D&D 5E No Cantrips Module

[Shadowsoul]

I just started a thread about Cantrips and the world of Dragonlance, these at will replacement ideas are great.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

It seems like we're all over the place with this thread. Here are the things that just keep standing out to me:

1. People who want this module also aren't generally interested in nerfing wizards. Even if they choose to only use this module, it should be theoretically balanced right alongside a standard wizard.
2. It's a heck of a lot easier to do this if we aren't rewriting the standard wizard class.
3. People who want this module generally want an old-school feel. Giving a wizard a certain number of cantrips based on some formula doesn't really solve it, because you are still lacking the vancian effect.
4. People who dislike at-will cantrips are prone to prefer old-school gaming where you may have many encounters in a day and the ability to keep blasting all day long actually matters.

Given #1 and #2, we need an equivalent exchange. Something you trade in for the loss of cantrips that is roughly equivalent in power. If this module is opt-in on a player by player basis, it needs to be something that some, but not all (probably not most) players will feel a desire to use.

Given #3 and #4, comparing cantrips to weapons isn't relevant. No matter how you slice it, a wizard using a weapon is nowhere near equivalent to a wizard using a (current scaling) cantrip. At 1st level a wizard can do well with a crossbow (or perhaps a longbow for an elf), but at 20th level a cantrip does 5d8. 5d8! Even if you are anelf with 20 Dex and a +3 longbow that 5d8(!!!) is blowing you out of the water. Did I mention 5d8? So, "most campaigns don't go to 20th level." Apparently the logical ending to that statement, "so game balance no longer matters at high level" doesn't bother some people. So let's look at mid-levels and more reasonable weapon stats. Let's say you are a 10th level wizard with a 16 Dex and a +1 longbow or +1 crossbow. You're doing an average of 8.5 damage, while a 3d8 cantrip is doing an average of 13.5, and by the way, you get a special effect on the target with a cantrip. Still not an acceptable trade.

We need (for those who want this module--I probably won't use it myself, since I enjoy-at will cantrips, sans crazy scaling) a module:

A. That is a balanced trade that some, but not most/all players will find desirable.
B. That doesn't mess with the original class.
C. And that preserves a more old-school vancian feel (and long adventuring day sacrifice) by not creating a system that just rewires "at-will" into a lesser number of spontaneous cantrips.

I'd recommend treating cantrips as 1st level spells (so that read magic and such are still available). I'd also recommend providing something that is worth about a feat in compensation. I see that this is highly problematic at 1st level, due to level dipping. The ability to take the arcane initiate feat isn't relevant, because this module would/should forbid the wizard from learning at-will cantrips by any means. So perhaps a better option would simply be to grant them an additional 1st level spell slot, and the ability to prepare an additional spell of each level from 1-4 (or so). I would have given them 2 additional spell slots, but this would make the option too appealing for those who play short adventuring days and never use their free cantrip bazookas, thereby making it too appealing of an option for that group.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I'm kind of new around here, but I can't tell whether or not you're joking. Just based on personal experience, I've prepared Read Magic probably a dozen times throughout the various editions, but there's simply never been a reason to cast it. Maybe because we've never figured out how you're supposed to write magic, so we just have inscriptions and spellbooks written in a mundane existing language.

It certainly wouldn't be something that sticks out in my mind as a mandatory ability that must be included if cantrips were removed.

Not Joking --

As I read the rules, Read Magic is the only way you can add to your spell book apart from level advancement.

If you want to add a spell from another caster, you need to be able to read the magic (we can ignore the meaningless fluff about secret alphabets) -- Classes p. 31

If you want to add a spell from a scroll (reading the scroll without activating the magic), you need to be able to read magic -- magic items p. 19

(The spell also allows magic runes, etc. to be identified; that's a third use called out in the spell description -- spells p. 44-45, as a supplement to Comprehend languages (explicitly at spells p. 14))

I'll add that I think this is a crazy set of rules that could be avoided, and that they could be presented much more clearly, but if this is not the intention, then the above passages are nonsensical.

