Inane cantrip question:

[ARandomGod]

The reason why they didn't give bonus spells for 0th level? Easy, anyone with Int 10 shouldn't get bonus spells at all

Psshht! They're bonus CANTRIPS!

But he's right you know. That's almost certainly the reason. We generally houserule it so that the table includes cantrips. It's incredibly easy (for anyone with high enough int to play a wizard....) to extrapolate the table back one level.

Of course, I've also debated with multiplying the number of cantrips a wizard/sorc gets by one half the caster level rounded up. So a first level gets all he would, as does a second, a third and fourth level get twice as many though... all the way up to level 20, where you get ten times the number of cantrips you would be getting. And this is with the bonus cantrips for high relevant stat mod. It greatly increases the magic feel to the character without really significantly increasing his power. So a high level caster will shoot a ray of cold to kill a roach now and then. That seems appropriate.

Seriously, it's not "overpowered". Look at what cantrips do.
The most "abusive" would be the ones that do damage perhaps. 1d3. The amount of damage you'd do throwing a rock. Of course, the wizard would be able to "throw" this ray or acid orb farther, and wouldn't get a strength penalty (as he's likely weak). On the other hand, by the time he's throwing cantrips... They CAN operate a crossbow, you know.

 

[ARandomGod]

I either dreamed up or read that the reasoning was if a spellcaster has the requisite ability score to cast cantrips then he automatically qualifies for a bonus cantrip, so the "extra" cantrip is already included in the spell chart.

Think of if a caster needed a 12 in the requisite stat to cast 1st level spells. Then every caster who could cast 1st level spells would get a bonus 1st level spell, so it would be just as easy to go ahead and include the bonus spell in the charts.

A bonus spell, sure. But that doesn't account for varying stat scores. Plus, if you look at the table, you will see that this clearly was not done. (Unless you're playing a bard or a sorc. Those who rely on charisma to cast spells can't be held accountable for not noticing what we who use wisdom or intel notice.)

 

[MerakSpielman]

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that not all spellcasting classes get 0 level spells, so it didn't make sense to start the bonus spell progression at 0 level.

Doesn't seem that adding bonus cantrips will hurt anything, though.

 

[DreamChaser]

We've given casters their spellcasting stat bonus as extra cantrips per day (so, a 16 Int wizard gets 3 extra cantrips per day). It's a small power boost at lower levels, and helps those first level wizards avoid feeling useless after they've cast their two-three spells for the day.

I also do this. Although some other people's ideas have gotten me thinking. In terms of wizard or clerics, don't change the number of cantrips they can prepare but give them a multiplier on the number of times they can cast their prepared cantrips before they lose them.

But that might be more complicated.

DC

 

[andargor]

At higher levels, having extra cantrips may be problematic. Consider the Archmage that has Arcane Fire throwing around 5d6 bolts as a Su ability nearly at will. Who needs Magic Missile?

Andargor

 

[RangerWickett]

In my home game, I allow unlimited cantrips. Really, it can't break the game.

Now, if some janky archmage thing uses the rules to cast 5d6 fireball cantrips, I'd just say no.

 

[JoeBlank]

A bonus spell, sure. But that doesn't account for varying stat scores. Plus, if you look at the table, you will see that this clearly was not done. (Unless you're playing a bard or a sorc. Those who rely on charisma to cast spells can't be held accountable for not noticing what we who use wisdom or intel notice.)

I'm not sure what you mean in saying this clearly was not done. For instance, a 1st level Wizard gets:

3 - 0 level
1 - 1st level

At 2d level, he advances to:

4 - 0 level
2 - 1st level

So I submit that the base for a Wizard 1 is 2 cantrips and 1 1st level spell, but they went ahead and added the bonus cantrip to the chart, making it 3 at 1st level.

 

[JimAde]

Unlimited cantrips might make it worthwhile for a rogue to dip into Sorcerer. 1d3...+5d6 Sneak Attack acid damage. I know he'd do more damage with a dagger, but if you have a Rat Bastard GM who likes to take your stuff on a regular basis, it could be worth doing.

 

[Evilhalfling]

I thought that some of these ideas seemed reasonable -
unless they are applied to cleric cantrips as well - with cure minor wounds
unlimited cantrips are not an option.
but total wis bonus = bonus cantrips, would be workable.

I have run mage battles where the enemy was down to cantrips for offense.


the rules do not include a bonus cantrip in the list, otherwise all 7th+ wizards would not have more 1st lvl spells than cantrips.

For aestic reasons, either giving the same number of bouns 1st lvl spells and bonus cantrips, or extrapolating backwards seem to be ideal solutions.

 

[ARandomGod]

I'm not sure what you mean in saying this clearly was not done. For instance, a 1st level Wizard gets:

3 - 0 level
1 - 1st level

At 2d level, he advances to:

4 - 0 level
2 - 1st level

So I submit that the base for a Wizard 1 is 2 cantrips and 1 1st level spell, but they went ahead and added the bonus cantrip to the chart, making it 3 at 1st level.

I could agree with that interpretation.
Although to do so you really need to look at the progression difference between non cantrip level spells. I've never thought of it that way simply for the reason that it doesn't account for or rely on a score at all.

It definitely screws with people who have an ability score of 18 or higher though, as they should be getting at least two bonus cantrips by that point.

But yes, the progression between 0 and 1 is one higher level of 0 than would *normally* be accounted for in the wizard and druid table.
The cleric and sorc tables do not reflect this virtual bonus.

At higher levels, having extra cantrips may be problematic. Consider the Archmage that has Arcane Fire throwing around 5d6 bolts as a Su ability nearly at will. Who needs Magic Missile?

Umm... I suppose I'm not familiar with the basics of why this would be considered a cantrip. Can you (or someone) elaborate?

I thought that some of these ideas seemed reasonable -
unless they are applied to cleric cantrips as well - with cure minor wounds
unlimited cantrips are not an option.
but total wis bonus = bonus cantrips, would be workable.

Unlimited cure minor would certainly destroy many games. Always heal to full after every battle!

But I don't think that the multiplier I suggested would be *too* much. Sure, that's a lot of extra healing, but it's not unlimited.

On the other hand, I really only use that bonus multiplier rule for arcane casters. I felt that they needed the extra flavor. Divine casters only get the table extrapolated backwards. Which is quite good enough.

I have run mage battles where the enemy was down to cantrips for offense.

the rules do not include a bonus cantrip in the list, otherwise all 7th+ wizards would not have more 1st lvl spells than cantrips.

For aestic reasons, either giving the same number of bouns 1st lvl spells and bonus cantrips, or extrapolating backwards seem to be ideal solutions.

I like extrapolating backwards, just to be... even. I like the arcane casters to have some extra fluff to throw around. Every arcanist should have a decent amount of prestidigitaion to throw around by mid levels. IMO.