Are there any serious balance implications to letting a sorcerer take the Produce Flame cantrip?











up vote
7
down vote

favorite












A player building a 1st level Sorcerer character feels that produce flame is a better thematic fit for their character than fire bolt. Are there any serious balance issues with allowing them to take produce flame, which is normally only available to Druids (and certain subclasses of Bard or Warlock) as a cantrip?



In general, produce flame seems like a combination of a slightly nerfed fire bolt with a seriously nerfed light, and the flavor doesn't seem wildly off for a sorcerer, so I'm wondering if there are any strong reasons to reject the request.






dnd-5e spells balance sorcerer cantrips







share|improve this question




























    up vote
    7
    down vote

    favorite












    A player building a 1st level Sorcerer character feels that produce flame is a better thematic fit for their character than fire bolt. Are there any serious balance issues with allowing them to take produce flame, which is normally only available to Druids (and certain subclasses of Bard or Warlock) as a cantrip?



    In general, produce flame seems like a combination of a slightly nerfed fire bolt with a seriously nerfed light, and the flavor doesn't seem wildly off for a sorcerer, so I'm wondering if there are any strong reasons to reject the request.






    dnd-5e spells balance sorcerer cantrips







    share|improve this question


























      up vote
      7
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      7
      down vote

      favorite











      A player building a 1st level Sorcerer character feels that produce flame is a better thematic fit for their character than fire bolt. Are there any serious balance issues with allowing them to take produce flame, which is normally only available to Druids (and certain subclasses of Bard or Warlock) as a cantrip?



      In general, produce flame seems like a combination of a slightly nerfed fire bolt with a seriously nerfed light, and the flavor doesn't seem wildly off for a sorcerer, so I'm wondering if there are any strong reasons to reject the request.






      dnd-5e spells balance sorcerer cantrips







      share|improve this question















      A player building a 1st level Sorcerer character feels that produce flame is a better thematic fit for their character than fire bolt. Are there any serious balance issues with allowing them to take produce flame, which is normally only available to Druids (and certain subclasses of Bard or Warlock) as a cantrip?



      In general, produce flame seems like a combination of a slightly nerfed fire bolt with a seriously nerfed light, and the flavor doesn't seem wildly off for a sorcerer, so I'm wondering if there are any strong reasons to reject the request.






      dnd-5e spells balance sorcerer cantrips




      dnd-5e spells balance sorcerer cantrips






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Nov 16 at 23:04









      V2Blast

      18.1k248114




      18.1k248114










      asked Nov 16 at 20:34









      Darth Pseudonym

      8,7762253




      8,7762253






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          14
          down vote



          accepted










          This is Fine



          Mechanically, Fire Bolt is far superior to Produce Flame with better range and better damage. For utility, Light far surpasses Produce Flame as a source of visible light at double the radius of effect.



          The only thing that Produce Flame can do that the other two cannot is the name of the cantrip itself: it can produce a small amount of fire that persists for the duration. This fire, unlike that of Fire Bolt, cannot light anything on fire however, since in Fifth Edition spells only do what they say they do. The main benefit to this cantrip, then, is that you get a both a source of light and a source of damage from one cantrip, great for druids who only have 2 cantrips at level 1.



          Thematically, this is a druid spell, but it doesn't stretch the imagination too far to say that a sorcerer (and especially one with a fire dragon bloodline or some similar origin) could realistically replicate this.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1




            Well, keep in mind that sorcerers are supposed to be balanced via their lack of spells known and the resulting lack of utility. So letting a sorcerer take a spell with two effects is generally far better for them than taking two spells with one effect each. That said, we're talking pretty weak effects in this case, so I'd still allow it.
            – MartianInvader
            Nov 17 at 1:01








          • 1




            @MartianInvader Sorcerers know more cantrips than any other class without feats, so they typically have more cantrip flexibility than other classes. This just extends that.
            – Viishnahn
            Nov 17 at 1:11






          • 2




            Doesn't produce flame specifically not have the "can ignite flammable objects " quote that Fire Bolt and others have? If that's the case it can't set things on fire
            – Jihelu
            Nov 17 at 1:33






          • 1




            @Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
            – Viishnahn
            Nov 17 at 2:29


















          up vote
          3
          down vote













          Seems Legit



          You're basically trading the increased damage and range of fire bolt for some additional utility in having a light source with produce flame.



