Spells that should be rituals or cantrips.

[JasonZZ]

If the rogue is the only class that can open locks, then I'm totally cool with making it a cheap ritual. If people can gain training with the Thievery skills without being a rogue (like in 4E), then I'd rather it just be a function of the skill, rather than magic.

I really, really hate Restricted skills.

I'm not talking about making it a restricted skill. I agree that anything that can reasonably considered a skill should be available to anyone who takes the appropriate background/theme/skill training/whatever 5e offers for skills. However, skill use is apparently the rogue's shtick, and I don't want that made irrelevant by a spell. That is what I meant by making Knock either expensive or unreliable.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I fail to see the downside to offering it as a ritual. There may be a downside to using it, but mechanically, it should be an option. I know I wouldn't waste a spell slot on it. In a party without a rogue, destroying doors isn't always your best bet; you might want to reuse them later.

I think knock as a ritual would be a bad thing, as it fits the 'wand of knock replaces a rogue' problem. If you can unlock any door with a bit of time and money, the rogue will feel wasted as a locksmith.

If knock can only be done by taking up a valuable spell slot, then you don't have the problem of sad rogues.

 

[Stormonu]

Rituals: how about just saying that any spell can work as a ritual (provided your character has the ability to do so), then standardize the costs so that all spells of the same level can be "ritualized" for the same gp cost and same casting time?

Cantrips: I am still undecided whether cantrips at will is a good or bad idea, so at the moment every suggestion to make one spell a cantrip does not meet my favour.

Can I have a ritual Fireball?

I think rituals should be a tool for any spell that you want to last more than a few rounds. Spell slots would be for "immediate effects", while rituals would be best for duration.

Also, it'd be nice if some spells could be flipped between cantrips and slotted spells. Make cantrips only ever last a round (think 3E's Spontaneous spells), and that should help. Then you could have three versions of a spell for different uses/effects. Cantrip, Memorized and Ritual spells.

------
Knock as a cantrip? Give the next person who tries to open a sealed object a bonus to their check.

Knock as a memorized spell? Opens one sealed object up to a fixed DC.

Knock as a ritual spell? Takes time, but you can open sealed objects of a higher DC.
------

Shield as a cantrip? Gain cover bonus for a round.

Shield as a memorized spell? Gain cover bonus that lasts for a short time (about the length of a combat)

Shield as a ritual? Grant 3/4 cover and/or extended duration.

-------

Magic Missile as a cantrip? Ranged attack that deals 1d4+1 damage.

Magic Missile as a memorized spell? Create X numbers of magic bolts that unerringly strike their target.

Magic Missile as a ritual? Err...probably not.

 

[Li Shenron]

Can I have a ritual Fireball?

I think rituals should be a tool for any spell that you want to last more than a few rounds. Spell slots would be for "immediate effects", while rituals would be best for duration.

Why not?

I totally understand that some spells don't make much sense as rituals. Anything meant to be used in combat clearly cannot require you to sit down and cast it in 10 minutes! Fireball would be therefore normally be prepared in a slot.

But if the designers have to think for each and every spell whether it should be allowed as a ritual or not, this is going to take a lot of design time... and furthermore it is prone to errors, because I'm quite sure there will be spells without a "ritual" tag that some people would like to be ritualizeable or wonder "why the hell didn't they allow this as a ritual?".

I think it would be so much easier for both designers and gamers, if we had a general rule that (provided your character has the ability to ritualize spells) allows every spell to be cast as a ritual. No ad-hoc analysis needed by the designers, saved space in the books, and saved timed to the DM.

If the main downside of that is that some spells could but would never be ritualized because there's little reason to do so, this to me is a minimal downside if one at all.

-> let's keep in mind here that so far a "ritualized" spell works exactly the same as a prepared spell, except that you cast it without preparation and the cost for that is a casting time so long that it would be impossible "on the fly" i.e. in combat, on the run, or in another stressful and strict-timed situation THEREFORE it is quite hard for me to imaging how this can be gamebreaking for any spell

------
Knock as a cantrip? Give the next person who tries to open a sealed object a bonus to their check.

Knock as a memorized spell? Opens one sealed object up to a fixed DC.

Knock as a ritual spell? Takes time, but you can open sealed objects of a higher DC.
------

Shield as a cantrip? Gain cover bonus for a round.

