As a DM how have you dealt with players that want to constantly cast a cantrip. the example I have. Dm: as you open the stuck door the cobwebs that help hold the door in place break revealing a room filled with interlaced cobwebs so dense you can’t see the other side of the room.
-player: I cast fire bolt to burn the webs. I keep doing this to clear the room of webs. I will cast until there is no more webs I can see.
Yeah, this seems like a fairly simple solution... the room catches on fire, maybe something of value gets destroyed in the process or the area ahead gets so engulfed in flame that it's not safe to traverse. Maybe the fire draws unwanted attention. The best way to curb this kind of attitude is just to remind your players that D&D is more complicated than videogames... in a videogame, a room full of cobwebs can easily be burned, because videogames have simple rules... if the room is designed to burst into flames, then it won't. But D&D has more complex rules, and things can change based on the DM's thoughts and decisions.
How long would that take? Do monsters move around in the dungeon, or even patrol it? Would a monster investigate a repeated burst of light/sound coming from the next room or down the hall? Is the rest of the party keeping watch for that?
If the above are true, your characters might find themselves vulnerable to random encounters! I wouldn't necessarily do a random encounter every time they stop to do something like this-- that's maybe a little too 'hand of the dm coming out of the sky to screw us over'-- but definitely something to consider if you feel they're abusing it.
Generally players should be motivated to keep moving in a dungeon crawl, otherwise they will spam cantrips, take short/long rests after every encounter, etc. However, dungeons aren't safe. Part of the challenge should be managing player resources like HP, spell slots, ammunition, class abilities, and balancing them against encounters with monsters, traps, and puzzles. That isn't to say that players should be penalized for resting, they should just not feel safe enough to just camp out in the middle of the Sunken Temple for like 6 hours without scouting the area for enemies or finding a defensible position. If your players aren't thinking that way, they'll likely learn to, once you set that expectation with them either by throwing a few random encounters their way based on the choices they made, or just by saying "hey guys, just want to reiterate that this is not a safe place to be, and one of the challenges of this adventure is navigating that. Just letting you know."
this, i'd start forcing them to deal with the fact that they're catching everything on fire...you burn the place down around their ears a couple times, they'll likely figure out to stop doing it. If not, let them die. They're doing it because there's no consequence.
Cantrips are designed to be used without limits. There is no reason to keep a player from doing so, but that said, there's no reason doing so won't have consequences. Taking ten minutes to spam the same spell a hundred times or casting a spell on the same thing over and over might have consequences- too much fire as listed above is a good example.
The cantrip is basically the same to a fighter saying they cut through it with their sword. The only differences should be coming from the mechanics of the spell for example if it has a verbal components people can hear it cast so its noisy, if it sets things on fire it might start a fire (though I wouldn't make a player hit something they wouldn't have otherwise without asking) and if it takes an action a cast they aren't going to be using it very quickly which will slow down their movement pace.
The cantrip is basically the same to a fighter saying they cut through it with their sword. The only differences should become from the mechanics of the spell for example if it has a verbal components people can hear it cast so its noisy, if it sets things on fire it might start a fire (though I wouldn't make a player hit something they wouldn't have otherwise without asking) and if it takes an action a cast they aren't going to be using it very quickly which will slow down their movement pace.
Yeah, I was about to say the same exact thing. If it really bothers you, maybe take that they are able to do this into account when creating encounters? I tend to look over my players skills before making a dungeon, encounter or a situation in which I really want them to use their brains to figure out how to get out of it? So, if you know one of your players can cast Fire bolt as a cantrip, maybe see about creating a situation in which that wouldn't work, or have more dire consequences? That said, it is a skill they can use as annoying as it is, haha.
What's the difference between doing this and using a torch to burn them away? The range?
Something you have to learn as a DM is that you can't ever predict how the players will try to solve problems. Whatever your intention, the players will use spells, abilities and cantrips to thwart whatever you have planned... but that's exactly what they should be doing! Don't try to hamper them or cut down what they can do. Let them use their abilities. I get the impression this cantrip casting bothers you because it's upsetting your planned encounters, or trivialising challenges.
Provide challenges; don't plan solutions. Example: my PCs used a Teleportation Circle (cast by an NPC) to enter an old tomb, not knowing what they'd fine. They appeared in a lightless room, with a huge stone door that required a DC25 Strength check to open. Only the barbarian could make it, and he failed. There was no other way out of the room, and they couldn't teleport out. So they had to come up with creative stuff; the dwarf used mason's tools to make handholds in the door (it had to be lifted up). The sorcerer used Mold Earth to deepen the grooves. There was also a plan to set a barrel of gunpowder, then hide inside a cube of force. Eventually, they managed to lift the door without blowing it by fashioning a lever from something in their Bag of Holding.