          That seems more than reasonable, but I would probably rule that they can't use the hand that is 'holding' produce flame to be used for anything else.






          share|improve this answer





















            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "122"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135724%2fare-there-any-serious-balance-implications-to-letting-a-sorcerer-take-the-produc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            14
            down vote



            accepted










            This is Fine



            Mechanically, Fire Bolt is far superior to Produce Flame with better range and better damage. For utility, Light far surpasses Produce Flame as a source of visible light at double the radius of effect.



            The only thing that Produce Flame can do that the other two cannot is the name of the cantrip itself: it can produce a small amount of fire that persists for the duration. This fire, unlike that of Fire Bolt, cannot light anything on fire however, since in Fifth Edition spells only do what they say they do. The main benefit to this cantrip, then, is that you get a both a source of light and a source of damage from one cantrip, great for druids who only have 2 cantrips at level 1.



            Thematically, this is a druid spell, but it doesn't stretch the imagination too far to say that a sorcerer (and especially one with a fire dragon bloodline or some similar origin) could realistically replicate this.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 1




              Well, keep in mind that sorcerers are supposed to be balanced via their lack of spells known and the resulting lack of utility. So letting a sorcerer take a spell with two effects is generally far better for them than taking two spells with one effect each. That said, we're talking pretty weak effects in this case, so I'd still allow it.
              – MartianInvader
              Nov 17 at 1:01








            • 1




              @MartianInvader Sorcerers know more cantrips than any other class without feats, so they typically have more cantrip flexibility than other classes. This just extends that.
              – Viishnahn
              Nov 17 at 1:11






            • 2




              Doesn't produce flame specifically not have the "can ignite flammable objects " quote that Fire Bolt and others have? If that's the case it can't set things on fire
              – Jihelu
              Nov 17 at 1:33






            • 1




              @Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
              – Viishnahn
              Nov 17 at 2:29















            up vote
            14
            down vote



            accepted










            This is Fine



            Mechanically, Fire Bolt is far superior to Produce Flame with better range and better damage. For utility, Light far surpasses Produce Flame as a source of visible light at double the radius of effect.



            The only thing that Produce Flame can do that the other two cannot is the name of the cantrip itself: it can produce a small amount of fire that persists for the duration. This fire, unlike that of Fire Bolt, cannot light anything on fire however, since in Fifth Edition spells only do what they say they do. The main benefit to this cantrip, then, is that you get a both a source of light and a source of damage from one cantrip, great for druids who only have 2 cantrips at level 1.



            Thematically, this is a druid spell, but it doesn't stretch the imagination too far to say that a sorcerer (and especially one with a fire dragon bloodline or some similar origin) could realistically replicate this.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 1




              Well, keep in mind that sorcerers are supposed to be balanced via their lack of spells known and the resulting lack of utility. So letting a sorcerer take a spell with two effects is generally far better for them than taking two spells with one effect each. That said, we're talking pretty weak effects in this case, so I'd still allow it.
              – MartianInvader
              Nov 17 at 1:01








            • 1




              @MartianInvader Sorcerers know more cantrips than any other class without feats, so they typically have more cantrip flexibility than other classes. This just extends that.
              – Viishnahn
              Nov 17 at 1:11






            • 2




              Doesn't produce flame specifically not have the "can ignite flammable objects " quote that Fire Bolt and others have? If that's the case it can't set things on fire
              – Jihelu
              Nov 17 at 1:33






            • 1




              @Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
              – Viishnahn
              Nov 17 at 2:29













            up vote
            14
            down vote



            accepted







            up vote
            14
            down vote



            accepted






            This is Fine



            Mechanically, Fire Bolt is far superior to Produce Flame with better range and better damage. For utility, Light far surpasses Produce Flame as a source of visible light at double the radius of effect.