Shield as a memorized spell? Gain cover bonus that lasts for a short time (about the length of a combat)

Shield as a ritual? Grant 3/4 cover and/or extended duration.

-------

Magic Missile as a cantrip? Ranged attack that deals 1d4+1 damage.

Magic Missile as a memorized spell? Create X numbers of magic bolts that unerringly strike their target.

Magic Missile as a ritual? Err...probably not.

Really lovely ideas, but IMHO these would seriously complicate the game design and DMing... these means that each spell's description will at least double, so for me it shouldn't really be attempted by the core game.

 

[Kzach]

Also, it'd be nice if some spells could be flipped between cantrips and slotted spells. Make cantrips only ever last a round (think 3E's Spontaneous spells), and that should help. Then you could have three versions of a spell for different uses/effects. Cantrip, Memorized and Ritual spells.

I wish I could rep you. I totally love the idea of having three levels of spells: cantrips, memorised, ritual. That just rocks.

In fact, if you scaled the power via that method, you could then also have class variants. Imagine a sorcerer as someone who only cast cantrips. His spells are weaker but he has access to them all at-will. That would be so awesome. And also a ritualist, perhaps they pre-cast one ritual per level or something, similar to how a scroll is a spell that is pre-cast with a trigger word. So they have very limited options, but those options are awesomely powerful.

 

[VannATLC]

I prefer to use magic as a tool, in my games. So an 'open' or 'knock' spell works by granting the wizard telekinetic control and remote viewing.. Fiendishly complex locks still need somebody who understands those locks mechanics.

Personally, I detest the use of magic that acts as its own agent. IE, the wizard who knows nothing about locks, yet can cast a spell to open any lock. It imbues magic itself as an agent. (which is fine if you look at mages as clerics worshipping a sentient energy force)
For the same reason, I don't allow spells which translate written text, or easily allows spoken language translation. I require knowledge checks of creature biology to establish a telepathic link.

 

[Kzach]

Personally, I detest the use of magic that acts as its own agent. IE, the wizard who knows nothing about locks, yet can cast a spell to open any lock. It imbues magic itself as an agent.

Maybe therein lies the answer? Knock spells can open locks in an area of effect without the need for thieves' tools or being a rogue but still requiring Open Locks as a skill and still requiring a skill roll.

A cantrip version could open the lock (provided a successful roll) you point at within 10-ft. A memorised version could open all locks (provided successful rolls) within a 30-ft. radius. A ritual version could open all locks in a structure like a castle or house (provided successful rolls).

The rogue isn't made redundant because he can do it whenever the hell he wants, wherever he wants and with Skill Mastery to boot. Plus is more likely to have a higher modifier.

 

[Leatherhead]

Personally, I detest the use of magic that acts as its own agent. IE, the wizard who knows nothing about locks, yet can cast a spell to open any lock. It imbues magic itself as an agent. (which is fine if you look at mages as clerics worshipping a sentient energy force)
For the same reason, I don't allow spells which translate written text, or easily allows spoken language translation. I require knowledge checks of creature biology to establish a telepathic link.

Magic should function on the principles of similarity and contagion. According to similarity, if you knock on a door, something will open it. In this case, the door is opening itself.

Or maybe it shouldn't, because that draws too many real word belief parallels.

Also, I just realized Knock doesn't target locks.

 

[variant]

Maybe therein lies the answer? Knock spells can open locks in an area of effect without the need for thieves' tools or being a rogue but still requiring Open Locks as a skill and still requiring a skill roll.

A cantrip version could open the lock (provided a successful roll) you point at within 10-ft. A memorised version could open all locks (provided successful rolls) within a 30-ft. radius. A ritual version could open all locks in a structure like a castle or house (provided successful rolls).

The rogue isn't made redundant because he can do it whenever the hell he wants, wherever he wants and with Skill Mastery to boot. Plus is more likely to have a higher modifier.

It doesn't answer it for me. I like the standard Knock spell, it is actually worth a spell slot.

 

[Oni]

I think knock as a ritual would be a bad thing, as it fits the 'wand of knock replaces a rogue' problem. If you can unlock any door with a bit of time and money, the rogue will feel wasted as a locksmith.

If knock can only be done by taking up a valuable spell slot, then you don't have the problem of sad rogues.

I've never really understood this argument. Why would a would you waste your time and money on something that the rogue could do faster and for free? This is something that is really only useful if you don't have a rogue, or one who knows sod all about lock picking.