Happy holidays! I am developing a damaging cantrip for a sorcerer NPC in a campaign I run and would appreciate others' thoughts on the relative balance of the two designs below. This is a character who derives his sorcerous power from the Silver Flame (Eberron mythos). The spell is supposed to be a radiant-based competitor to Fire Bolt and Toll the Dead.
The first design is a basic damaging cantrip that does extra damage to enemies of the Silver Flame. To provide some flavor for everyday use, I added a dazzle effect on hit, which I think would be pretty minor in terms of impact. The second design derives from another person's idea for a scaling damage cantrip. While I think this would be fairly balanced with Toll the Dead, a sorcerer could get to max damage in fewer than 3 rounds, and I worry this might overshadow Fire Bolt as a primary nuke.
Any thoughts or suggestions for changes (based on balance or thematic relevance) would be welcomed.
Silverlight
Level: Cantrip Casting time: 1 Action Range: 60 feet Components: V, S Duration: Instantaneous You point at one creature you can see within range, and a silver beam of light is launched toward the target. Make a ranged spell attack against the creature. On a hit, the beam explodes in a flash of light, and the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. If the target is a fiend, undead, or lycanthrope it instead takes 1d12 radiant damage. A sighted target hit by this spell is dazzled and suffers a -1 penalty on attack rolls and sight-based Perception checks until the end of your next turn.
The spell’s damage increases by one die when you reach 5th level (2d8 or 2d12), 11th level (3d8 or 3d12), and 17th level (4d8 or 4d12).
Cleansing Flame
Level: Cantrip Casting time: 1 Action Range: 60 feet Components: V, S Duration: Instantaneous You launch a ray of silver fire toward one creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On an initial hit, the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. The intensity of the flames increases with succeeding attacks made on the same target. If the target is hit a second time during the encounter it instead takes 1d10 radiant damage, and any subsequent hits to the target deal 1d12 radiant damage.
The spell’s damage increases by one die when you reach 5th level (2d8, 2d10, or 2d12), 11th level (3d8, 3d10, or 3d12), and 17th level (4d8, 4d10, or 4d12).
Silverlight would be more balanced if it was a save instead of an attack roll. Especially if it was a CON save effect, which a lot of enemies are good at. For the most part, I think that cantrips that impose conditions are save-based, and ones with just straight damage more likely to be attack rolls.
Cleansing Flame looks good, but instead of "a second time during the encounter", I would reword that to "on the following round". And I would just jump from 1d8 to 1d12 for that second round, and every subsequent round. Good focus fire dps for 2+ rounds, but you shouldn't be rewarded for tagging and cycling around throughout the whole battlefield, especially because that's more complicated to track.
I think Cleansing Flame has the potential to be cantrip balanced, but right now looks more like a lvl. 1 spell. I think to back it down to a cantrip that does what you’re proposing mechanically (which I like, by the way) the target should get a dex save to put out the flame. If they fail, and you use your action to repeat the Cleansing Flame on your next turn, the flames synergize and do 2d6 on a hit. If you use your action for anything else on your next turn, the flames die out on their own at the end of the your turn.
I like 2d6 better than 1d12 for this use. If you’re devoting your action for two rounds to this endeavor, you shouldn’t have to tolerate a 1 for the second round damage. I'd normally say 2d8 would be out of bounds for a lowest level cantrip, but I could be convinced that because you need to spend two consecutive turns to make it happen, even that would be fair. But certainly at least 2d6.
Anyway, the target should be able to save again with each hit, or be opened up to (again) taking the hightened damage dice on a hit if the caster uses the same action on the next round.
It would scale to 2d8 and 4d6, etc
My hangup with Silverlight is -1 penalties and “dazzled” feel more Pathfinder than D&D. Maybe to bring it back on brand with 5e, if the target is fiend, undead, or lycanthrope, the target must make a CON save or be blinded for one round. Sad thing is no one’s rolling a d12 this way, but it does give an incentive to aim it at those types of creatures. And it feels more on level with other cantrips.
A level 1 spell that only got good when cast two or more rounds in a row would not be a useable spell. A cantrip that gets better the more rounds you use it is a cool quirk, and is balanced by a couple of things: first, if he were to accept my suggestion, than missing an attack would reset the damage back down to d8. Second, casters usually don't want to be casting cantrips every round (unless they're a warlock), so any cantrip that requires dedicating successive rounds to it to do full damage is balanced by the opportunity cost incurred by doing so. A d12 Cleansing Flame is no better than Toll the Dead would be against that same target; with my suggestion it would actually be worse, since Toll the Dead stays powered up as long as they're damaged, while Cleansing Flame would stand a real risk of resetting. Allowing the target to negate that effect with a save could be a good alternative to my recommendation, but I certainly wouldn't pile them both on, that would really kill the spell.