            The only thing that Produce Flame can do that the other two cannot is the name of the cantrip itself: it can produce a small amount of fire that persists for the duration. This fire, unlike that of Fire Bolt, cannot light anything on fire however, since in Fifth Edition spells only do what they say they do. The main benefit to this cantrip, then, is that you get a both a source of light and a source of damage from one cantrip, great for druids who only have 2 cantrips at level 1.



            Thematically, this is a druid spell, but it doesn't stretch the imagination too far to say that a sorcerer (and especially one with a fire dragon bloodline or some similar origin) could realistically replicate this.






            share|improve this answer














            This is Fine



            Mechanically, Fire Bolt is far superior to Produce Flame with better range and better damage. For utility, Light far surpasses Produce Flame as a source of visible light at double the radius of effect.



            The only thing that Produce Flame can do that the other two cannot is the name of the cantrip itself: it can produce a small amount of fire that persists for the duration. This fire, unlike that of Fire Bolt, cannot light anything on fire however, since in Fifth Edition spells only do what they say they do. The main benefit to this cantrip, then, is that you get a both a source of light and a source of damage from one cantrip, great for druids who only have 2 cantrips at level 1.



            Thematically, this is a druid spell, but it doesn't stretch the imagination too far to say that a sorcerer (and especially one with a fire dragon bloodline or some similar origin) could realistically replicate this.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Nov 17 at 2:33

























            answered Nov 16 at 20:46









            Viishnahn

            577215




            577215








            • 1




              Well, keep in mind that sorcerers are supposed to be balanced via their lack of spells known and the resulting lack of utility. So letting a sorcerer take a spell with two effects is generally far better for them than taking two spells with one effect each. That said, we're talking pretty weak effects in this case, so I'd still allow it.
              – MartianInvader
              Nov 17 at 1:01








            • 1




              @MartianInvader Sorcerers know more cantrips than any other class without feats, so they typically have more cantrip flexibility than other classes. This just extends that.
              – Viishnahn
              Nov 17 at 1:11






            • 2




              Doesn't produce flame specifically not have the "can ignite flammable objects " quote that Fire Bolt and others have? If that's the case it can't set things on fire
              – Jihelu
              Nov 17 at 1:33






            • 1




              @Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
              – Viishnahn
              Nov 17 at 2:29














            • 1




              Well, keep in mind that sorcerers are supposed to be balanced via their lack of spells known and the resulting lack of utility. So letting a sorcerer take a spell with two effects is generally far better for them than taking two spells with one effect each. That said, we're talking pretty weak effects in this case, so I'd still allow it.
              – MartianInvader
              Nov 17 at 1:01








            • 1




              @MartianInvader Sorcerers know more cantrips than any other class without feats, so they typically have more cantrip flexibility than other classes. This just extends that.
              – Viishnahn
              Nov 17 at 1:11






            • 2




              Doesn't produce flame specifically not have the "can ignite flammable objects " quote that Fire Bolt and others have? If that's the case it can't set things on fire
              – Jihelu
              Nov 17 at 1:33






            • 1




              @Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
              – Viishnahn
              Nov 17 at 2:29








            1




            1




            Well, keep in mind that sorcerers are supposed to be balanced via their lack of spells known and the resulting lack of utility. So letting a sorcerer take a spell with two effects is generally far better for them than taking two spells with one effect each. That said, we're talking pretty weak effects in this case, so I'd still allow it.
            – MartianInvader
            Nov 17 at 1:01






            Well, keep in mind that sorcerers are supposed to be balanced via their lack of spells known and the resulting lack of utility. So letting a sorcerer take a spell with two effects is generally far better for them than taking two spells with one effect each. That said, we're talking pretty weak effects in this case, so I'd still allow it.
            – MartianInvader
            Nov 17 at 1:01






            1




            1




            @MartianInvader Sorcerers know more cantrips than any other class without feats, so they typically have more cantrip flexibility than other classes. This just extends that.
            – Viishnahn
            Nov 17 at 1:11




