Cantrips scaling

[clash]

So I had a thought. What if cantrips scaled with class levels instead of character levels? Would this be a real issue? It would discourage caster multiclassing but is that really so bad? If a fighter multiclass extra attack doesn't scale with character level. Well what do you guys think? Good, bad, terrible?

[Kuulvheysoon]

What about high elves, or other characters who get a cantrip through a racial feature? What about through a feat?

[Skyblaze]

Is caster multiclassing really for the cantrips though?

[clash]

So in the case of a feat, feats are technically class features so it would scale with whichever class you gained the feat from. Add far a racial cantrips they might have to be removed to keep things simple

[Naanomi]

Extra Attack doesn’t stack; but all the various other damage boosting abilities do

[Daphne]

Is caster multiclassing really for the cantrips though?

In the case of Warlocks, yes, people do dip into the class just for EB+AB.

[clash]

Right the damage stacking is a good point but spell slots already stack. And not everything else for martial stacks. Fighting styles don't stack. A rangers level 11 abilities don't stack with extra attack. A lot of a monks damage competes with the rogues cunning Acton that is often used to trigger sneak attack.

[clash]

Is caster multiclassing really for the cantrips though?

It would also discourage multiclassing for the progression you would lose ad opposed to single classing.

[mephnick]

Just make EB class based and the rest of the cantrips are fine.

[clash]

But it's not even about eb. No other feature scales with character level except proficiency. It just seems inconsistent. It's more of a why do they scale off character level to begin with. Eb dipping is just a side effect of it

[PhoenixPhyre]

But it's not even about eb. No other feature scales with character level except proficiency. It just seems inconsistent. It's more of a why do they scale off character level to begin with. Eb dipping is just a side effect of it

They scale with character levels because they're found in the Spells section, not in the class section. Classes allow you to select cantrips, but they scale off of personal power, just like proficiency (which also scales on character level). That's an intentional decision, in part so that racial cantrips can stay relevant throughout the game and for ease of calculation.

Let's assume you scaled them off of class level. Then, if you had a Bard X/Sorcerer Y (or worse, a Warlock / anything), you'd have to write down multiple damage lines based on which class you're casting from, and a non-caster high elf would get screwed if he took a combat cantrip.

Thus, the main reasons I see are:

* Simplicity--once you know a cantrip, it always levels with you, so you update its numbers when you level just like proficiency.
* Relevance--that way cantrips (which are the only spells you can't adjust later) stay relevant so you're not stuck with a bad choice forever
* Racial cantrips--this allows them to be a real thing instead of a joke.

[DarkKnightJin]

They scale with character levels because they're found in the Spells section, not in the class section. Classes allow you to select cantrips, but they scale off of personal power, just like proficiency (which also scales on character level). That's an intentional decision, in part so that racial cantrips can stay relevant throughout the game and for ease of calculation.

Let's assume you scaled them off of class level. Then, if you had a Bard X/Sorcerer Y (or worse, a Warlock / anything), you'd have to write down multiple damage lines based on which class you're casting from, and a non-caster high elf would get screwed if he took a combat cantrip.

Thus, the main reasons I see are:

* Simplicity--once you know a cantrip, it always levels with you, so you update its numbers when you level just like proficiency.
* Relevance--that way cantrips (which are the only spells you can't adjust later) stay relevant so you're not stuck with a bad choice forever
* Racial cantrips--this allows them to be a real thing instead of a joke.

The simplicity is actually the entire reasoning behind cantrips in the first place.
Your character knows these minor spells so well they can cast them whenever, without worrying about 'using up' their mana.
They're an interwoven part of their very being. THAT is why they scale with character level.

[Hyde]

What's the objective?

Why discourage multiclassing, and why only spellcasting dips?

If the problem is with multiclassing in general, just ban it at your table.

You've said that EB warlock dips "aren't even the problem" which is far and away the most "abused" dip, if you wanna call it that.

I guess what I'm missing here is an observed behavior that we're trying to discourage with this change.

[Coidzor]

Fighting styles don't stack.

Yes they do.

You can get FS: Archery and FS: Defense through multiclassing and both function just fine.

[Crgaston]

Yes they do.

You can get FS: Archery and FS: Defense through multiclassing and both function just fine.

But you can’t get Archery from Fighter and then Archery from Ranger for a +4.

[Lord Vukodlak]

But you can’t get Archery from Fighter and then Archery from Ranger for a +4.

They don't stack as a single-class fighter who gets multiple styles either. The reason Extra attack doesn't stack is because only fighters are suppose to get multiple extra attacks.

[Spacehamster]

Bad idea in general, cantrips are not even close to op and multi classing is bad enough as it is in this edition. :)

[Lord Vukodlak]

Bad idea in general, cantrips are not even close to op and multi classing is bad enough as it is in this edition. :)

Spell Slots stack, lots of good abilities in the first three levels. So define bad enough... Do you mean by bad that MOST builds are improved by dipping into another class.