I do agree with kcb that the dazzled effect doesn't feel very 5e. Static +1/-1's are pretty rare in 5e, and handing out advantage/disadvantage is normally preferred. Blinded is too strong for a cantrip I feel, since it entirely prevents several attacks and abilities that require "a target you can see", gives everyone advantage against that target, gives that target disadvantage when attacking everyone else, and prevents them from making opportunity attacks. Too much. "A target that fails its save takes 1d8 radiant damage, or 1d12 if fiend/lycanthrope/undead, and suffers disadvantage on attacks and perception checks until the start of your next round if it relies on vision to see." Actually, swap out "lycanthrope" for "shapechanger", that's the actual tag used in the 5e manual to pick out werecreatures.
Silverlight is awkward. Making it a save against having disadvantage on next attack is still strictly better than frostbite even if you lowered the damage to d6 and made creatures immune to blinded auto save. It is also pretty close to being a strictly better Chill touch. I can't think of a balance fix for the attack penalty except to drop or change it completely. For the creatures that take extra damage, you can swap lycanthropes for shapeshifters (which includes lycanthropes). You could maybe make the second effect be to dispel illusions on the target and/or reveal their true form if transformed, but might be too much for a cantrip.
Cleansing flame is just a worse toll the dead that uses attack roll instead of WIS save. But I have a cool solution to this. Instead of increasing the number of dice, increase the number of attacks (like eldritch blast) and have it do d12 damage if the target has taken damage from this spell since the begining of your last turn.
That idea for Cleansing Flame is actually pretty good... a cantrip that levels up to be a multi-target cantrip, which does increased damage against anyone its already tagged at least once? Does slightly less than an un-enhanced Eldritch Blast against untagged targets, slightly more against tagged targets, and has the potential to benefit from features like a Radiant Warlock 6's Radiant Soul (and thus actually give them a potential justification for not using Eldritch Blast?). I like. it.
My thoughts on silverlight... Many friends and undead are already weak against radiant damage, so having a radiant damage spell that also gets more powerful against them is often unnecessary.
Although it's kind of a moot point because I think cleansing flame is overall a better, more interesting spell.
Silverlight would be more balanced if it was a save instead of an attack roll. Especially if it was a CON save effect, which a lot of enemies are good at. For the most part, I think that cantrips that impose conditions are save-based, and ones with just straight damage more likely to be attack rolls.
Cleansing Flame looks good, but instead of "a second time during the encounter", I would reword that to "on the following round". And I would just jump from 1d8 to 1d12 for that second round, and every subsequent round. Good focus fire dps for 2+ rounds, but you shouldn't be rewarded for tagging and cycling around throughout the whole battlefield, especially because that's more complicated to track.
That said, this belongs in Homebrew.
The intended role for Cleansing Flame is use against targets resistant to fire damage or in longer fights (i.e., targets with more HP). If the spell jumps from d8 to d12 by round 2, then this will affect its relative balance vs. Fire Bolt. Assuming an "average" fight is 3 rounds, Cleansing Flame with this scaling would roughly equal the damage output of Fire Bolt over 3 rounds (math below). Thus, the only differentiators would be damage type and range. Overall, this would devalue Fire Bolt as a primary nuke.
@kcbcollier, ChickenChamp (other comments), DxJxC : As written, Cleansing Flame's damage scales on successive hits during the encounter (combat) and resets only once the combat has ended. I considered the possibility of a "branding" mechanic that would start with d8 and scale to d12 if the same target is hit on the next turn. However, it would be difficult to maintain this buff to make damage competitive with other options. Below, I link results from some calculations of expected damage values for Fire Bolt, Toll the Dead, and various Cleansing Flame designs.
Comparators: FB, Fire Bolt; TtD, Toll the Dead; CF, Cleansing Flame as written; CF2, Cleansing Flame using ChickenChamp's initial suggestion (ramp from d8 to d12 on second and subsequent hits); CF3, Cleansing Flame with branding mechanic (d8 base damage ramping to d12 only on a consecutive hit).
Scenarios: Combat over 3, 4, and 5 rounds (including CF3 only in 3-round scenario)
Assumptions: One attack per round (no Quicken Spell), Toll the Dead always hits damaged target, no resistances
(2) Cleansing Flame as written is inferior to Fire Bolt in rounds 3 and 4 and is only slightly better in round 5.
(3) CF2 is roughly equal to Fire Bolt in 3 rounds, slightly better in 4 rounds, and begins to pull away in 5 rounds.
(4) CF3 is inferior to Fire Bolt and CF2 in 3 rounds.
Based on the above, I think a branding mechanic would be overly complicated and produce a generally inferior spell. Among the Cleansing Flame designs discussed thus far, CF2 is the most realistic candidate, and as noted above, it is still generally better than Fire Bolt for general use.
