Homebrew: Necrotic Booming/Green-Flame Blade

[viaFAMILIAR]

I have a slight obsession with the Cleric: Death Domain and thought necrotic versions of Booming/Green-Flame Blade would fit the character so well. But in doing so, the spells' schools would also change to Necromancy, thus benefitting from Reaper. Along with Divine Strike adding even more damage to these cantrips, it seems a little OP to the intended capabilities of the original cantrips and class features.

What do you guys think about changing the damage types of spells in general? Do these slight alterations break the class?

[JNAProductions]

I have a slight obsession with the Cleric: Death Domain and thought necrotic versions of Booming/Green-Flame Blade would fit the character so well. But in doing so, the spells' schools would also change to Necromancy, thus benefitting from Reaper. Along with Divine Strike adding even more damage to these cantrips, it seems a little OP to the intended capabilities of the original cantrips and class features.

What do you guys think about changing the damage types of spells in general? Do these slight alterations break the class?

Going from Fire to Necrotic damage, absent anything else, is a trade I'd be fine being made as a DM.

But, when you're specifically changing it because it synergizes well with your other features, that's when you'd get a no from me.

[Honest Tiefling]

Changes made for thematic reasons are typically okay by me, better than a death domain cleric wielding necrotic energy then sheepishly using fire instead of the power granted by their deity. JNAProductions put it quite nicely, if it was just a damage type change.

If it worked with other class features, I'd 1) Ask the group if they are okay with the change and 2) Ask the player what they would be willing to give up to get the new feature. I admit, I am not the most mechanically minded person, but I'd like for the other players to have a say in mechanical changes like this. And if the player isn't willing to give up anything...That's not a good sign, even if the end verdict is to just allow it in the end.

[Seclora]

I agree, fire damage to necrotic damage for flavor would be fine. Changing it when it would affect class features is an entirely different matter.
Changing the school for any reason would be a very serious request.

[Crucius]

I have to agree with JNA here. Changing damage I think is totally fine, changing the type for acquisition through reaper is on the edge, but I would allow it. Getting to target 2 creatures with it is too much in my opinion. Therefore I would allow you picking up greenflame blade but not booming blade this way.

Booming blade is just really really good. It's the reason melee sorcerers take twin and quicken to just blast with insane damage, though costing them a lot of sorcery points. Reaper costs you nothing and starts at level 1.

[suplee215]

I agree with the others about the change in the spell schools adds a big element but my biggest concern is giving this spell to a cleric. Normally clerics have to jump through hoops for green flame blade/booming blade either going Arcana, taking a feat or being a high elf. A necro attack cantrip like those sound cool but I think those spells are extremely powerful on a cleric already and making one that synergies with the subclass feature of a subclass that already requires DM approval and isn't exactly balanced is going to be a no from me. Although I just read the Death Domain and it does give you a free cantrip from any list already so this isn't that big an issue for getting it. But I still wouldn't allow it.

[BarneyBent]

Giving either cantrip to a Cleric for free is a pretty big boon (compare Arcana Cleric, considered one of the strongest subclasses). I’d be fine giving it a Death Domain Cleric with necrotic damage type as a replacement for their Reaper class feature. So no doubling up on targets, instead get a really strong couple of cantrips with necrotic damage type.

[viaFAMILIAR]

Disregarding any supposed changes to these cantrips, and supposing the Cleric has access to them, would the RAW "the target suffers the attack's normal effects" negate any type of damage bonus due to class features?

[Blood of Gaea]

Booming Blade -> Necrotic
Greenflame Blade -> Poison

I second that you should give something else up for this change. And Death Cleric will not get them for free.

[viaFAMILIAR]

Giving either cantrip to a Cleric for free is a pretty big boon (compare Arcana Cleric, considered one of the strongest subclasses). I’d be fine giving it a Death Domain Cleric with necrotic damage type as a replacement for their Reaper class feature. So no doubling up on targets, instead get a really strong couple of cantrips with necrotic damage type.

I was inspired by earlier editions' opposing schools of magic(illusion) but there's only one spell in that school, hardly a sacrifice. Giving up Reaper sounds like a pretty decent fix, but giving up a class feature for what a feat could grant isn't. I'd like to run the numbers, given your suggestion.

[Seclora]

Booming Blade -> Necrotic
Greenflame Blade -> Poison

I second that you should give something else up for this change. And Death Cleric will not get them for free.

Honestly, I see the other way around making more sense.
Booming Blade > Poison
your blade plants a poison activated by movement
Green Flame Blade > Necrotic
A sweeping blow that draws the life force out of a target and one of his neighbors

[Mortis_Elrod]

I offer an alternate cantrip.

Primal Savagery.

one of the few damage melee cantrips. change acid to necrotic.

My current death domain lizardfolk uses this via magic initiate Druid. Course i didn't change the spell at all, (acid damage is fun too)

[Zhorn]

Making new spells to fit a desired niche is an acceptable practice within D&D. A bunch of spells created specifically by the character's that first used them are in the game named after them.

