D&D 5E Limiting Cantrips?

[Ruin Explorer]

No pitfalls came true. No mass purchases of light crossbows, darts, or daggers. No casters complaining that they didn't feel they were contributing, or it was too limiting, etc.

I can totally believe no complaining, especially given the players signed up to it, and anyone who would likely have complained was thus eliminated from even being involved.

1 + Stat mod Jinxes is likely 4-5 combat cantrips for most PCs (6 at higher levels) per SR. 5E is balanced around 6-8 combats, usually of 3-4 rounds per adventuring day and 2 short rests. So if your group takes regular short rests it's not surprising that was enough Jinxes, assuming every other round they used a leveled spell.

I am slightly surprised people didn't buy light crossbows, though - they're actually more effective than combat cantrips a lot of the time on classes which don't get some sort of damage or to-hit improvement with combat cantrip (assuming a decent DEX).

What I don't entirely get is how this ended up different from normal though - because your limit on combat cantrips was pretty high, there's no real reason not to use them every round you would have anyway? You're complaining about the laser light show, and that's a perfectly reasonable aesthetic complaint, but did your changes actually result in significantly less combat cantrips being cast? It seems like they wouldn't have.

 

[Bolares]

Wizards should be Wizards. Always very bizarre they have to resort to a xbow or other weapon that are equally bad with.
If they use a cantrip a round I can't see any issue, they are doing " wizard" each round.

I was very confused and dissapointed when I first played a wizard. I was promised a game where I could play a wizard, and I got a crappy archer that could do magic twice a day. (at least that was my first impression)

 

[Horwath]

I was very confused and dissapointed when I first played a wizard. I was promised a game where I could play a wizard, and I got a crappy archer that could do magic twice a day. (at least that was my first impression)

yeah, I mostly played elven wizards in 3.5e as having a longbow is 3 categories less demeaning than heavy crossbow.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I was very confused and dissapointed when I first played a wizard. I was promised a game where I could play a wizard, and I got a crappy archer that could do magic twice a day. (at least that was my first impression)

This was certainly a common reaction in earlier versions of D&D from new players. In 2E it was even worse. New players would pick Wizard, and be astonished that they could cast like 1-2 spells/day, and otherwise had to hit things with a stick. I think it was part of what lead to a huge number of second/third characters being Fighter/Mages and the like, because people wanted to cast spells, but they didn't want to just hang out throwing daggers or hitting with sticks.

 

[Bolares]

This was certainly a common reaction in earlier versions of D&D from new players. In 2E it was even worse. New players would pick Wizard, and be astonished that they could cast like 1-2 spells/day, and otherwise had to hit things with a stick. I think it was part of what lead to a huge number of second/third characters being Fighter/Mages and the like, because people wanted to cast spells, but they didn't want to just hang out throwing daggers or hitting with sticks.

Yeah, I hated the disbalance, you went from useless to soloing the game. There was no half measure.

 

[HammerMan]

I have done the opisite. I make up new cantrips and give them out as 'treasure' and even as a PC take warlock invocations (Speak w/dead at will, mage armor at will, speak w animals at will) that give more at will spells

 

[HammerMan]

Yeah, I hated the disbalance, you went from useless to soloing the game. There was no half measure.

I remember it was my 3rd or 4th campaign we had a player who had been playing a few years longer than us (and had a car) and had been to a few cons come in as a ranger 3 duel classed into wizard. We watched as he leveled and "owned" the game. other players would say it was the "alex show".
A few years later we all were playing spellcasters and trying to convince DMs to start at level 4+. (Since at low level wizards were no fun and no one wanted to have fun for 3-5 levels then sit out the rest of the campaign.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I just hope that the people who want to remove attack cantrips aren't also the same people who get mad about dump stats? Because if you are going to require all of your casters to shoot crossbows in combat you're going to see another uptick in DEX-heavy characters.

At least having attack cantrips that use your spellcasting stat makes the need for DEX being your second-highest stat less of an imperative. I mean, it's still going to be a popular ability score... but it just isn't AS necessary than if you were stuck using ranged weapons all the time.

 

[Rogerd1]

I remember having a similar discussion on the Palladium boards a while back, that supers could blast until the cows came home, but a mage would need to use a weapon. And that DnD / PF still has the same problems, and that it has not been sorted out is annoying.

Personally I just assign power points for spells are a certain level. Then ensure that any magic-users start with Con in PP, which increases by the 50% every level. That should allow players to cast as they will, but also be very careful about using higher level magic which will cost them in energy, and also maybe assign fatigue if they use too much in one go.

Just like you see in movies and comics.

 

[Rogerd1]

Double post