The point is, I didn't plan how they'd get out. So if they cast a dozen cantrips, that's fine! Nothing is spoiled.
At higher level, it won't be cantrips causing you to pull your hair out. Regularly, one higher level spell will ruin all your plans. The PCs may even declare that they teleport to the other side of the world.
Create the challenges and the world, and then just be happy when the PCs burn all your spiderwebs away.
And here I thought this thread would be about shillelagh. I have had players that want to keep that spell up at all times when going through a dungeon or something. I'm more or less okay with it, but it means they're constantly making noise. If that's not enough, you could have them roll 1d10 at initiative to see how many rounds they have left on the current cast.
Just narrate: "as you cast your firebolt to burn the webs, you hear a scream as you strike a young girl in the face, horribly scarring her. She's the lords daughter you were hired to rescue, he will not be happy. Perhaps you should get a will or reroll?". Just set up a scenario where you know the players behavior, and this time have it backfire. Whether you want it to be comical, cruel or deadly. You could also put in a barrel of highly combustible goblin juice and go "oh, oh no, your firebolt explodes the kegs, the kegs of goblin draught, its 150 proof. A massive fireball forms, roll Dexterity saving throw please".
Just narrate: "as you cast your firebolt to burn the webs, you hear a scream as you strike a young girl in the face, horribly scarring her. She's the lords daughter you were hired to rescue, he will not be happy. Perhaps you should get a will or reroll?". Just set up a scenario where you know the players behavior, and this time have it backfire. Whether you want it to be comical, cruel or deadly. You could also put in a barrel of highly combustible goblin juice and go "oh, oh no, your firebolt explodes the kegs, the kegs of goblin draught, its 150 proof. A massive fireball forms, roll Dexterity saving throw please".
This is the opposite of what a DM should do, unless they have already given the players clues (foreshadowing) to show that this might happen. Why would you punish the players for using their abilities?
There's often a knee jerk reaction in threads like this one, to say "Throw something unexpected at them to stop them doing it." This is practically the worst thing a DM can do to their players. It tells them that if they try to solve problems using their abilities, random, awful and inexplicable things can happen. The world loses consistency.
It's one thing to "know player behaviour" and set up something that requires them to do something differently, but it needs to be reasonable for the PCs to expect it. A random child hidden in the webs? The players aren't really responsible for that. What was the child doing in a dense spiderweb patch and why hadn't they broken the webs? If the DM instead states "There's a broken trail through the centre of the webs," then you could allow a Survival check to identify that they've been recently broken by a creature passing through.
The DM creates the world.
The DM lays clues to indicate what the PCs might encounter along the way.
When something goes amiss, it's because the PCs didn't investigate, or didn't take sensible precautions.
It is poor play to cause random, inexplicable mishap to try to force characters to play a certain way.
I'm in the "Don't change anything" camp. The consequences of spending a full minute shouting "FIREBOLT!", each accompanied by a whoosh of flame, are fairly self explanatory without adding "and you set things on fire" to the mix.
However, feel free to include later encounters - with foreshadowing - that penalise usign the same approach every time. For example, if they find a place which smells of sulfur, has sooty marks on the walls, and no torches in the corridor (or specifically hooded lanterns), then say "there is a room full of cobwebs and small barrels" then castign Fireball may cause the black powder to ignite, causing a "run like hell" approach!
And here I thought this thread would be about shillelagh. I have had players that want to keep that spell up at all times when going through a dungeon or something. I'm more or less okay with it, but it means they're constantly making noise. If that's not enough, you could have them roll 1d10 at initiative to see how many rounds they have left on the current cast.
But it's a bonus action spell, so now too disruptive to recast mid-fight.
You're going to have to provide more examples than just that because fire bolt seems like a fine solution. But what are the consequences of doing this?
Fire Bolt may emit a whoosh or some sort of flittering sound like tinder as it is conjured and launched at the target. Perhaps enough to alert the creatures which blocked the path with webbing in the first place?
You could always decide that in your world magic has a smell, in this instance, a sulphurous or burning stench. Add to that the flammable fuel source of webbing, it will no doubt spread the smell and possibly require the players to cover their noses. Can the creatures nearby smell this? Fun, somewhat related fact: in Buffy the Vampire Slayer (especially in the comics) magic smells of strawberries. For magic sensitive creatures lurking by, this could be the first hint to their next meal.