If a caster does not choose read magic as a cantrip, then the only way to expand the spell book is through level advancement. That, of course, will be a straightforward choice for many players who don't want to play the mini-game of building up your spell book; and it's a completely legit choice.

I'll also point out two further problems:

1. Spellbooks contain cantrips. Because cantrips are at-will, Read Magic is the only limit on spell casters rapidly expanding their cantrip list *all* cantrips. That for me is not desirable, but it is the only limit. If the above reading is wrong, then every mage should be able to cast all cantrips trivially if they ever had any friends.

2. Bards and Druids also have read magic on their lists. Clerics don't. It is a much weaker choice for these classes, since they lack a spell book.

Hope this helps.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

What if cantrips were unlimited, but inflicted a minor penalty?

Like, let's say that using a cantrip gives you -1 max hp for a minute, cumulative. So if you cast 5 cantrips in a minute you're at -5 hp which is a Big Deal TM, but over the course of a day you can space them out and it's no harm at all.

That's more complicated than I'd want it to work, but just getting a feel for what types of things can bridge the gap.

The 1 hp of damage per cantrip I suggested upthread has a very similar effect and is simpler to use. I like your idea quite a lot, but it may be a bit much for people that dislike tracking effects.

 

[Mistwell]

I'm kind of new around here, but I can't tell whether or not you're joking. Just based on personal experience, I've prepared Read Magic probably a dozen times throughout the various editions, but there's simply never been a reason to cast it. Maybe because we've never figured out how you're supposed to write magic, so we just have inscriptions and spellbooks written in a mundane existing language.

It certainly wouldn't be something that sticks out in my mind as a mandatory ability that must be included if cantrips were removed.

As written right now, if you find a scroll or spellbook there is a decent chance it's written in a code you will not be able to decipher on your own without the read magic spell (presumably the only ones not in such a code are the ones intended for sale, or being used to teach wizards in a somewhat public way). And if you cannot read it, then you obviously cannot cast it, and you also cannot put it in your spellbook as a new spell.

So, if you don't have the read magic spell either prepared, or itself in scroll form, you won't be able to use a lot of scrolls and spellbooks you find.

 

[Mistwell]

Given #3 and #4, comparing cantrips to weapons isn't relevant. No matter how you slice it, a wizard using a weapon is nowhere near equivalent to a wizard using a (current scaling) cantrip. At 1st level a wizard can do well with a crossbow (or perhaps a longbow for an elf), but at 20th level a cantrip does 5d8. 5d8! Even if you are anelf with 20 Dex and a +3 longbow that 5d8(!!!) is blowing you out of the water.

First, who cares what happens at 20th level? Seriously, most campaigns don't ever get that far, and the issue focuses on where most campaigns will experience the issue. So it's nothing like the 5d8.

Second, saying 5d8 with three exclamation marks (and multiple times too) doesn't actually make it more than it is - and what it is, is low damage in this context. 5d8 is about 22.5 damage. It's only 22.5 damage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For a 20th level character, this is not particularly meaningful. Due to bounded accuracy, their attack role is still sometimes failing (for zero damage), and the monster they are attacking has a lot more hit points, and often has a lot more means to be outside the range of that spell (but likely still in the range of a crossbow). Meanwhile, they have so many spells, which do so much more damage at those levels, that it's even more silly to be putting three exclamation marks next to 22.5 damage for a regular attack spell requiring an attack roll at 20th level.

Bottom line, your 20th level character won't be common, and even when they do come up, they won't be using this spell much anyway. They're going to wish they had a longer range attack when facing that ancient red dragon.

So we're really talking about much lower levels - levels at which the crossbow does around the same damage. Because ability scores naturally go up but they max out at 20 this way, and because Dex is generally the second best score for a mage, we're talking about +3 to +5 damage for their crossbow (which has a much longer range than the ray of frost). So that crossbow is doing better damage than the spell at low levels, and continues to roughly keep up through 9th level. From 10th to 14th level it starts to do about 4-5 points damage more than the crossbow, which just so happens to be the levels where that 4-5 extra damage becomes less meaningful as hit points continued to go up, your other spells continue to do more damage, and your attack rolls are still failing sometimes due to bounded accuracy. And that's also around where most campaigns seem to end, according to survey data.

