D&D 5E Wizard's at will damage cantrips concern

[Klaus]

Sure, there are other cantrips, but none of them are as good (or seem as good) as ray of frost. I mean, just think about ray of frost vs. read magic. Do you want a spell you'll use multiple times in every single combat, or a spell you're going to use once every 10 sessions?

The auto-scaling seems unnecessary. By the time you get it, you can throw around multiple fireballs each day. Do you really need increased at-will damage, too?

But if someone doesn't want a game with at-will magical attacks, then why think those cantrips are better than the others? Is there a pressure to have an at-will damaging cantrip (as opposed to, say, use a crossbow, throw a dagger or even have *no* viable at-will attack)?

The way I see it, those cantrips are there for those who want them. Those who don't can pick up other cantrips, no strings attached. Not every wizard needs to be a blaster. Illusionists, enchanters, abjurers, etc, have all existed in the game with little direct damage spells.

 

[gweinel]

Thank you all for your input.

First, I want to clarify that I don't have any problem with the cantrips as it is, with the difference this feature does not fit to the game that I am preparing when 5e will come out. As I said i built a dangerous gritty world where magic is not common, but when shows itself it does it with a powerful blast. Yes, what i have in mind is the structure of the 2e-3e magic system.


As Cybit said above right now it is almost autoselect the Rays of Frost and Shocking Grasps. So, the thing that concern me is that cantrips (especially the dmg ones since they scale) are hard coded to the spellcasters that i won't be able to easily remove them without consirably weaken the class. It reminds me, to a lesser degree, when I started to play 4e and despised healing surges. I tried to remove them but quickly understood that it was so vital part of the 4e experience that if you just ignore it you loose many other features.

 

[GX.Sigma]

But if someone doesn't want a game with at-will magical attacks, then why think those cantrips are better than the others? Is there a pressure to have an at-will damaging cantrip (as opposed to, say, use a crossbow, throw a dagger or even have *no* viable at-will attack)?

The way I see it, those cantrips are there for those who want them. Those who don't can pick up other cantrips, no strings attached. Not every wizard needs to be a blaster. Illusionists, enchanters, abjurers, etc, have all existed in the game with little direct damage spells.

Yes, there is pressure to have an at-will damaging cantrip. Assuming the DM doesn't ban it (or the player decides not to take it for ethical reasons), ray of frost is the most attractive cantrip. Even characters who don't want to be "blasters" feel like they have to take it to keep up.

 

[Klaus]

Yes, there is pressure to have an at-will damaging cantrip. Assuming the DM doesn't ban it (or the player decides not to take it for ethical reasons), ray of frost is the most attractive cantrip. Even characters who don't want to be "blasters" feel like they have to take it to keep up.

Keep up with what? It's perfectly viable to have a wizard with Light, Minor Illusion and Read Magic as his cantrips. Will he play differently than a wizard with Chill Touch, Ray of Frost and Shocking Grasp? Yes, definitely. And that's the whole point: covering a wide range of playstyles, from the blaster to the sage.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Keep up with what? It's perfectly viable to have a wizard with Light, Minor Illusion and Read Magic as his cantrips. Will he play differently than a wizard with Chill Touch, Ray of Frost and Shocking Grasp? Yes, definitely. And that's the whole point: covering a wide range of playstyles, from the blaster to the sage.

Yeah, but what I'm saying is that even a wizard player who wants to be a sage will go "why would I take read magic when I can have ray of frost?"

 

[Wulfgar76]

He's not in the minority.

Yes he is, and so are you.
Every playtest has included At-Will damage cantrips. They are one of the few 4e-isms that is generally well-liked by the participants of the playtest. A clear majority prefers them - WotC has said as much.

Any kind of "at-will" spells should be a feature of a single spellcasting class like the warlock or sorcerer.

Says who?

What makes a Wizard special is the idea that he must prepare his spells ahead of time and must be careful how quickly he casts them or he would run out. That is always been the challenge and trademark of the Wizard.

We are talking about cantrips here. They are of minimal importance compared to the Wizard's repertoire of daily spells.

 

[Wulfgar76]

As Cybit said above right now it is almost autoselect the Rays of Frost and Shocking Grasps. So, the thing that concern me is that cantrips (especially the dmg ones since they scale) are hard coded to the spellcasters that i won't be able to easily remove them without consirably weaken the class. It reminds me, to a lesser degree, when I started to play 4e and despised healing surges. I tried to remove them but quickly understood that it was so vital part of the 4e experience that if you just ignore it you loose many other features.

So don't remove them, but rather make them 5x/day. Does that solve your problem?

And Attack Cantrips are not nearly as integral to the game as Healing Surges were to 4e. I think you could remove them completely without too much trouble.

 

[Cybit]

Yeah, but what I'm saying is that even a wizard player who wants to be a sage will go "why would I take read magic when I can have ray of frost?"

I understand where you're coming from - the only thing I can think of is that at low levels, most wizards / spellcasters will be as good at using a bow as a non ranged specialized martial character, or close to it, and that should actually give sages an option in combat. That said, I wish I had even realized that when I was helping folks make characters - it didn't even cross my mind till earlier today.

I think they should separate out attacking cantrips from non attacking cantrips, and give spellcasters a choice of a single attacking cantrip, and like 4 non attacking cantrips. Might be the best way to handle the situation?

 

[Thyrwyn]

So don't remove them, but rather make them 5x/day. Does that solve your problem?

And Attack Cantrips are not nearly as integral to the game as Healing Surges were to 4e. I think you could remove them completely without too much trouble.

. . . or take away the scaling, or lower the damage die.

 

[DEFCON 1]

This is one of those situations that I really can't stand... the "it's too useful and if you don't take it you look stupid, so it should just be removed from the game!" argument.

If you don't want to take an attack cantrip... then don't. And if the rest of your group starts bitching at you... tell them to go screw themselves. The difference between a Ray of Frost and a crossbow bolt is not so great that you should be expected to min-max every aspect of your character and that they have a right to complain about it if you don't.

Now if your ego can't handle dealing with your fellow players... then that's on you. You need to make a choice-- either choose the spells you want, or subsume your interests to the group. But don't put it on the rest of us to handle the situation for you by just allowing these attack cantrips to be removed from the game entirely just to allow you to get out of handling the situation yourself. It ain't my job to deal with your fellow players, and I'm not going to give up attack cantrips just so you don't have to either.