Ok, but then if you change rituals to take 2-3 hours, you make a whole bunch of them useless. Detect Magic taking 2-3 hours to cast for example would not be worth bothering with as a ritual as it only last 10 with concentration.That's my point. If you up the time it becomes an actual cost. If it took 2 or 3 hours to mage armor the whole party it would lose some luster, wouldn't it? That applies generally to ritual spam, and it's a easy way to prevent a bunch of abuse if you decide to make more spells into rituals. i'm comparing that to the non-ritual spell slot cost.
Right, but unless you are going to create ritual specific rules for each spell, it doesn't seem to make sense for just this one. What I suggest for those that want to make it a ritual is to change the target to self. For most parties this will make little difference since very few martial classes want to give up their armor anyway.2 or 3 hours to mage armor on the whole party. Not 2 or 3 hours to cast mage armor period. The suggestion being that upping the ritual duration to half an hour or whatever would keep it reasonable for one person while making it awkward for a group. Scaling ritual duration could be a great gate and it doesn't have to be super complicated.
Note, the feat with Mage Armor includes a +1 to an ability.In your points system, I’d say that a feat that only gives Mage Armor as a ritual would be completely terrible compared to most feats. Light armor gives 1 less AC and that feat gives a +1 to a stat!
I agree. Light Armor + 1 AC = Mage Armor.Another way to look at it is viewing it as a feat that gives +1 AC while wearing light armor. That’s the direct equivalent.
(Ultimately, to protect Strength, merge it with Constitution − so Strength becomes the source for toughness. Also formally correlate Strength as a size prerequisite, so a Large creature must have at least 18 Strength. Then via Large size, a high Strength might gain reach.Now, separately from that, there is the issue of the value of strength builds. I personally don’t think there needs to be any incentivisation to build for strength, beyond heavy armor and big weapons and barbarian rage damage bonuses requiring Strength. Those are things people want to play, and they are perfectly viable. They are in fact quite strong (pun intended). However, for those who feel that strength should dominate, or should be just as robust a choice in classes with no preference otherwise, I don’t think this is a good space to accomplish that.
Mage Armor either is or isn’t effectively always on regardless of ritual status, for most characters who’d consider taking it. It isn’t going to change the percentage of Dex vs Str builds.
Instead, I’d suggest some special weapons that require certain Str scores to wield without disadvantage, or perhaps give extra range on bows and thrown weapons for strength modifier, or even consider increasing movement speed by 5ft per strength mod when you dash or something.
The problem with Strength in 5e is that many of the things that rely on it are boring things that get handwaved, or that groups prioritize getting magic items to be able to ignore, etc. How often does carry, lift, drag, push, etc weights come up? How many groups actual run jumping correctly?
No, you’re ignoring vital data.I agree. Light Armor + 1 AC = Mage Armor.
That flat +1 bonus to AC that also allows for full Dexterity, is worth 2 points, about the same as a Shield.
If someone already has Light Armor, then the +1 AC is worth 2 points. If someone is gaining both Light Armor and the +1 AC, then it is worth about 5 points.
In other words, Mage Armor is really worth about 5 points. More than 4.
So, a feat that gives Ability Score +1 and Mage Armor is an appealing feat, worth about 9 points, where a standard feat is 8 points.
So, you are saying that having proficiency with Light Armor is a baseline that every character has. Even the classes that have the ‘flaw’ of lacking it have something comparable in its place.No, you’re ignoring vital data.
There are only two classes that don’t have light armor or better, and both of them have Mage Armor already on their spell list.
So it’s always just a +1. The fact that it allows full Dex is irrelevant, because so does adding +1 onto some light armor.
I get what you are saying, but increasing the duration for a number of rituals where they cannot be used frequently pushes them toward the useless category. I think Mage Armor is fine without the ritual tag, but I could also see it being a class feature where the caster renews it when they prepare their spells.So changing the target of the spell is somehow less difficult than changing duration? I'm not sure I follow your logic there, not when the stated goal was to disincline parties from going the all mage armor route for no cost via a ritual. I don't think the obvious answer there is remove the ability of the spell to affect someone else, nor is that solution one that necessarily transfers well to other spells that might suffer from a spam treatment as rituals. However, changing duration does transfer well as a mechanical concept to other rituals and it does so without changing the actual spell in question.
I think we're really talking about different things. I don't actually care about Mage Armor at all, it was just an example. I was suggesting ritual duration in the context of a vastly expanded field of ritual spells as a mechanism to prevent spam.
I just don’t agree at all that it’s worth the same as a skill proficiency. Medium armor, maybe. Heavy Armor certainly. Light armor is not a value add for any character. Its like tool proficiency before Xanathar’s, except even those had utility in the hands of a DM whose goal is fun.@doctorbadwolf
Assuming light armor is baseline. It is probably still worth a skill to gain proficiency with it. The Wizard class did not get it and, if it wants it, could reasonably swap something like a skill for it.
Note proficiency with one or more simple weapons is also a baseline. Together, light armor and one or more simple weapons, plus shield, total 4 points for basic self-defense − what typical people look like when they get drafted for a battle.
• 2 shield
• 1 light armor
• 2 Medium Armor (prereq light)
• 3 Heavy Armor (prereq medium)
• 2 flat +1 bonus to AC (full Dexterity)
• 3 Mage Armor (light +1)
• 4 ability score +1
Casting a cantrip is generally an Action, which means it can’t be combined with the Attack Action.Can Fighter Extra Attack cast a cantrip ‘Spell Attack’?
I think it should be able to.
I am guessing the official answer is no, but where is the precise wording?
Right, but is a spell description that says ‘make a spell attack’ considered an attack?Casting a cantrip is generally an Action, which means it can’t be combined with the Attack Action.
Eldritch Knights get to Attack as a bonus action after casting a cantrip, at level 7