Are there any serious balance implications to letting a sorcerer take the Produce Flame cantrip?
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
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:04
V2Blast
19.7k356121
asked Nov 16 '18 at 20:34
Darth Pseudonym
12.1k22966
add a comment |
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
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:04
V2Blast
19.7k356121
asked Nov 16 '18 at 20:34
Darth Pseudonym
12.1k22966
add a comment |
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
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:04
V2Blast
19.7k356121
asked Nov 16 '18 at 20:34
Darth Pseudonym
12.1k22966
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
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:04
V2Blast
19.7k356121
asked Nov 16 '18 at 20:34
Darth Pseudonym
12.1k22966
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:04
V2Blast
19.7k356121
asked Nov 16 '18 at 20:34
Darth Pseudonym
12.1k22966
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:04
V2Blast
19.7k356121
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:04
V2Blast
19.7k356121
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:04
V2Blast
19.7k356121
19.7k356121
asked Nov 16 '18 at 20:34
Darth Pseudonym
12.1k22966
asked Nov 16 '18 at 20:34
Darth Pseudonym
12.1k22966
asked Nov 16 '18 at 20:34
Darth Pseudonym
12.1k22966
12.1k22966
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:46
Viishnahn
587217
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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 at 1:33
1
@Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
– Viishnahn
Nov 17 '18 at 2:29
add a comment |
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:42
NautArch
53k8188356
add a comment |
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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:46
Viishnahn
587217
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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 at 1:33
1
@Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
– Viishnahn
Nov 17 '18 at 2:29
add a comment |
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:46
Viishnahn
587217
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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 at 1:33
1
@Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
– Viishnahn
Nov 17 '18 at 2:29
add a comment |
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:46
Viishnahn
587217
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:46
Viishnahn
587217
edited Nov 17 '18 at 2:33
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:46
Viishnahn
587217
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:46
Viishnahn
587217
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:46
Viishnahn
587217
587217
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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 at 1:33
1
@Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
– Viishnahn
Nov 17 '18 at 2:29
add a comment |
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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 at 1:33
1
@Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
– Viishnahn
Nov 17 '18 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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 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 '18 at 1:33
1
1
@Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
– Viishnahn
Nov 17 '18 at 2:29
@Jihelu Good point, I didn't catch that.
– Viishnahn
Nov 17 '18 at 2:29
add a comment |
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:42
NautArch
53k8188356
add a comment |
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:42
NautArch
53k8188356
add a comment |
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:42
NautArch
53k8188356
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.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:42
NautArch
53k8188356
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:42
NautArch
53k8188356
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:42
NautArch
53k8188356
answered Nov 16 '18 at 20:42
NautArch
53k8188356
53k8188356
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
