Cantrip wands

[Danielqueue1]

So I'm looking for feedback/suggestions for this base idea,

Cantrip wand: uncommon-very rare
user must have the ability to cast at least 1 spell of first level or higher. A character wielding this wand may use an action to cast the cantrip enscribed on the wand using (stat of maker's spellcasting ability) as the spelcasting ability for this cantrip.

So anyone who can cast spells can pick up one of these wands and cast the cantrip spells like light would be uncommon, with ray of frost rare and eldritch blast probably locked behind a plot point. They would be rare enough that collecting a bunch would be a big expense for the party, but allow for people to have a little more diversity in spells.

Thoughts?

[Man_Over_Game]

Eh, kind of a slap in the face to your non-casters. High level magical item that only casters can use but they won't actually care about.

If a caster wanted a cantrip, they'd already have it by the time Rare/Very Rare items should be available.

Kinda like giving away cheap motorcycle helmets. There are very few instances where that'd be helpful.

[Rukelnikov]

As Man_Over_Game said, spellcasters will have already picked the cantrips they want to use in combat. Wands require being held, I'd much rather be holding another wand or staff that granted me extra daily resources than to one that would at best grant me minimal increase over my at will powers, so it would be mostly an utility item. The main use I could see is getting, Prestidigitation, Control Fire, etc as a Paladin or Ranger.

I would make it an uncommon attuned item, amulet probably, that grants at will use of a cantrip.

[Slybluedemon]

I like the idea of a ring (instead of a wand) that once attuned to and worn you can cast the cantrip at will.

This would let anyone get a cantrip at the cost of a magic item slot. So the champion fighter or thief rouge can get firebolt or green flame blade.

I would make it accessible to any class.

[Angelalex242]

Well, cantrip wands are only really good for spellcasters that don't get cantrips...like Paladins.

As long as it's not attunement, Paladins and Rangers want this.

[opaopajr]

Better as a potion. Then non-casters can use them as expendibles. Potions can be made to have more than one use, too, (like charges,).

The advantage of the wand is restriction to casters, holding charges, and recharging. Some casters will care. Many may not.

[Danielqueue1]

I was mostly going for the ability for characters to pick up a few utility cantrips or ones off their spell list. Wizard picking up a spare the dying wand, grabbing mending without having to worry too much about what else you could have used the cantrip slot on. Etc.

Also, someone with the magic initiate feat could make good use of them.

I've never played a game where a spellcaster felt like they didn't need anymore spells. So I don't quite catch the sentiment behind 'you already have all the cantrips you want' (paraphrased)

I do admit that putting EB as very rare might have over-done it, but on the other side requiring an attunement slot to gain a single cantrip seems too much to me as well.

I like the ideas though so lets keep it going.

[Danielqueue1]

This would let anyone get a cantrip at the cost of a magic item slot. So the champion fighter or thief rouge can get firebolt or green flame blade.

I would make it accessible to any class.

Fair point about giving non-casters the ability to use them for an attunement slot. Perhaps two different items 1 requires attunement but can be used by anyone and leaves your hands free, the other has restrictions and requires a free hand.

[Rukelnikov]

I was mostly going for the ability for characters to pick up a few utility cantrips or ones off their spell list. Wizard picking up a spare the dying wand, grabbing mending without having to worry too much about what else you could have used the cantrip slot on. Etc.

Also, someone with the magic initiate feat could make good use of them.

I've never played a game where a spellcaster felt like they didn't need anymore spells. So I don't quite catch the sentiment behind 'you already have all the cantrips you want' (paraphrased)

I do admit that putting EB as very rare might have over-done it, but on the other side requiring an attunement slot to gain a single cantrip seems too much to me as well.

I like the ideas though so lets keep it going.

I think getting spare the daying would be nice, but will I hold a wand of spare the dying over a wand of the warmage, a rod of the pact keeper or a weapon to attack with? Idk...

That's why I said make it something else instead of a wand, you only have 2 hands.

[Zonugal]

I think if they were uncommon magic items, they might be attractive for really low-level characters/npcs.

[JackPhoenix]

I think getting spare the daying would be nice, but will I hold a wand of spare the dying over a wand of the warmage, a rod of the pact keeper or a weapon to attack with? Idk...

That's why I said make it something else instead of a wand, you only have 2 hands.

Well, this isn't MMORPG. You can (semi-)freely switch what you're holding any time you want. If you need to use the theoretical Wand of Spare the Dying, you don't need the Wand of the War Mage at the same time, as your actions per turn are limited anyway.