Bigby's Hand
Melf's Acid Arrow
Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion
Tenser's Floating Disc

Making a spell specifically for your needs should be fine for everything outside of AL.
viaRAILGUN's Necrotic Blade :smallbiggrin:

As for balance, moving into a less resisted damage type it makes sense to step down the damage dice, or give it an effect more in keeping with another balanced cantrip.
If it was swapping to an equally resisted damage type, then it shouldn't need a dice effect adjustment, but as you're looking to do this specifically for a power increase, it is a little bit munchkin like and understandably setting off alarms to some DM's.

[BarneyBent]

I was inspired by earlier editions' opposing schools of magic(illusion) but there's only one spell in that school, hardly a sacrifice. Giving up Reaper sounds like a pretty decent fix, but giving up a class feature for what a feat could grant isn't. I'd like to run the numbers, given your suggestion.

I’m not sure why you’re comparing class/subclass features to Feats. Both vary WIDELY in power. Compare, for example, the War Cleric’s bonus action attacks up to WIS modifier per short rest. That’s worth less than just one part of the Polearm Master feat, which grants bonus action attacks literally whenever so long as you’re using a polearm.

Like PAM, Magic Initiate (assuming that’s the feat you’re referring to) is one of the strongest feats in the game. Comparing a class feature that grants a single cantrip from a meh list of cantrips (aside from Toll the Dead, which is already available to Clerics), and which situationally allows the cantrip to target two people instead of one (congrats, you can put down a second mook in the one turn), isn’t exactly fair - the feat is way more valuable.

And you’re not just getting any cantrips, you’re getting two of the first cantrips, with a modified damage type, that synergises with Divine Strike in a way that the rest of the cantrips don’t. Which honestly I think Death Domain needs as it is otherwise a pretty underwhelming subclass.

The cantrips alone are, IMO, equal to or more powerful than the Reaper feature. But if you think it needs more, you could also ignore resistance to Necrotic damage.

[Misterwhisper]

Change GFB to necrotic, sure.
Change it to a necromancy spell, no.
You would also have to get it on your own somehow, definitely not getting one of the best cantrips in the game for free.

It would make sense and be thematic for a tempest cleric to get shocking grasp but they don’t.

[Chronos]

I'll be a dissenting voice and say that changing a spell's damage type is not always OK, and in particular that changing from fire to necrotic is not OK. Different damage types have different values, because different numbers of creatures are immune/resistant to them, and a lot more things resist fire than necrotic. In general, switching from any of the common damage types (fire, lightning, cold, poison, or acid) to any of the uncommon types (force, psychic, radiant, necrotic, or thunder) is a significant buff. And a buff might be OK if you're starting with a weak cantrip, but Green Flame Blade is generally considered to be a pretty strong one already.

[Willie the Duck]

What do you guys think about changing the damage types of spells in general? Do these slight alterations break the class?

Speaking at a general level, there are multiple things going on. First and foremost, changes to fit a theme should be encouraged. However --

On some level, there is a power/scarcity component that means that all damage types are not equal. As an example, the cantrips poison spray and fire bolt have bigger damage dice and are more convenient (the long range option and the high-area short range option) compared to cantrips like shocking grasp, chill touch, ray of frost, etc. Some of that is because those other spells have better riders, but it is also a perk for the fire and poison spells because they have the burden of also being the most-often-resisted damage types. Thus, if you switch something from fire/poison to something less-often-resisted, you should re-examine the benefit to see if you haven't given the spell a serious boost.

Likewise, the game is made up of tough choices and subtle compromises. Combining X with Y often comes with some cost (be it feat of allotted-cantrip cost, or sometimes something like a non-arcana Cleric having to pick booming blade over green flame blade because GFB would add +int or +cha to damage, while BB adds an attribute-independent +1d8 instead. Changing the cantrip to work with Wisdom, and/or changing it to work with necrotic (a type which is highly beneficial to Death Domain Clerics), are, as JNAProductions put it, "specifically changing it because it synergizes well with your other features." It doesn't mean I give it a hard no, but I'm going to look at it as a serious perk that I would do only if I thought the build/theme needed a boost, or if a compensatory cost was added.

[viaFAMILIAR]

So it seems the general consensus is against my 'Dooming Blade/Black-Flame Blade' cantrips, tough love. A damage type change for thematic purposes grew into a whole other beast. Combined with the class features Reaper and Divine Strike, necromancy versions of these cantrips weigh too much. The intent was to use BB(learned via Magic Initiate) in conjunction with War Caster's reaction ability, advantage on concentration saves is great, but somatics rarely came up in games I've played and can be acheived by sheathing your weapon. Plus I'm stuck on a familiar(poisonous snake) mounting the character, gaining cover from a shield and administering various touch spells(Guidance, Light, Spare the Dying). BB/GFB is totally doable and would add some balance to the character's melee capability. I could see how a Dex build would work, given no heavy armor proficiency, but a cleric wielding a crossbow is "meh" IMO. If I could have my way; I'd go full ranged caster, replace martial proficiency with Heavy armor, replace Divine Strike with Potent Spellcasting, and nevermind the supposed cantrips. This is definitely a concept for the archives.