The spell itself might not be smokey, but it ignites flammable surfaces and there's no telling how much smoke that's going to produce. As you're burning away the webs, smoke might fill the corridor or room, requiring players to save versus choking. It's also going to be very hard to see through there until the smoke is somehow removed.
The webs are burnt away... but what else is burning with it? The door and doorway, and the wooden walls and floorboards around them? The very dry, dusty carpet the players are standing on? Anything on the otherside of the webs they can't see through? How hot is the room getting, and how far is that heat spreading throughout the complex? It should be made clear what in the room is catching fire as the webs are burning away; don't make them guess.
Don't be spiteful because they're using their toolkit to solve a problem by having them fail a quest because they were too clever. Find means to challenge them in different ways. My immediate solution to this would've been to borrow from Brutal Legend where the spiders' steel silk is used to make bass guitar strings. Casting fire bolt only makes the metal 'webs' very hot, but they could easily be bent or pushed out of the way, whilst producing a throbbing hum throughout the halls. Perhaps the party will come across the creatures which made these webs, or perhaps they went the way of Black Sabbath.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
Just narrate: "as you cast your firebolt to burn the webs, you hear a scream as you strike a young girl in the face, horribly scarring her. She's the lords daughter you were hired to rescue, he will not be happy. Perhaps you should get a will or reroll?". Just set up a scenario where you know the players behavior, and this time have it backfire. Whether you want it to be comical, cruel or deadly. You could also put in a barrel of highly combustible goblin juice and go "oh, oh no, your firebolt explodes the kegs, the kegs of goblin draught, its 150 proof. A massive fireball forms, roll Dexterity saving throw please".
This is the opposite of what a DM should do, unless they have already given the players clues (foreshadowing) to show that this might happen. Why would you punish the players for using their abilities?
There's often a knee jerk reaction in threads like this one, to say "Throw something unexpected at them to stop them doing it." This is practically the worst thing a DM can do to their players. It tells them that if they try to solve problems using their abilities, random, awful and inexplicable things can happen. The world loses consistency.
It's one thing to "know player behaviour" and set up something that requires them to do something differently, but it needs to be reasonable for the PCs to expect it. A random child hidden in the webs? The players aren't really responsible for that. What was the child doing in a dense spiderweb patch and why hadn't they broken the webs? If the DM instead states "There's a broken trail through the centre of the webs," then you could allow a Survival check to identify that they've been recently broken by a creature passing through.
The DM creates the world.
The DM lays clues to indicate what the PCs might encounter along the way.
When something goes amiss, it's because the PCs didn't investigate, or didn't take sensible precautions.
It is poor play to cause random, inexplicable mishap to try to force characters to play a certain way.
Did you miss this part, doing this on opening the door always:
>As a DM how have you dealt with players that want to constantly cast a cantrip.
I want you to think about that, what would happen if every time a soldier was clearing a room he opened fire as soon as he opened the door? He just opened the door and randomly fired without checking for who is in the room? Oh wait, he'd kill innocent people. The character is doing the exact same thing, he's shooting blindly to take advantage game mechanics and not treating the world as real. Situations like that, is that over time he's going to screw up and hit someone. What you advocate for is the exact opposite of what a DM should do. You are advocating for making the world all about the player with no consequences of their action. You can coddle your players all you want, but lack of verisimilitude and player coddling leads to short campaign.
I want you to think about that, what would happen if every time a soldier was clearing a room he opened fire as soon as he opened the door?
That wasn't what was being discussed in the original question though. The player was reacting to a particular issue (spider webs everywhere) by trying to remove them with firebolt, and the DM had some unclear issue with that.
There's no guarantee that firebolt will be an effective way of clearing spider webs, but there's also no guarantee that it won't be. The DM should decide based on whatever seems like reasonable results for using fire, and if your idea is very different from what the player seems to expect but is something the character might reasonably know, warn the player that the results may not be what they're expecting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
As a DM how have you dealt with players that want to constantly cast a cantrip.
the example I have.
Dm: as you open the stuck door the cobwebs that help hold the door in place break revealing a room filled with interlaced cobwebs so dense you can’t see the other side of the room.
-player: I cast fire bolt to burn the webs. I keep doing this to clear the room of webs. I will cast until there is no more webs I can see.