Bottom line, for most campaigns, it's a very marginal difference. An awful lot of people will want to choose a different cantrip than an attack cantrip, particularly once they start to crunch the numbers and see how little difference it makes relative to the crossbow, and the added range of the crossbow.

I am glad you like the attack cantrips and think they do AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!! amounts of damage. But my mages will never be taking any of them, unless they find a scroll of them. They're not good spells. I'd much rather have minor illusion, light, read magic, and mage hand.

 

[Mistwell]

If a caster does not choose read magic as a cantrip, then the only way to expand the spell book is through level advancement.

Or buying a read magic scroll and adding that to their spell book. Which won't be that common a thing.

1. Spellbooks contain cantrips. Because cantrips are at-will, Read Magic is the only limit on spell casters rapidly expanding their cantrip list *all* cantrips. That for me is not desirable, but it is the only limit. If the above reading is wrong, then every mage should be able to cast all cantrips trivially if they ever had any friends.

No you are correct. With read magic and the ingredients to write spells to your spellbook, you can add more cantrips to your spell book when you find them. The problem is finding them.

 

[Dausuul]

No matter how you slice it, a wizard using a weapon is nowhere near equivalent to a wizard using a (current scaling) cantrip. At 1st level a wizard can do well with a crossbow (or perhaps a longbow for an elf), but at 20th level a cantrip does 5d8. 5d8!

That's true assuming you don't grant the wizard any compensating bonus with the weapon in question. Here's one way to even it up:

Arcane Skill: Starting at 5th level, you can use your Intelligence in place of Dexterity or Strength for attacks with wizard weapons.
Arcane Speed: Starting at 15th level, when you use your action to attack with a wizard weapon, you can make one extra attack with that weapon.

So, if you're using a light crossbow, you'll be dealing 1d8+4 at 5th level, which is right about on par with the 2d8 you'd get from ray of frost. This will rise to 1d8+5 when you max out your Intelligence. Then at 15th level, it becomes 2d8+10, which is slightly better than the 4d8 ray of frost. Furthermore, you can boost both damage and accuracy with a magic crossbow, an option not available to the cantrip user.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

So, if you're using a light crossbow, you'll be dealing 1d8+4 at 5th level, which is right about on par with the 2d8 you'd get from ray of frost. This will rise to 1d8+5 when you max out your Intelligence. Then at 15th level, it becomes 2d8+10, which is slightly better than the 4d8 ray of frost. Furthermore, you can boost both damage and accuracy with a magic crossbow, an option not available to the cantrip user.

Not so much with the crossbow, though, since those still have the loading property that limits you to one attack per round. You could do it with a regular bow, though, if you picked up proficiency through a race or feat. You could also just go dagger-frenzy on someone, Black Mage style.

 

[Blackwarder]

I don't have a problem with cantrips in general, but I realy dislike most of the attack cantrips. For me, a cantrip is a inor magic, easily mastered by some one who is dedicated to studying the Art and a stepping stone for more potent spells, but not something very powerfull on its own.

Lets take for example Ray of Frost as one of the most iconic offenders, it does the same damage equivalent to a long sword and it for a hindering effect on top of it and that completely disregarding the fact that it just feels meh.

Here are a couple of cantrips I would like to see:

Fire Fingers (Minor Flame) - you conjure a small flame on one of your hands (in your Palm or any of your fingers), the flame cast light as bright a candle and you can use it to light up any easily flammable objects, the flame itself will cause 1d6+int modifier points of damage to any object other than you, while you have the flame in your hand your hand is immune to fire. You can only have one flame at a time.

Ice Shard (Ice Dagger) - You conjure a shard of ice in your hand, the shard is generally shaped like a crudely fashioned dagger and as such have the same characteristic as a normal dagger but you can fashion it as any kind of tiny crudely fashioned object, the shard will last for 10 minutes, by the end of this time the shard will dissolve to a tiny puddle of water.

Those two are the kind of cantrips I would like to see, they can be very versatile, they don't feel like a finished spell but as fracture of one, and they can be used by an innovative player to cause mayhem in interesting ways.

Warder