[Spacehamster]

Spell Slots stack, lots of good abilities in the first three levels. So define bad enough... Do you mean by bad that MOST builds are improved by dipping into another class.

One level dip = one level later that you gain next level spells/extra attack/ASI and so on, you already pay a price for multiclassing by delaying other things instead.

[Arnie82]

But you can’t get Archery from Fighter and then Archery from Ranger for a +4.
I don't see your point. A fiend Lock and a Sorcerer can both learn fireball. That doesn't mean if someone multi classes them and learns fireball from both classes that the damage of fireball should double. Learning the same thing more then once =/= getting better at something.

[clash]

A fiend Lock and a Sorcerer can both learn fireball. That doesn't mean if someone multi classes them and learns fireball from both classes that the damage of fireball should double. Learning the same thing more then once =/= getting better at something.

But even though fiend lock and sorcerer both get fireball at level 5 a fiendlock 3/sorcerer 2 doesnt know fireball. Likewise, a Fighter 2/Paladin 3 doesnt know extra attack. So why can a Sorcerer 1/Barbarian 4 cast more powerful cantrips then a sorcerer 4?

[bid]

What if cantrips scaled with class levels instead of character levels?
Cantrip is what you use once you are out of spell slots.
How often are you out of spell slots?

And even then, a shortbow does more damage than a level 11 firebolt.


If your problem is with EB+AB, why don't you make AB scale with warlock levels?
{Cha mod to 2 bolts at lock 5, to 4 bolts at lock 17}

[melvinmelon123]

But even though fiend lock and sorcerer both get fireball at level 5 a fiendlock 3/sorcerer 2 doesnt know fireball. Likewise, a Fighter 2/Paladin 3 doesnt know extra attack. So why can a Sorcerer 1/Barbarian 4 cast more powerful cantrips then a sorcerer 4?

Why does their proficiency go up? Why do they need the XP a 5th level single class does? Why does a score of 10 equal a modifier of 0? Why is AC 10+Dex?

Most things in this game basically boil down to "That's the rule". Don't try too hard to try and make everything consistent, because it would just be a mess.

[Big Papa Turnip]

And even then, a shortbow does more damage than a level 11 firebolt.


That's only if you're an EK with a shortbow and all necessary investments, unless I'm mistaken.

[JNAProductions]

3d10 averages to 16.5, assuming hitting on an 8 (65% hit rate) because of 20 Casting Stat and proficiency gives you 10.725 damage each turn. Fire damage to boot-one of the easiest to resist damage types.

A shortbow gives you 1d6+5 damage per shot, assuming 20 Dex, for 8.5 per. We'll assume hitting on a 6, due to Archery Fighting Style, for a 75% hit rate. 12.75, assuming two attacks.

So a competent archer (Fighting Style, 20 Dex, Extra Attack) outdamages a competent Firebolt slinger (20 Int). It took a little more resources, but it also does more.


That's only if you're an EK with a shortbow and all necessary investments, unless I'm mistaken.

So no. Anyone with basic competency in Archery outdamages that. Hell, even WITHOUT Archery Style, you're hitting 11.05 DPR, which is better.

[clash]

But all of this is assuming 5 levels in a class for extra attack. If you just dip 1 level into a fighter for weapon proficiency you only get half of that which is even behind what the level dip into wizard for firebolt gives you by the time you reach character level 5.

[Big Papa Turnip]

I thought we were talking about a caster with a bow for some reason, instead of a full-fledged archer.

You're absolutely right in that case.

[JNAProductions]

But all of this is assuming 5 levels in a class for extra attack. If you just dip 1 level into a fighter for weapon proficiency you only get half of that which is even behind what the level dip into wizard for firebolt gives you by the time you reach character level 5.

I mean, yes, you can build someone who is incompetent at archery and then have them be bad at archery. Is that that bad?

How would you change the system to make it better, without screwing people over and diminishing their fun?

[Lonely Tylenol]

Bad idea in general, cantrips are not even close to op and multi classing is bad enough as it is in this edition. :)

The most OP interaction in the game, at least as DPR goes, is Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast combined with Quicken Spell, which makes Warlock the preeminent dip class in many circles. Multiclassing fix solves that.

[JNAProductions]

The most OP interaction in the game, at least as DPR goes, is Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast combined with Quicken Spell, which makes Warlock the preeminent dip class in many circles. Multiclassing fix solves that.

Except that's really no sustainable. Not unless you go Coffeelock, which is its own set of issues that have nothing to do with cantrips.

