D&D 5E reducing dominance of ranged: cantrips

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Gadget]

Moving on, however, we get to the gravamen of the issue; almost all attack cantrips (with the exception of Firebolt) are limited in this targeting. Which means that either you play by the RAW, in which case Firebolt becomes that much more useful, or you limit Firebolt (go against the RAW and/or "nerf"), or you step back and wonder why it makes any sense that the caster can, say, summon acid at will, but only to kill things. Which may make sense from a purely gamist and balance perspective (assuming firebolt is an accident), but doesn't, you know, make sense.

While it is undoubtedly gamist from a certain perspective, I don't find it to be too reason defying to surmise that magic operates under different rules and that attack cantrips must have a target creature to focus upon to bring about a detrimental supernatural effect that mimics real world phenomenon. That may amount to "cause it's magic" in some people's eyes, and I suppose it does at the end of the day, but I can work with it. It does make Firebolt the odd man out though.

WIW, my table hates the "always on" cantrips. Which is why we are thinking about a return to 1e, or modifying the rules regarding cantrips. And why threads like this are useful; at least to the extent that they promote a conversation about the issue for those table that are considering it an issue, as opposed to assuming that this a communication issue.

TL;DR- If I can give some constructive advice, it might be helpful to assume that his table finds this to be an issue, and provide advice on same, instead of assuming that because you don't find it to be an issue, it is just a DM issue.

Not being pleased with the aesthetics of the 'always on' cantrips I can completely understand and sympathize with entirely. I myself am not fully comfortable with them from a flavor perspective. I don't really have a problem with Prestidigitation and the like, but some of the others are not my favorite. Perhaps at a higher level (10+) make the 'unlimited' or something. But the original post has posited the question from the position of the 'Dominance' of Ranged combat, implying that the cantrips were over powered in some way and citing examples that were dubious rulings (dissolve a body, Firebolt as blowtorch), or might fall under the label, IMHO, of 'bag o' rats' syndrome.

It may be that ranged cantrips do indeed contribute to the dominance of ranged combat, leading to kiting situations or some other issues. I do not wish to be too contrarian, and realize that everyone has different tastes and play styles. If I were of a mind to limit cantrips while still trying to make them a useful fall back for spell casters, I would probably limit them to 4 plus spellcasting stat bonus per short rest. This would still give them enough to feel comfortable in combat while limiting the endless 'pew, pew, pew' through any obstacle. It would, of course, increase book keeping somewhat, and I'm not sure how this would effect the warlock--a class that is almost built around Eldritch Blast.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[LapBandit]

I agree mostly with OP, however solved it very simply:
Ranged cantrips that aren't Eldritch Blast scale 1 time, at 11th level.
Eldritch Blast scales with Warlock level.

In other Ranged nerfs:

Archery Fighting style allows you to ignore half-cover.
Sharpshooter is a half feat that ups your ignore cover mechanic from none to half or half to 3/4.

In other melee buffs:

Two Weapon Fighting Style gives you non-Light weapons and modifier to offhand.
Dual Wielder loses the +1 AC and non-Light weapons, now gives offhand attack as part of Attack Action, Attacks of Opportunity that hit roll both weapon's damage.

Very happy with where melee/range/caster is after these changes.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Though I'd really prefer magic users to be really rare, as in you have never met one and you probably don't know anyone who has met one. Not Gandalf rare, not 5 total. But very few, very far between. That's what I'd prefer, but it is hard to square that with an adventuring party of five that has two spellcasters.

And a party of 5 with /three/ non-casters is a little hard to square with the choices in the PH, for that matter. Sure, a Champion, Berserker, Theif, Evoker, and Life Cleric isn't exactly impossible or untenable (while a Champion, BM, Berserker, Rogue, & Assassin /is/ probably untenable). But a Paladin, Druid, Bard, Wizard, and Cleric - 5 casters out 5 - isn't exactly implausible, either. D&D in general, and 5e in particular, doesn't, in it's class choices, exactly paint a picture of a world in which casting is at all uncommon. At least 3e went to the trouble of actually saying that the world was 70% commoners.