[Rukelnikov]

Well, this isn't MMORPG. You can (semi-)freely switch what you're holding any time you want. If you need to use the theoretical Wand of Spare the Dying, you don't need the Wand of the War Mage at the same time, as your actions per turn are limited anyway.

But I would have been using my WotWM +1, between turns a party member falls, now I gotta use and object to stow my wand, and cant get the other one out.

Sure I could just drop the Wand of the WM, but next round I would have to drop WoStD in order to pick up WotWM. I'm generally against that kind of item juggling, but I suppose I can do it...

[GreatWyrmGold]

Personally, I'd design it something like so:

1. Nonspellcasters can use the cantrip at 1st level (or maybe a fraction of their character level?)
2. Spellcasters can use the cantrip at their caster level
3. Spellcasters who know that cantrip can cast a slightly stronger version, with details dependant on the spell.

That way, everyone can make use of it.

[opaopajr]

Healer's Kit is already a "Spare the Dying" wand, except better because usable on undead & constructs, but costs 5 gp and has just 10 uses ("charges"). :smallamused:

Healer’s Kit. This kit is a leather pouch containing bandages, salves, and splints. The kit has ten uses. As an action, you can expend one use of the kit to stabilize a creature that has 0 hit points, without needing to make a Wisdom (Medicine) check.

Spare the Dying
Necromancy cantrip
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Touch
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You touch a living creature that has 0 hit points. The creature becomes stable. This spell has no effect on undead or constructs.

It's a good example of how to turn a Cantrip into an expendable Equipment, yet slightly different so as to keep both relevant. :smallsmile:

Were you think of any other "Cantrip Wand" ideas?

[sithlordnergal]

I rather like this idea. That said, give them cantrips like Mending,Message, or Dancing Lights. Most casters don't choose those spells to begin with, and its give them a neat way to access those spells.

[opaopajr]

Hell, it'd be cool with other cantrips, too. It actually makes the Rogue Thief more reminiscent of old school, dropping magical objects mid-combat. There's even an example with Acid Vial equipment & Acid Splash cantrip. :smallsmile:

Acid Vial. As an action, you can splash the contents of this vial onto a creature within 5 feet of you or throw the vial up to 20 feet, shattering it on impact. In either case, make a ranged attack against a creature or object, treating the acid as an improvised weapon. On a hit, the target takes 2d6 acid damage.

Costs 25 gp. I think there should be a cheaper, weaker version, personally, but whatever. :smallamused: Hey, look!, open design space to create! Make a cheaper "1st lvl" version, instead of this "5th lvl" version. :smallbiggrin:

Acid Splash
Conjuration cantrip
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You hurl a bubble of acid. Choose one creature within range, or choose two creatures within range that are within 5 feet of each other. A target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take 1d6 acid damage.
This spell’s damage increases by 1d6 when you reach 5th level (2d6), 11th level (3d6), and 17th level (4d6).

[GreatWyrmGold]

Were you think of any other "Cantrip Wand" ideas?
To me, the most interesting part of "cantrip wands" (especially if they're of comparable price to a healer's kit) is the worldbuilding potential. If armies can coordinate their movements with wands of message, if any geezer out for a midnight walk could be packing a wand of acid splash, if entrepreneurs could offer to repair tools on the fly with their wands of mending...even without adding new non-adventurer-focused cantrips, the possibilities could revolutionize how the world works.

[Prince Vine]

To me, the most interesting part of "cantrip wands" (especially if they're of comparable price to a healer's kit) is the worldbuilding potential. If armies can coordinate their movements with wands of message, if any geezer out for a midnight walk could be packing a wand of acid splash, if entrepreneurs could offer to repair tools on the fly with their wands of mending...even without adding new non-adventurer-focused cantrips, the possibilities could revolutionize how the world works.

I feel like this is the fundamental premise of Eberron.

[MrStabby]

Depending on the magic level of the game I might want to switch things up a bit.

1) homebrew cantrip for the wand. Why restrict yourself to what exists already? You can go for precisely the power level you want then.

2) bundle things together. A wand that has a primary ability of +2 to damage but also let's you cast acid splash and guidance adds a bit of extra flavour.

3) this may be more interesting for martials than casters, even if stipulating the user must be able to cast spells (totem barbarians, shadow monks, tieflings etc. Can benefit). You could equally make the item a sword as a wand.