My thoughts on silverlight... Many friends and undead are already weak against radiant damage, so having a radiant damage spell that also gets more powerful against them is often unnecessary.
Although it's kind of a moot point because I think cleansing flame is overall a better, more interesting spell.
I believe there are only 2 undead that are vulnerable to radiant damage, including the shadow and one other.
A level 1 spell that only got good when cast two or more rounds in a row would not be a useable spell. A cantrip that gets better the more rounds you use it is a cool quirk, and is balanced by a couple of things: first, if he were to accept my suggestion, than missing an attack would reset the damage back down to d8. Second, casters usually don't want to be casting cantrips every round (unless they're a warlock), so any cantrip that requires dedicating successive rounds to it to do full damage is balanced by the opportunity cost incurred by doing so. A d12 Cleansing Flame is no better than Toll the Dead would be against that same target; with my suggestion it would actually be worse, since Toll the Dead stays powered up as long as they're damaged, while Cleansing Flame would stand a real risk of resetting. Allowing the target to negate that effect with a save could be a good alternative to my recommendation, but I certainly wouldn't pile them both on, that would really kill the spell.
I do agree with kcb that the dazzled effect doesn't feel very 5e. Static +1/-1's are pretty rare in 5e, and handing out advantage/disadvantage is normally preferred. Blinded is too strong for a cantrip I feel, since it entirely prevents several attacks and abilities that require "a target you can see", gives everyone advantage against that target, gives that target disadvantage when attacking everyone else, and prevents them from making opportunity attacks. Too much. "A target that fails its save takes 1d8 radiant damage, or 1d12 if fiend/lycanthrope/undead, and suffers disadvantage on attacks and perception checks until the start of your next round if it relies on vision to see." Actually, swap out "lycanthrope" for "shapechanger", that's the actual tag used in the 5e manual to pick out werecreatures.
Appreciate your pointing out the "shapechanger" classification in 5e. Also, I recognize that dazzle is not a conventional 5e condition, but as someone noted earlier, blinded is too powerful a condition for a cantrip.
Based on the assessments I've made this morning, I am not convinced I can carve out a defined role for Cleansing Flame. Toll the Dead will always dominate it in terms of damage, and the separation between Cleansing Flame and Fire Bolt is so fine as to call into question general applications of the latter. Again, the whole purpose of this exercise is to develop a secondary nuke with Fire Bolt serving as the primary damage cantrip.
While the mechanics of Silverlight may not be as interesting as those of Cleansing Flame, the role of the spell is clearer to me: use against foes of the Silver Flame or radiant resistant targets. The only sticking point is coming up with some flavor utility for targets who are not fiends, undead, or shapechangers. If dazzle is deemed a poor fit, then an alternate solution might be to combine a spell attack roll with a saving throw for the condition on hit. For instance: "On a hit, the beam explodes in a flash of light, and the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. If the target is a fiend, undead, or shapechanger it instead takes 1d12 radiant damage. A sighted target hit by this spell that fails a Constitution saving throw suffers disadvantage on attacks and perception checks until the start of your next turn."
I think this might be too powerful as disadvantage would likely occur on 1/3 to 2/3 of hits. By comparison, Frostbite does 1d6 imposing disadvantage on weapon attacks only (based on a single CON save), and Chill Touch does 1d8 with disadvantage imposed on undead only (with a single spell attack).
That idea for Cleansing Flame is actually pretty good... a cantrip that levels up to be a multi-target cantrip, which does increased damage against anyone its already tagged at least once? Does slightly less than an un-enhanced Eldritch Blast against untagged targets, slightly more against tagged targets, and has the potential to benefit from features like a Radiant Warlock 6's Radiant Soul (and thus actually give them a potential justification for not using Eldritch Blast?). I like. it.
In going back through comments, I believe others were aligning on something akin to the following for Cleansing Flame:
You launch a ray of silver fire toward one creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On an initial hit, the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. The intensity of the flames increases with succeeding attacks made on the same target. If the target is hit again during the same encounter it instead takes 1d12 radiant damage.
The spell creates more than one ray when you reach higher levels: two at 5th level, three at 11th level, and four at 17th level. You can direct the rays at the same target or at different ones. A separate attack is made for each ray.
A problem with this design is that it would render Fire Bolt of questionable use by level 11 and definitively by level 17. The expected damage values I provided for Fire Bolt and CF2 over 4 rounds, assuming one attack per round, apply equally to scenarios in which a single attack with multiple dice (Fire Bolt) or multiple attacks (Cleansing Flame) would be made in round 1. A multi-attack version of Cleansing Flame would benefit disproportionately from advantage (much like Eldritch Blast) and would synergize well with Bestow Curse or Hex. However, I believe the Draconic Sorcerer's elemental affinity and Celestial Warlock's radiant soul abilities would still apply to one damage roll of the spell (unlike Eldritch Blast). Moreover, because the spell could affect multiple targets, it could not be duplicated using Twin Spell, which would normally allow the elemental affinity and radiant soul abilities to be applied to multiple targets.