[bid]

But all of this is assuming 5 levels in a class for extra attack. If you just dip 1 level into a fighter for weapon proficiency you only get half of that which is even behind what the level dip into wizard for firebolt gives you by the time you reach character level 5.
Can you name a case where this is actually an issue?

Your caster dips fighter 1 for armor. Class level lags character level by 1. Not an issue.
Your martial dips caster 1 for cantrips or gets magic initiate. Shortbow does more damage. Not an issue.


I'm sorry if your hammer is looking for nails, but this is a screw.
If the only problem is AB, fix the invocation itself.

[bid]

The most OP interaction in the game, at least as DPR goes, is Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast combined with Quicken Spell, which makes Warlock the preeminent dip class in many circles. Multiclassing fix solves that.
Scorching ray does 6d6 ~ 21 damage per turn. Convert that level 2 slot into SP and quickened EB would do 4d10 ~ 22.

Once again, the issue is with AB scaling.

[Millstone85]

If your problem is with EB+AB, why don't you make AB scale with warlock levels?
{Cha mod to 2 bolts at lock 5, to 4 bolts at lock 17}I could see that.

Agonizing Blast
Prerequisite: eldritch blast cantrip
When you cast eldritch blast, add your Charisma modifier to the damage it deals on one hit.
You add the modifier to more hits when you reach higher levels in this class: two hits at 5th level, three hits at 11th level, and four hits at 17th level.

Pure warlocks keep the exact same progression. Magic initiates can still pick the cantrip. Only dippers are nerfed. This is the cleanest solution I have seen.

[Tanarii]

On first reading, I was going to suggest scaling like multiclassing for spell slots: determine it from combined spellcasting feature levels.

Then I realized you need an exception for racial cantrips, especially high elves.

Then I realized you need an exception to use full casting levels for EKs and ATs, especially EKs.

Then I realized it gives Pally & Ranger 1/2 their levels, even though they don't normally get cantrips at all, so you need an exception to make their spellcasting feature levels,not count.

Then I realized that physical damage dealers are better off doing physical damage instead of using a cantrips. (Edit2: generally. Some specific builds a long range cantrip might see use over a Javelin.)

Then I realized it's a bad idea.

Just house-rule EB to go up as Warlock levels only, and be done with it. Edit: or just use bid or Millstone85 suggestion above if you just care about the AB addition to EB.

[Pex]

In my paladin game I'm seriously considering multiclassing into sorcerer at 9th level. My paladin has been a great asset, but there have been many occasions where my lack of a range attack hurts the party. The party loses my character's actions because I have nothing to do. This is not a complaint against the class or 5E. I accept the weakness of the class. The reason I don't use a bow is because my DX is 10, so at 8th level I'd be at +3 to hit for 1d8 damage. Strictly better than doing nothing, yes, but might as well be. With Charisma 16 at 9th level I'd be at +7 to hit doing 2d10 damage with Fire Bolt. I'm definitely better off in melee, but at least I get to contribute something of significance instead of doing nothing. I fail to see how this is such an atrocious thing that ruins the game to be nerfed into almost uselessness by not scaling. I'm not going warlock because I get 3rd level spell slots for smiting, Shield spell while using a two-handed weapon, and Expeditious Retreat when my dwarf self is not on his Find Steed mount. The following level Quicken will help on action economy.

The DM is not a fan of multiclassing, but he's ok with this. It helps we've been playing for nearly two years now, so he knows I'm not trying to Win D&D. I told him flat out why I wanted to do this. There's also a side roleplaying benefit by coincidence. Dragon Sorcerers get double proficiency on Persuasion with dragons. The campaign has reached a point where that will come in handy.

Personally in all my years of gaming since 2E I rarely multiclass. I've almost always found what I get single class is worth more than multiclass. For this campaign Paladin 8/Sorcerer 1 is the better option than Paladin 9.

[Tanarii]

For a Paladin, HA Str Cleric or Str HA Fighter in a campaign that regularly features combat starting at very long ranges, it's definitely not a bad idea if you're willing to invest in it.

Is a level of Paladin progression delay much better in your consideration than spending a ASI Spell Sniper?

[Coidzor]

Cantrip is what you use once you are out of spell slots.
How often are you out of spell slots?

And even then, a shortbow does more damage than a level 11 firebolt.

A shortbow only does more damage with a number of riders. Like sneak attack dice. 8.5 is the best average damage an unaugmented shortbow can do, assuming a 20 Dexterity, while 3d10 averages to 16.5. Admittedly, you only need 3 extra d6s to exceed that average damage.

Level 11 Rogue averages 29.5 if they get sneak attack off, a Ranger with Colossus Slayer and Hunter's mark can manage 16.5 at level 11, unless its a favored enemy, of course.

[BigONotation]

The problem is ranged cantrips. Scale them at 9th and 17th and you won't have an issue. Scale EB with Warlock levels.

