D&D 5E Limiting cantrips - advice needed

[houser2112]

I would go with the following:

• You get 5 cantrip slots. These refresh on a short rest.
• You learn the following cantrip free of charge:

Arcanist's Weapon
Transmutation cantrip

Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: Touch
Components: V, S
Duration: 24 hours or until cast again

You temporarily enchant a weapon for your own personal use. For the duration of the spell, the weapon is considered magical. When you reach higher levels, if you use the Attack action to make a single attack with the weapon, it gains bonus damage on that attack: 1d12 at 5th level, 2d12 at 11th level, and 3d12 at 17th level.

If you cast this spell again, the effect ends on any previously enchanted weapon.

That looks like a tasty target for a rogue using Magic Initiate, or a one level dip.

 

[Dausuul]

That looks like a tasty target for a rogue using Magic Initiate, or a one level dip.

Agreed. That occurred to me after I posted, so I rewrote it as a class feature that kicks in at level 5 and improves at 11 and 17.

 

[77IM]

I like the idea of incorporating caster level. That means low-level casters will feel the limitation but at higher levels (when the cantrip damage scaling matters more) you will have enough cantrip slots to blast away. Caster level + spellcasting ability (or half caster level + spellcasting ability for non-primary-casters) is an easy number to calculate because for casters who prepare spells, that's the number of spells they have prepared. I'd make this a per-day limit because otherwise the numbers rapidly increase to the point where a per-short-rest limit becomes meaningless.

Simplified idea: Below 5th level, you can use cantrips 5 times between short rests. At 5th level, you can use them at-will.
Another simplified idea: Below 5th level, you can't cause damage to a creature by using a cantrip. At 5th level, you can.

 

[Chocolategravy]

5E is based around having ~7 combat encounters. 2E is not. If you stick with 2E's fewer but harder encounters the players will naturally use their more powerful spells and not rely on their cantrips.

If you limit cantrips but keep 7 fights/day then you'll just end up with wizards hitting things with a stick nearly as well as fighters do, which should strike you as even further from old school flavor than cantrip spam.

 

[Kobold Stew]

By setting a limit on cantrips, you encourage players only to use them for combat. That, in my mind, is regressive. If I only have X castings per time period (regardless of X or the length of the time period), I'm not going to "waste" a cantrip slot to light. Or to mending, message, prestidigitation, or any of the flavourful cantrips that let a player feel "magical" without upsetting the balance of the game. Even Minor illusion is only going to be used when "needed", since it expends a limited resource.

I like the cantrip economy as is. The only limit I would suggest is against achieving overlapping effects (so using a combat spell to see; that erodes the need for light -- using prestidigitation to attract enemies; that erodes dancing lights -- etc.).

 

[pming]

Hiya.

In 5e, offensive cantrips are basically the spellcaster equivalent of "light crossbow", "dagger", or "sling bullet". This was one concern I had before we played our second game. Turns out, it's not so much of a problem, but it still could be.

What is that problem? The problem is that a wizard, for example, can cast firebolt all day long. The ranger, thief and cleric? They'll run out of ammo. This is a potential problem for me, so I did the following:

Any "damaging" cantrip (one that basically is meant to replace having to use a crossbow, dagger, etc.), needs a material component. That component is used up in the casting. I've allowed a variation of the above, with a specially prepared item (wand, ring, staff, whatever) to have the material component infused into it. The same effect though; each casting of a cantrip uses up one material component.

With the above change, "spamming cantrip" is as useful as "spamming light crossbow bolts". Eventually, you'll run out of ammo. Also, no need for new rules on how many cantrips you can have, or any additional special ability (or feat) needed. It, effectively, is "magic zappy ammo". If you loose it, you can't cast it...just like if a ranger looses his arrows or has them taken away from him.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Grainger]

The wizard spamming Firebolt?

Allows you to reduce fallen foes to ashes. Burn through walls. See in darkness. Etc

The Wizard's in a dark room. He keeps casting Fire Bolt to light the room up. Useful in an emergency, but these are still flashes of light, not a continual glow, so he's going to be moving slowly. What's more, any activities he does (looking for things etc.) will be at Disadvantage. The flashes (plus associated sound; DM's choice) will probably be more likely to alert enemies than a simple Light spell or a torch. Plus, he might set like to things (doors, chests, books, supporting beams) he doesn't want to.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I can see a lot of good things about 5E's cantrips. But I play to experience worlds like I read in fantasy fiction. And while there are some where a mage is an infinite Zippo, those aren't really the worlds I'm looking to experience.

I dislike hard limits though. In your case I'd consider a rule that each spell cast, regardless of level, costs the caster 1 hp. Thus they can still use their cantrips but there's a tradeoff that makes other options somewhat more attractive.

 

[Gadget]

Perhaps, If I understand the original poster's concerns correctly, it would be best to just limit cantrips (other than eldritch blast) to the utility variety. That way casters would still feel 'magical' but would not be constantly blasting. Maybe that would still feel too 'high magic' though.

 

[Meliath1742]

I think if my casters start using cantrips for things like intermittent torches I would start hinting around "a feeling of fatigue" that could start to affect them when they really need all of their mental faculties...