE]

Verification