 

[Alatar]

And a party of 5 with /three/ non-casters is a little hard to square with the choices in the PH, for that matter. Sure, a Champion, Berserker, Theif, Evoker, and Life Cleric isn't exactly impossible or untenable (while a Champion, BM, Berserker, Rogue, & Assassin /is/ probably untenable). But a Paladin, Druid, Bard, Wizard, and Cleric - 5 casters out 5 - isn't exactly implausible, either.

That is certainly true. In our current campaign, we have a party of 7. Four of the 7 are casters. And this is an all-melee party, not by agreement; it just happened that way. The life cleric is the least melee oriented of the bunch, but even she finds herself jumping in. Peer pressure, I guess.

D&D in general, and 5e in particular, doesn't, in it's class choices, exactly paint a picture of a world in which casting is at all uncommon. At least 3e went to the trouble of actually saying that the world was 70% commoners.

I guess it depends on how you skin it. If it's a party of "adventurers" who just happened to get thrown together by happenstance, and all or most of them sling magic as a matter of course, then yeah, this is a world where magic is dirt common and the fact that there isn't a Ye Olde Magic Shoppe in every town square is a sign of a dysfunctional economy. But if this is a Suicide Squad, X-Men, Justice League assortment of rare to unique individuals, carefully assembled by some guiding force in the world, then no Magic Shops.

Of course, neither of those scenarios is contemplated in the majority of campaigns. Magic is rare and wonderous. Most of us heroes use it daily. The contradiction that these two facts about the world embody will go unexamined. Disbelief is suspended.

That last option is the one we play. Four out of 7 party members are magic slingers. Magic items exist. No one knows how they were made, and in 11 levels of play we have encountered but a few of them. There are two or three +1 weapons in our party of 7, and this is our high magic campaign.

All-melee parties are really fun by the way. I won't claim that ranged isn't superior in some ways to melee. I'm sure that DPR-wise that's true. This thread and the other one attest to that. But melee is probably more fun. Melee combat is less repetitive, more tactical, more immediate, visceral, immersive. I'd rather play a melee battlemaster with the Shield Master feat, trip attack, menacing attack, and riposte than a ranged sharpshooter/crossbow expert battlemaster with trip attack, pushing attack. precision attack and commander's strike. DPR is meaningless hair-splitting in this regard. It will seem like either battlemaster is slaying mightily. The DM is going to strive to walk the same knife edge regardless of whether the party is strong or weak by any objective standard.

Which is to say, I see no problem with cantrips in the current regime. Part of that may be the shared philosophical approach that my group of players takes toward the game. We have been at it, as a group, since 1981, and we have always accepted the game presented to us. We don't houserule at all. We do ignorerule sometimes. Weapon speed was never a big thing. My 11th level battlemaster is still working on the field rations that came with his starting equipment. But that's about the extent of it. In 4e and 5e, there are hardly any rules to ignore. In 1st edition AD&D there were plenty of rules that begged to be ignored. But we've never really changed stuff.

We've always played under the assumption that the folks who were paid real money to spend 40 hours a week designing the game were going to be orders of magnitude better at it than we would be. When I was a little kid, my father taught me the deal with criminals. He pointed out that the cops don't have to be really smart or particularly good at their jobs. They just have to show up for work 5 days a week. They work in shifts, around the clock. They get medical, dental and pensions. They get paid vacations. Criminals don't stand a chance. When it comes to game design, we're the criminals.

So, I guess I don't accept the unstated premise of this thread, which is that anyone here is likely to improve the game by fiddling with the mechanics.

Cantrips are what wizards do when they are running low on the cool stuff. There is one class that specializes in one particular cantrip, and they have to sell their soul to the DM to do it. And comparing cantrips to what we had in 3rd edition is silly. At 16th level in 3rd edition, wizards were chasing down demigods across the planes of existence. They were spanking krakens. Cantrips? They didn't need no steenkeen cantrips.

