D&D 5E Spells with attack rolls, do you avoid them?

[Nefermandias]

My problem isn't really with spells that requires an attack roll, but with spells that have the potential to do nothing.

It's usually better to stick with spells that do half damage on a save or the ones that always work like buffs and walls.

 

[Stalker0]

My problem isn't really with spells that requires an attack roll, but with spells that have the potential to do nothing.

It's usually better to stick with spells that do half damage on a save or the ones that always work like buffs and walls.

I just created a little house ruled cantrip that might help with that: D&D 5E - (Houserule) Guided Target: A cantrip to help Attack Roll Casters

See what you think.

 

[Nefermandias]

I just created a little house ruled cantrip that might help with that: D&D 5E - (Houserule) Guided Target: A cantrip to help Attack Roll Casters

See what you think.

I cannot fathom homebrewing a cantrip to make player's lives easier. Nah. I would never do that.
Screw them.

 

[ECMO3]

My problem isn't really with spells that requires an attack roll, but with spells that have the potential to do nothing.

It's usually better to stick with spells that do half damage on a save or the ones that always work like buffs and walls.

The problem is most of them are weaker compared to other things you can do with a slot of equivalent level.

 

[Nefermandias]

The problem is most of them are weaker compared to other things you can do with a slot of equivalent level.

Maybe, but at least you know they always work, and that's a pretty important thing when you are talking about limited daily resources.