[Throne12]

Wand of firebolt

Rare magic item

You can cast the cantrip firebolt as if you where a 5th level character your spell casting Modify is a +5. If you attune to this wand you can cast firebolt as if your a 20th level character. Your casting Modify is a +11 and you get a +1 to attack and damage rolls when using this wand.

[Ganymede]

Healer's Kit is already a "Spare the Dying" wand, except better because usable on undead & constructs, but costs 5 gp and has just 10 uses ("charges"). :smallamused:


I'm not so sure. Undead and constructs, being NPCs, generally just die when they hit 0 hp.

[Zonugal]

This is something I'm likely to introduce into my own campaign setting, as it functions as a flashlight & a weapon.

Flame Stick
Wand, uncommon (requires attunement)

This wand grants those with attunement to it the ability to cast the Produce Flame cantrip. The spell is cast as a 1st-level spell, unless the wielder is a spellcaster, in which case they may use their own caster level. When utilizing the ranged spell attack option of the cantrip, you may use your highest mental stat for the attack modifier. When performing such a use with the wand, on a die roll of 1, the wand briefly spouts harmless sparks and is temporarily unavailable for one minute.

[Sigreid]

Eh, kind of a slap in the face to your non-casters. High level magical item that only casters can use but they won't actually care about.

If a caster wanted a cantrip, they'd already have it by the time Rare/Very Rare items should be available.

Kinda like giving away cheap motorcycle helmets. There are very few instances where that'd be helpful.

My wizard would love a cantrip wand or more. I like cantrips. I'd like to have all the cantrips. I can't have all the cantrips I'd most like to have.

[GreatWyrmGold]

3) this may be more interesting for martials than casters, even if stipulating the user must be able to cast spells (totem barbarians, shadow monks, tieflings etc. Can benefit). You could equally make the item a sword as a wand.
Or make a sword with a special wand-cavity in the hilt, which can channel the power of the wand. That way you can switch out wands without having to carry a whole new magic sword.

[Asmotherion]

i'd change it to common and have it use the attunement slot.

This way no matter how many you have you can only attune to one at a time. And you may have better items to attune to at higher levels (Depending on your DM).

Have the cost change depending on how good the cantrip is but have in mind that the cost should not be terribly more than the equivalent investment of 1 feat (magic initiate).

i was divided about changing the requirement about casting a 1st level spell. Many classes who will want them can't cast spells. On the other hand it's a minimum investment of 1 feat to "at least be able to quallyfy as a mage" by somehow getting 2 cantrips and a 1st level spell or some Rituals (also 1st level spells). So... if someone wants to wield a wand and is not "proficient" in magic he needs to trade off a feat for it just as a spellcaster does to wield a weapon.

The main reason i'd want them as common items is to have them as "off-weapons" of sorts in a high magic campain. The Fighter is out of arrows? No problem as he drows his wand of firebolts. Wizard's default chill touch uneffective? He uses his wand of Sacred Flame. Warlock's eldritch blast doesn't match the opponents AC for some reason? Uses Wand of Toll the Dead. You get the picture.

Finally i want to close this terribly long post by saying that Eldritch Blast without it's support mechanics (Hex/Agonising Blast and optionally quicken spell if you're going that way) is not terribly more powerful than any other cantrip really. Merelly a good option (good damage type/better chance to hit at least partially). if you're building a character around it you don't want it on a wand. if not it's not necesserally better for you than firebolt or chill touch.

[Vogie]

It really depends on the style of game you're playing. In Eberron or Ravnica, where there are an abundance of spellcasters due to dragonmarks/guild membership bonuses, it makes perfect sense. In a normal Forgotten Realms, not so much.

You have to ask "what is this item trying to solve". If it's just spreading out cantrip access to certain casters, that's kind of... meh. Like the above people have said, a medicine kits are a consumable spare the dying. Message could be accomplished with a spyglass and sign language.

Others would make sense- a society with a magic bent may require their guardsmen to use Lightning Lure and Ray of Frost (...freeze ray?) to subdue their targets, so having wands available for those things.

My Version of Waterdeep (I'm running W:DH), for example, is very Eberron-y, and utility magic items are available very widely.