[Blood of Gaea]

If I could have my way; I'd go full ranged caster, replace martial proficiency with Heavy armor, replace Divine Strike with Potent Spellcasting, and nevermind the supposed cantrips. This is definitely a concept for the archives.
Why in the world can't you?

[viaFAMILIAR]

Why in the world can't you?

Because I would then start lobbying for domain spell changes..

[Zhorn]

So it seems the general consensus is against my 'Dooming Blade/Black-Flame Blade' cantrips, tough love.
Not in whole, just the part about adding on more benefits without balancing it with some drawbacks.

Example, Green-Flame Blade: Even with the school change, GFB hitting two targets at baseline disqualifies it from Reaper, so if you want GFB+Reaper then you have to drop that baseline cleave.

Both are already eligible for Divine Strikes, so there's no issue on that front (note that GFB will only trigger Divine Strike on the primary target, not the secondary one).

[viaFAMILIAR]

Example, Green-Flame Blade: Even with the school change, GFB hitting two targets at baseline disqualifies it from Reaper, so if you want GFB+Reaper then you have to drop that baseline cleave.

I totally missed that bit about GFB, good catch.

Proposed 'fix': GFB(necrotic) now only does the damage of the second target to the first. @17th weaponD+mod, +3d8+mod. This way, it actually meets the requirements for Reaper. Even still, that's extra attack+ @1st. I think it's beyond repair.

Compare this to GFB, +Horde Breaker(ranger: hunter). Or GFB(necrotic), +Reaper, +Horde Breaker =Gross.

[Mortis_Elrod]

I totally missed that bit about GFB, good catch.

Proposed 'fix': GFB(necrotic) now only does the damage of the second target to the first. @17th weaponD+mod, +3d8+mod. This way, it actually meets the requirements for Reaper. Even still, that's extra attack+ @1st. I think it's beyond repair.

Compare this to GFB, +Horde Breaker(ranger: hunter). Or GFB(necrotic), +Reaper, +Horde Breaker =Gross.

At that point just make a new different cantrip for the cleric with all the bells and whistles you want.

[Zhorn]

I totally missed that bit about GFB, good catch.

Proposed 'fix': GFB(necrotic) now only does the damage of the second target to the first. @17th weaponD+mod, +3d8+mod. This way, it actually meets the requirements for Reaper. Even still, that's extra attack+ @1st. I think it's beyond repair.

Compare this to GFB, +Horde Breaker(ranger: hunter). Or GFB(necrotic), +Reaper, +Horde Breaker =Gross.

Compressing it all into the one target is a bit high for a cantrip level ability if the same dice size is used AND the addition of the casting mod to damage.

For damage limits, I think taking mod+1d12 is your upper damage limit for tier 1, stepping up 1 dice for each tier up to mod+4d12 at tier 4. Using other existing cantrips as a baseline for where the trade offs exist.

Examples:

Firebolt; can hit a target at range? drop the mod. Can light objects on fire? drop the dice down to d10's

Toll The Dead: can hit a target at range? drop the mod. Uses a save instead of targeting AC, drop the dice one size. Can still deal higher dice damage to injured targets? drop the baseline dice size once more to d8's

Green-Flame Blade: Can get above the 1d12+mod damage limit? damage is spread across multiple targets. Can utilise weapons with on hit effects? is not used with an attack action.

etc

[Coidzor]

If you use Green Flame Blade as the base, then Reaper won't come into the equation, at least the part that allows a necromancy cantrip to affect 2 different targets. Being able to have an always on Twin Spell for Booming Blade might be a bit much for a first level ability, though.

I don't see any problems with using Reaper to pick up the necromancy-flavored weapon attack cantrip in the first place, though.

Divine Strike would be happening regardless, so I don't see how that's really relevant as a factor.

Bypassing resistance to Necrotic Damage is good, but it's not game-breaking.

[viaFAMILIAR]

If you use Green Flame Blade as the base, then Reaper won't come into the equation, at least the part that allows a necromancy cantrip to affect 2 different targets. Being able to have an always on Twin Spell for Booming Blade might be a bit much for a first level ability, though.

I don't see any problems with using Reaper to pick up the necromancy-flavored weapon attack cantrip in the first place, though.

Divine Strike would be happening regardless, so I don't see how that's really relevant as a factor.

Bypassing resistance to Necrotic Damage is good, but it's not game-breaking.

So the changes made to GFB is fine, given it doesn't synergize with Reaper or a necromancer's Grim Harvest by RAW.

The problem then lies with a necrotic BB. A free extra attack @1st just weighs too much on the scale. To maintain the theme of the build, I'd be fine with a clerical BB that did force damage instead, like spiritual weapon does.

[Chronos]

Note that Booming Blade already does one of the "good" damage types, so changing it to force or necrotic isn't as big of a deal. Force is still better than thunder, but it's not as big a difference as force and fire, or necrotic and fire.