Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6776658" data-attributes="member: 16814">Dude, shove off.  I'm not misinformed.  You're attacking arguments I didn't make.  I never restricted myself to EB, and all cantrips that can get better with level do get better with level (firebolt, which I used as an example, frex).  I can't even imagine how the opportunity cost for a feat is more than an entirely class level which prevents capstones and slows progression in primary abilities, so, yeah.  Mellord did show that heavy C-bow is a better options, provided the target doesn't have resistance that you can't bypass.  And that fact is something I also noted as arguing in my favor because the classes that don't advance spell levels all have compensating things that make it less useful to rely on cantrips, even fully powered ones.  So there's no need to give fully powered cantrips because they're not necessary.  Useful, yes, but not necessary.And that brings me to my third point. The MOST I've said about the cantrips is that they are useful.  End point.  Arguments that imply I think they are overpowered or game breaking are off target.  Finally, all I said was that I didn't like the rule.  IMC, cantrips will level by spellcaster multiclassing rules.  This isn't such a complex statement that it requires a careful numbers analysis of the mechanical impacts -- there were small to begin with and they remain small.  It goes to flavor only.  And no amount of you telling me to relax and look up the subject will change the flavor argument.We clear?</blockquote>

Verification