I've actually made it that there are Glyphs can be used repeatedly. For example, the PCs will find a Glyph of Thaumaturgy in the tavern they purchased, which makes sense when you think about it:

Able to yell closing time when needed without hurting the vocal chords, or one-way whisper to someone on the other side of the bar.
Able to open or close the doors from behind the bar
Able to adjust lighting at-will

The reason for this is that I want the PCs to have to care about their funds - while they're searching for a great treasure, they're a group of nobodies who also need to raise 1250 gp to get said tavern going. And having expensive things to spend money on that won't increase their power level is a good way for them to get themselves in trouble, financially... which leads to other issues.

[Chronos]

Quoth Sigreid:

My wizard would love a cantrip wand or more. I like cantrips. I'd like to have all the cantrips. I can't have all the cantrips I'd most like to have.
A year or two ago, I had a thread where I worked out an insanely-multiclassed character that managed to pick up (almost) all of the cantrips in existence at the time (PHB + Elemental Evil). I think I only ended up missing one. It'd actually work out to be a reasonably usable character: In combat, you're a warlock with eldritch blast, a couple of matching invocations, and metamagic (plus a bunch of spell slots to turn into more metamagic), plus occasional riders from other cantrips, and out of combat, well, you've got all of the cantrips, plus a ton of rituals. (don't necro it (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?406843-Silly-idea-The-cantripper))

Back to the main topic, my group did actually find a wand containing a cantrip, and I think it might have been from a published adventure. But it wasn't the only thing the wand had. IIRC, it could cast Ray of Frost for free, Ray of Frost as cast by a 5th-level caster for 1 charge, Sleet Storm for 3 charges, or Ice Storm for 4 charges (7 charges total, as normal for a wand). The only requirement for attuning to it was to be a spellcaster, so we gave it to the barbarian, so she'd have a ranged option (because totem barbarians are spellcasters, after all). But in practice, it most often ended up being used for Sleet Storm.

[Eragon123]

You can always take an existing cantrip, add an unusual but flavorful rider on it and then use that as justification for why it requires attunement.

[Bjarkmundur]

Love the idea! Definitely stealing it for my own game ^^

[Samayu]

As long as we're talking about something for spellcasters only, how about an item that, when worn, allows the caster to learn an additional cantrip?

[GreatWyrmGold]

The reason for this is that I want the PCs to have to care about their funds - while they're searching for a great treasure, they're a group of nobodies who also need to raise 1250 gp to get said tavern going. And having expensive things to spend money on that won't increase their power level is a good way for them to get themselves in trouble, financially... which leads to other issues.
That's one of the problems with how 5e generally handles magic items. Now, removing the Magic Mart and the expectation of having a bunch of boring stat-boosting items has a lot of benefits, but the rest of the game wasn't tweaked to accommodate it. Treasure is still treated as a significant reason for adventurers to adventure, which works at low levels, but once you've got a couple thousand GP of gear you won't have much left to buy, save for finishing your situational-gear Bingo card and getting more healing potions than you'll ever use.
Sure, there exist things like businesses and castles that players could spend money on, but they aren't detailed in the book. Sure, there exist non-cash incentives your group could get (like social status or prestige), but they aren't detailed in the book. Sure, the DM can wing it, but that's not so much a solution as an admission that there's a problem.

...Which is just another reason that D&D 5e is far better-designed at low levels than high levels.

[Chronos]

Remember, the opportunity to spend money is itself a reward. The best reward my rogue ever got was the opportunity to sponsor the education of a couple of street urchins. It gave him no mechanical benefit whatsoever (and in fact, turned into a drawback when a villain kidnapped them to get to him) and cost him hundreds of gold, but it was still a major positive, as far as he was concerned.

[MeeposFire]

The ability to not be forced to spend money just to be able to perform as expected is an example of freedom as I can spend it in whatever way I want and not have to worry about hurting my performance from what is expected.

[Throne12]

Remember, the opportunity to spend money is itself a reward. The best reward my rogue ever got was the opportunity to sponsor the education of a couple of street urchins. It gave him no mechanical benefit whatsoever (and in fact, turned into a drawback when a villain kidnapped them to get to him) and cost him hundreds of gold, but it was still a major positive, as far as he was concerned.

Ok but wht if the character background is noble and they had all the money they want. But went out to be a adventurer for the thrall, fam, and powerful magic items you might not find in a dusty smelly magic shop.