I let them do it? I wouldn't promise that setting things on fire will be free from consequences, but it's certainly an ability the character has.
Yeah, this seems like a fairly simple solution... the room catches on fire, maybe something of value gets destroyed in the process or the area ahead gets so engulfed in flame that it's not safe to traverse. Maybe the fire draws unwanted attention. The best way to curb this kind of attitude is just to remind your players that D&D is more complicated than videogames... in a videogame, a room full of cobwebs can easily be burned, because videogames have simple rules... if the room is designed to burst into flames, then it won't. But D&D has more complex rules, and things can change based on the DM's thoughts and decisions.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
How long would that take? Do monsters move around in the dungeon, or even patrol it? Would a monster investigate a repeated burst of light/sound coming from the next room or down the hall? Is the rest of the party keeping watch for that?
If the above are true, your characters might find themselves vulnerable to random encounters! I wouldn't necessarily do a random encounter every time they stop to do something like this-- that's maybe a little too 'hand of the dm coming out of the sky to screw us over'-- but definitely something to consider if you feel they're abusing it.
Generally players should be motivated to keep moving in a dungeon crawl, otherwise they will spam cantrips, take short/long rests after every encounter, etc. However, dungeons aren't safe. Part of the challenge should be managing player resources like HP, spell slots, ammunition, class abilities, and balancing them against encounters with monsters, traps, and puzzles. That isn't to say that players should be penalized for resting, they should just not feel safe enough to just camp out in the middle of the Sunken Temple for like 6 hours without scouting the area for enemies or finding a defensible position. If your players aren't thinking that way, they'll likely learn to, once you set that expectation with them either by throwing a few random encounters their way based on the choices they made, or just by saying "hey guys, just want to reiterate that this is not a safe place to be, and one of the challenges of this adventure is navigating that. Just letting you know."
I hope that they can breath smoke.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
this, i'd start forcing them to deal with the fact that they're catching everything on fire...you burn the place down around their ears a couple times, they'll likely figure out to stop doing it. If not, let them die. They're doing it because there's no consequence.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
Cantrips are designed to be used without limits. There is no reason to keep a player from doing so, but that said, there's no reason doing so won't have consequences. Taking ten minutes to spam the same spell a hundred times or casting a spell on the same thing over and over might have consequences- too much fire as listed above is a good example.
The cantrip is basically the same to a fighter saying they cut through it with their sword. The only differences should be coming from the mechanics of the spell for example if it has a verbal components people can hear it cast so its noisy, if it sets things on fire it might start a fire (though I wouldn't make a player hit something they wouldn't have otherwise without asking) and if it takes an action a cast they aren't going to be using it very quickly which will slow down their movement pace.
Yeah, I was about to say the same exact thing. If it really bothers you, maybe take that they are able to do this into account when creating encounters? I tend to look over my players skills before making a dungeon, encounter or a situation in which I really want them to use their brains to figure out how to get out of it? So, if you know one of your players can cast Fire bolt as a cantrip, maybe see about creating a situation in which that wouldn't work, or have more dire consequences? That said, it is a skill they can use as annoying as it is, haha.
Sounds like a plan. Personally, Ireally don't like spiders, so the idea of blasting every single cobweb to fire sort-of appeals to me. :-)
Like any plan, it has its consequences. In this case, noise and time.
The PCs are not going to be able to sneak up on anyone, since they are making all that noise casting spells.
The PCs are going slowly through the dungeon, which means more random encouter rolls and more time for the foes to plan and act.
What's the difference between doing this and using a torch to burn them away? The range?
Something you have to learn as a DM is that you can't ever predict how the players will try to solve problems. Whatever your intention, the players will use spells, abilities and cantrips to thwart whatever you have planned... but that's exactly what they should be doing! Don't try to hamper them or cut down what they can do. Let them use their abilities. I get the impression this cantrip casting bothers you because it's upsetting your planned encounters, or trivialising challenges.
Provide challenges; don't plan solutions. Example: my PCs used a Teleportation Circle (cast by an NPC) to enter an old tomb, not knowing what they'd fine. They appeared in a lightless room, with a huge stone door that required a DC25 Strength check to open. Only the barbarian could make it, and he failed. There was no other way out of the room, and they couldn't teleport out. So they had to come up with creative stuff; the dwarf used mason's tools to make handholds in the door (it had to be lifted up). The sorcerer used Mold Earth to deepen the grooves. There was also a plan to set a barrel of gunpowder, then hide inside a cube of force. Eventually, they managed to lift the door without blowing it by fashioning a lever from something in their Bag of Holding.