[stoutstien]

In the case of Warlocks, yes, people do dip into the class just for EB+AB.

Just make the bonus damage from Charisma from agonizing blast based on warlock levels.

[Ganymede]

I could see a full overhaul of cantrips treating them more similarly to the Radiant Sun Bolt of Sun Soul monks.

Being a spellcasting class would give your proficiency with a handful of specific melee/ranged spell attacks that would go on to be enhanced by specific class features, with all spellcasting classes getting a "When you use the attack action to make a spell attack, you may attack twice" ability or something similar.

Heck, you could even make a chart with various ranged/melee spell attacks just like the weapon chart.

[Tanarii]

A shortbow only does more damage with a number of riders. Like sneak attack dice. 8.5 is the best average damage an unaugmented shortbow can do, assuming a 20 Dexterity, while 3d10 averages to 16.5. Admittedly, you only need 3 extra d6s to exceed that average damage.This ignores Extra Attack, and it ignores hit chance. It's a pointless comparison.

[bid]

A shortbow only does more damage with a number of riders. Like sneak attack dice. 8.5 is the best average damage an unaugmented shortbow can do, assuming a 20 Dexterity, while 3d10 averages to 16.5. Admittedly, you only need 3 extra d6s to exceed that average damage.

Level 11 Rogue averages 29.5 if they get sneak attack off, a Ranger with Colossus Slayer and Hunter's mark can manage 16.5 at level 11, unless its a favored enemy, of course.


This ignores Extra Attack, and it ignores hit chance. It's a pointless comparison.
Oh so true.

All it does is demonstrate it's not an issue for rogue, the only martial class that doesn't get extra attack.
So what is left?

Pex is the only one who gave an actual case, where cantrip allowed him to contribute. Yet again, not an issue.


I'm repeating myself, but:
Can anyone name a case where this is actually an issue?

[Pex]

I'm repeating myself, but:
Can anyone name a case where this is actually an issue?

It's an argument discussed in the past. Some people get offended when a player multiclasses for one or two levels in another class for the class features. They're not accepting of enjoying the game mechanics for the sake of enjoying the game mechanics.

[Tanarii]

I got offended by the concept of multiclassing at all, at least as its implemented in 3e and 5e. But I still think it's scaling cantrips by class level instead of character level is a solution looking for a problem.

[Phoenix042]

But even though fiend lock and sorcerer both get fireball at level 5 a fiendlock 3/sorcerer 2 doesnt know fireball. Likewise, a Fighter 2/Paladin 3 doesnt know extra attack. So why can a Sorcerer 1/Barbarian 4 cast more powerful cantrips then a sorcerer 4?

These are excellent examples of why that scaling should be by the level. A fiendlock 3 / sorcerer 2 doesn't know fireball, no, but he does fight CR 5 creatures and is expected to be able to output reasonable damage for his level (or bring whatever utility and support power he's expected to be able to bring by this level). If his cantrips didn't scale, he'd be woefully underpowered.

Compare that to the fighter 2 / paladin 3, who is obviously at the low point of his level-adjusted power curve but who will soon catch up; remember that if you needed warlock 5 to get two EB's, your blasts don't benefit AT ALL from a dip in any other class. Meanwhile, a paladin 5 fighter 3 has the same extra attack that a paladin 8 has, but also has action surge, an additional fighting style, and a fighter archetype's features improving those attacks and making them continue to scale. Sure, that fighting style won't be the main one, but stacking defense or protection onto another style is still stacking however you slice it. Action surge on a vengeance paladin makes their existing features scale implicitly, making their existing attack routine better and giving them more chances to smite or lots of opportunities to crit and follow up with a smite.

And your sorcerer 1 / barbarian 4 is giving up lots of melee power (from extra attack) for a flavorful and powerful ranged attack for when melee isn't a good option (2d10 firebolts) and several other useful cantrips that would might be terrible if they didn't scale. Without that, it'd be an even worse multiclass than it already is.

A paladin 5 fighter 6 may not have extra attack twice and is missing out on improved smite, but you can hardly say that his attacks are comparable to a paladin 5's. Champion would see him have an expanded crit range, a buff to his attacks that stacks directly with extra attack, and meanwhile, opening a combat with Vow of Enmity -> action surge for four attack with advantage is not really a set of totally unrelated abilities and features the same way spells-known is.

Knowing fireball gives you fireball, but it doesn't make scorching ray any stronger. Having the choice to use either eldritch blast or firebolt might be nice in some cases, but if they didn't scale with character level, gaining versatility off of multiple casting classes wouldn't really help you stay competitive at higher levels, and dipping into them would feel like an unsatisfying waste.

Cantrips scale explicitly by character level because most other stuff also scales with levels in other classes, just in less direct ways, while cantrips don't get better without explicit scaling.