[Throne12]

That's one of the problems with how 5e generally handles magic items. Now, removing the Magic Mart and the expectation of having a bunch of boring stat-boosting items has a lot of benefits, but the rest of the game wasn't tweaked to accommodate it. Treasure is still treated as a significant reason for adventurers to adventure, which works at low levels, but once you've got a couple thousand GP of gear you won't have much left to buy, save for finishing your situational-gear Bingo card and getting more healing potions than you'll ever use.
Sure, there exist things like businesses and castles that players could spend money on, but they aren't detailed in the book. Sure, there exist non-cash incentives your group could get (like social status or prestige), but they aren't detailed in the book. Sure, the DM can wing it, but that's not so much a solution as an admission that there's a problem.

...Which is just another reason that D&D 5e is far better-designed at low levels than high levels.

Pick up Matt Coleville new book strongholds and followers.

[Vogie]

That's one of the problems with how 5e generally handles magic items. Now, removing the Magic Mart and the expectation of having a bunch of boring stat-boosting items has a lot of benefits, but the rest of the game wasn't tweaked to accommodate it. Treasure is still treated as a significant reason for adventurers to adventure, which works at low levels, but once you've got a couple thousand GP of gear you won't have much left to buy, save for finishing your situational-gear Bingo card and getting more healing potions than you'll ever use.
Sure, there exist things like businesses and castles that players could spend money on, but they aren't detailed in the book. Sure, there exist non-cash incentives your group could get (like social status or prestige), but they aren't detailed in the book. Sure, the DM can wing it, but that's not so much a solution as an admission that there's a problem.

...Which is just another reason that D&D 5e is far better-designed at low levels than high levels.

I have to disagree, completely. The bulk of the game could be accomplished completely, 1-20, with only the most basic of magic items to bypass that "smokescreen" of resistance/immunity to nonmagic weapons.

In my view, they built 5e 100% correctly. You can't go out and find a Scimitar of Speed or an icicle-launching self-loading crossbow by buying it at a slight markup (from the DMG/MSRP) at the Magicmart from the other side of the tracks. That's what 3.P got wrong.

You look through the DMG and there aren't prices, aren't schematics, nothing like that. The only way to find a Dancing Sword is by defeating one of the Sword Dancers that use one. Sure, on the lowest levels of play, the ALs and whatnot, you'll hit a level where gold becomes essentially meaningless, because you can't purchase anything, and the DM has no fiat because they're manacled to the fact that there isn't a single persistent houserule for high-value items.

[Chronos]

If the character is a rich noble, then what I said is especially true: You don't reward him by giving him more money that he doesn't need; you reward him by giving him something that's worth using his money for.

[MeeposFire]

Really that is a misnomer. You can put a magic item for sale in a shop in 5e and you can price it however you want. The actual difference between 3e and 4e (unless you use inherent bonuses) with 5e is that a magic item shop is not required and you do not have to put a lot of effort in creating treasure to fill needs for your characters to have the abilities they are supposed to have. 5e is liberating in that regard. It brings back having items and by extension item shops as being something special that the DM wants to offer the players rather than something needed for the treadmill.

[GreatWyrmGold]

The ability to not be forced to spend money just to be able to perform as expected is an example of freedom as I can spend it in whatever way I want and not have to worry about hurting my performance from what is expected.
Don't get me wrong, that's great and all. It just requires moving away from money as a major motivating factor in adventures, which D&D doesn't seem to have consistently done. If you can't get the characters involved in the Fate of the World or something before they have plate armor and a crate of potions, the game doesn't provide any useful carrots.
I kinda wish there was a Motivation entry next to Background, Bond, Flaw, and Trait—a reason the character adventures, beyond riches or plot progression. That way, the DM would be guaranteed have an easy hook to tie into an adventure's opening, highlighted for even the newest of DMs to see.



DMs can provide things for players to spend their money on.
DMs can also provide non-monetary rewards, but that's not the point. The point is that these things aren't in the rules, and their absence functions as a criticism thereof.



Pick up Matt Coleville new book strongholds and followers.
This is a better solution, if crudely-worded. I obviously can't give WotC credit for solving the problem, but this would solve it.
I haven't read the book, but from the blurb (and the title), I'm willing to bet that it provides guidelines on how much money you need to spend to buy a stronghold, what you can do with a stronghold, etc. This lets DMs create better experiences for their players, without accidentally cheapening the experience of owning a stronghold or making them pay out the nose for a stack of pancakes laced with blowfish poison that fell on the floor (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?495544-Is-an-Acre-to-much-land-to-give-to-a-party&p=21032271&viewfull=1#post21032271).
...One criticism of the book I can levy right now is that it would have been really easy to make the title alliterative.