 

[Tony Vargas]

That is certainly true. In our current campaign, we have a party of 7. Four of the 7 are casters. And this is an all-melee party...All-melee parties are really fun by the way. I won't claim that ranged isn't superior in some ways to melee. I'm sure that DPR-wise that's true. This thread and the other one attest to that. But melee is probably more fun.

I can see that. One reason it's nice to have relative balance - whether system- or DM- imposed, is it means you can gravitate towards what's fun without worrying so much about what's viable.

Cantrips are what wizards do when they are running low on the cool stuff. There is one class that specializes in one particular cantrip, and they have to sell their soul to the DM to do it.

Nod. As I see it, cantrips and spells both contribute the 'ranged' side of the ranged vs melee analysis.

And comparing cantrips to what we had in 3rd edition is silly.

But inevitable. Fans of 3e aren't meant to be intentionally excluded from 5e, either.

We've always played under the assumption that the folks who were paid real money to spend 40 hours a week designing the game were going to be orders of magnitude better at it than we would be.

Fair 'nuff, but only at what they're actually trying to accomplish, which might not be exactly what any one homebrewer wants
...and...

So, I guess I don't accept the unstated premise of this thread, which is that anyone here is likely to improve the game by fiddling with the mechanics.

A stated premise of 5e is that it's designed with the expectation that DMs will mod it ("make it your own!"). One of many considerations that may have pushed little things like range vs melee considerations far down on the list of their priorities.

When I was a little kid, my father taught me the deal with criminals. He pointed out that the cops don't have to be really smart or particularly good at their jobs. They just have to show up for work 5 days a week. They work in shifts, around the clock. They get medical, dental and pensions. They get paid vacations. Criminals don't stand a chance. When it comes to game design, we're the criminals.

No doubt some forumites see themselves as the Holmes dedicated amateur (or Moriarty criminal mastermind) to Mr. Mearls's seasoned-full-time-professional Lestrade.

 

[dkmurphy]

***Snip***

Cantrips are what wizards do when they are running low on the cool stuff. There is one class that specializes in one particular cantrip, and they have to sell their soul to the DM to do it. And comparing cantrips to what we had in 3rd edition is silly. At 16th level in 3rd edition, wizards were chasing down demigods across the planes of existence. They were spanking krakens. Cantrips? They didn't need no steenkeen cantrips.

After playing and DMing 5e for awhile I have had no issues with unlimited cantrips. In fact I think that it can contribute to casters relying more on cantrips in many cases and less on their spells, and that limits the casters effectiveness. Higher level spells can do WAY more, and that versatility is the strength of casters. Being able to pew pew pew something is what the fighting classes do and do better. Sure a Warlock has an awesome cantrip ability and a quick dip MC gets you something cool, but selling your soul..... With the groups I have played in, Warlocks have been rare because the players like role playing, and don't like the idea of selling their characters soul.... There are always some combos that can "break" the game or more accurately be ANNOYING for a DM.

A player doing the same thing over and over and over is annoying. It is also boring. The ultimate game balance mechanic though is that anything a PC can do an NPC can do too. I never really liked playing blaster type casters, it feels pretty boring to me and also never really enjoyed playing fighters for the same reason, however some of my friends do and find it fun. Good for both of us.

If a caster is in a cell with a lock, ask yourself, do you WANT them to escape? If no, come up with an acceptable reason why their plan won't work. If you DO want them to escape who cares how they do it. If it is a question of timing, you CONTROL that. If you don't like YOUR dice rolls cheat, especially if it makes a better STORY. I tell my players I cheat at rolls, just not which ones. Heck I reward creative spell use. If they use the same thing over and over I'll find a way to counter it for smarter enemies with intelligence gathering ability. This works better for home games less for AL type play, but still doable. Ultimate balance is NPC can do and should do what the PC's do. If players are relying on cantrips so much that means they lack the creativity to really mess your plans up with better spells = easier to come up with cooler challenges.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Eubani]

No one has yet to convince me that there is any real problem with cantrips with the exception of level dipping into Warlock for Eldritch Blast and the Invocations. This is more a multiclassing issue than a cantrip one. Maybe make Eldritch Blast a class ability that is not gained via multiclassing, to be honest I don't even believe that far is required.