            @MartianInvader Sorcerers know more cantrips than any other class without feats, so they typically have more cantrip flexibility than other classes. This just extends that.
            – Viishnahn
            Nov 17 at 1:11




            2




            2




            Doesn't produce flame specifically not have the "can ignite flammable objects " quote that Fire Bolt and others have? If that's the case it can't set things on fire
            – Jihelu
            Nov 17 at 1:33




            Doesn't produce flame specifically not have the "can ignite flammable objects " quote that Fire Bolt and others have? If that's the case it can't set things on fire
            – Jihelu
            Nov 17 at 1:33




            1




            1




            @Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
            – Viishnahn
            Nov 17 at 2:29




            @Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
            – Viishnahn
            Nov 17 at 2:29












            up vote
            3
            down vote













            Seems Legit



            You're basically trading the increased damage and range of fire bolt for some additional utility in having a light source with produce flame.



            That seems more than reasonable, but I would probably rule that they can't use the hand that is 'holding' produce flame to be used for anything else.






            share|improve this answer

























              up vote
              3
              down vote













              Seems Legit



              You're basically trading the increased damage and range of fire bolt for some additional utility in having a light source with produce flame.



              That seems more than reasonable, but I would probably rule that they can't use the hand that is 'holding' produce flame to be used for anything else.






              share|improve this answer























                up vote
                3
                down vote










                up vote
                3
                down vote









                Seems Legit



                You're basically trading the increased damage and range of fire bolt for some additional utility in having a light source with produce flame.



                That seems more than reasonable, but I would probably rule that they can't use the hand that is 'holding' produce flame to be used for anything else.






                share|improve this answer












                Seems Legit



                You're basically trading the increased damage and range of fire bolt for some additional utility in having a light source with produce flame.



                That seems more than reasonable, but I would probably rule that they can't use the hand that is 'holding' produce flame to be used for anything else.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Nov 16 at 20:42









                NautArch

                50.7k6178340




                50.7k6178340






























                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded



















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135724%2fare-there-any-serious-balance-implications-to-letting-a-sorcerer-take-the-produc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

                    Image
                    3 Recently upgrade to 18.10 from 18.04, and using the terminal is becoming annoying: the new alert sound is a drip ( /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg ), and the previous one is still located at ( /usr/share/sounds/ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg ). My issue is that at the gnome-terminal, when autocompleting or pressing left BOTH sounds are reproduced, at the same time. I want to just have ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg active, not both . At the moment I have been only able to reduce the volume of the alerts (but still both are played), or turn the alerts down (but I dislike both "solutions"). gnome-terminal 18.10 teminal-bell share | improve this question
                    Read more

                    Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

                    Image
                    up vote 5 down vote favorite 2 I would like to make it so that the vertical space below the title of each chapter is the same when using the Bjornstrup package (i.e. so that the descenders do not affect the spacing - as shown by the red arrow in the picture below). I think I'm fairly happy with the spacing around "A chapter", so I'd really like titles without descenders (e.g. "Contents") to have the same vertical spacing as "A chapter" below the title. I would also like to remove the large "0" in the contents title. Any help appreciated, as always. documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{book} % Packages[![enter image description here][1]][1] usepackage[left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm, top=4.3cm, bottom=4.25cm]{geometry} usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} usepackage{libertine} usepackage[libertine]{newtx
                    Read more

                    Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?

                    Image
                    0 I want to add Tabulator js to my java project. I added tabulator.min.js, tabulator.min.css to resources folder. After that added to my html page these dependencies as recommending in readme.md. <link rel="stylesheet" th:href="@{/css/tabulator.min.css}"> <script type="text/javascript" th:src="@{/js/tabulator.min.js}"></script> Now my tables view all elements, that I have in the html page, but not correct. In the documentation of Tabulator is example how to create header and table, var table = new Tabulator("#example-table", { columns:[ {title:"Name", field:"name", sorter:"string", width:200, editor:true}, {title:"Age", field:"age", sorter:"
                    Read more