The point is, I didn't plan how they'd get out. So if they cast a dozen cantrips, that's fine! Nothing is spoiled.
At higher level, it won't be cantrips causing you to pull your hair out. Regularly, one higher level spell will ruin all your plans. The PCs may even declare that they teleport to the other side of the world.
Create the challenges and the world, and then just be happy when the PCs burn all your spiderwebs away.
And here I thought this thread would be about shillelagh. I have had players that want to keep that spell up at all times when going through a dungeon or something. I'm more or less okay with it, but it means they're constantly making noise. If that's not enough, you could have them roll 1d10 at initiative to see how many rounds they have left on the current cast.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Just narrate: "as you cast your firebolt to burn the webs, you hear a scream as you strike a young girl in the face, horribly scarring her. She's the lords daughter you were hired to rescue, he will not be happy. Perhaps you should get a will or reroll?". Just set up a scenario where you know the players behavior, and this time have it backfire. Whether you want it to be comical, cruel or deadly. You could also put in a barrel of highly combustible goblin juice and go "oh, oh no, your firebolt explodes the kegs, the kegs of goblin draught, its 150 proof. A massive fireball forms, roll Dexterity saving throw please".
Why are you trying to stop players using their abilities to solve problems?
This is the opposite of what a DM should do, unless they have already given the players clues (foreshadowing) to show that this might happen. Why would you punish the players for using their abilities?
There's often a knee jerk reaction in threads like this one, to say "Throw something unexpected at them to stop them doing it." This is practically the worst thing a DM can do to their players. It tells them that if they try to solve problems using their abilities, random, awful and inexplicable things can happen. The world loses consistency.
It's one thing to "know player behaviour" and set up something that requires them to do something differently, but it needs to be reasonable for the PCs to expect it. A random child hidden in the webs? The players aren't really responsible for that. What was the child doing in a dense spiderweb patch and why hadn't they broken the webs? If the DM instead states "There's a broken trail through the centre of the webs," then you could allow a Survival check to identify that they've been recently broken by a creature passing through.
I'm in the "Don't change anything" camp. The consequences of spending a full minute shouting "FIREBOLT!", each accompanied by a whoosh of flame, are fairly self explanatory without adding "and you set things on fire" to the mix.
However, feel free to include later encounters - with foreshadowing - that penalise usign the same approach every time. For example, if they find a place which smells of sulfur, has sooty marks on the walls, and no torches in the corridor (or specifically hooded lanterns), then say "there is a room full of cobwebs and small barrels" then castign Fireball may cause the black powder to ignite, causing a "run like hell" approach!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
But it's a bonus action spell, so now too disruptive to recast mid-fight.
You're going to have to provide more examples than just that because fire bolt seems like a fine solution. But what are the consequences of doing this?
Don't be spiteful because they're using their toolkit to solve a problem by having them fail a quest because they were too clever. Find means to challenge them in different ways. My immediate solution to this would've been to borrow from Brutal Legend where the spiders' steel silk is used to make bass guitar strings. Casting fire bolt only makes the metal 'webs' very hot, but they could easily be bent or pushed out of the way, whilst producing a throbbing hum throughout the halls. Perhaps the party will come across the creatures which made these webs, or perhaps they went the way of Black Sabbath.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
Did you miss this part, doing this on opening the door always:
>As a DM how have you dealt with players that want to constantly cast a cantrip.
I want you to think about that, what would happen if every time a soldier was clearing a room he opened fire as soon as he opened the door? He just opened the door and randomly fired without checking for who is in the room? Oh wait, he'd kill innocent people. The character is doing the exact same thing, he's shooting blindly to take advantage game mechanics and not treating the world as real. Situations like that, is that over time he's going to screw up and hit someone. What you advocate for is the exact opposite of what a DM should do. You are advocating for making the world all about the player with no consequences of their action. You can coddle your players all you want, but lack of verisimilitude and player coddling leads to short campaign.
That wasn't what was being discussed in the original question though. The player was reacting to a particular issue (spider webs everywhere) by trying to remove them with firebolt, and the DM had some unclear issue with that.
There's no guarantee that firebolt will be an effective way of clearing spider webs, but there's also no guarantee that it won't be. The DM should decide based on whatever seems like reasonable results for using fire, and if your idea is very different from what the player seems to expect but is something the character might reasonably know, warn the player that the results may not be what they're expecting.