You launch a ray of silver fire toward one creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On an initial hit, the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. The intensity of the flames increases with succeeding attacks made on the same target. If the target is hit again during the same encounter it instead takes 1d12 radiant damage.
The spell creates more than one ray when you reach higher levels: two at 5th level, three at 11th level, and four at 17th level. You can direct the rays at the same target or at different ones. A separate attack is made for each ray.
A problem with this design is that it would render Fire Bolt of questionable use by level 11 and definitively by level 17. The expected damage values I provided for Fire Bolt and CF2 over 4 rounds, assuming one attack per round, apply equally to scenarios in which a single attack with multiple dice (Fire Bolt) or multiple attacks (Cleansing Flame) would be made in round 1. A multi-attack version of Cleansing Flame would benefit disproportionately from advantage (much like Eldritch Blast) and would synergize well with Bestow Curse or Hex. However, I believe the Draconic Sorcerer's elemental affinity and Celestial Warlock's radiant soul abilities would still apply to one damage roll of the spell (unlike Eldritch Blast). Moreover, because the spell could affect multiple targets, it could not be duplicated using Twin Spell, which would normally allow the elemental affinity and radiant soul abilities to be applied to multiple targets.
I can understand how this could ramp up damage too quickly compared to firebolt. How about if the d12 damage specifically required the enemy to have been hit with this spell last turn. That way it can do d8+3d12 damage on the first turn. That would make it average with firebolt over 2 turns and beat it on turn 3. Or even if you stick with your original damage scaling, the multiple beams option at least makes it easier to read and more interesting than "worse firebolt."
What spell list are you developing this for? Based on the radiant damage and evil things hatred I assumed cleric, but they don't get firebolt. Sorcerers don't need stronger cantrips, they are set. Wizards dont either, but are less broken. Warlock, druid, bard, or artificer would be ok.
You mentioned not being able to twin it if it has beams, but you can still quicken it.
You launch a ray of silver fire toward one creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On an initial hit, the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. The intensity of the flames increases with succeeding attacks made on the same target. If the target is hit again during the same encounter it instead takes 1d12 radiant damage.
The spell creates more than one ray when you reach higher levels: two at 5th level, three at 11th level, and four at 17th level. You can direct the rays at the same target or at different ones. A separate attack is made for each ray.
A problem with this design is that it would render Fire Bolt of questionable use by level 11 and definitively by level 17. The expected damage values I provided for Fire Bolt and CF2 over 4 rounds, assuming one attack per round, apply equally to scenarios in which a single attack with multiple dice (Fire Bolt) or multiple attacks (Cleansing Flame) would be made in round 1. A multi-attack version of Cleansing Flame would benefit disproportionately from advantage (much like Eldritch Blast) and would synergize well with Bestow Curse or Hex. However, I believe the Draconic Sorcerer's elemental affinity and Celestial Warlock's radiant soul abilities would still apply to one damage roll of the spell (unlike Eldritch Blast). Moreover, because the spell could affect multiple targets, it could not be duplicated using Twin Spell, which would normally allow the elemental affinity and radiant soul abilities to be applied to multiple targets.
I can understand how this could ramp up damage too quickly compared to firebolt. How about if the d12 damage specifically required the enemy to have been hit with this spell last turn. That way it can do d8+3d12 damage on the first turn. That would make it average with firebolt over 2 turns and beat it on turn 3. Or even if you stick with your original damage scaling, the multiple beams option at least makes it easier to read and more interesting than "worse firebolt."
What spell list are you developing this for? Based on the radiant damage and evil things hatred I assumed cleric, but they don't get firebolt. Sorcerers don't need stronger cantrips, they are set. Wizards dont either, but are less broken. Warlock, druid, bard, or artificer would be ok.
You mentioned not being able to twin it if it has beams, but you can still quicken it.
This is being developed for a DS sorcerer. Life would be so much simpler if I just stayed with the dominant choice (Toll the Dead) or thematically appropriate choice (Sacred Flame)...
I had linked expected values for CF with branding mechanic assuming one attack per round over 3 rounds. The results would also apply to comparisons over 1 round at level 11 (i.e., 3 dice for FB or TtD or 3 rays for CF). With 4 rays and multiple rounds of attacks, the math gets more involved.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Happy holidays! I am developing a damaging cantrip for a sorcerer NPC in a campaign I run and would appreciate others' thoughts on the relative balance of the two designs below. This is a character who derives his sorcerous power from the Silver Flame (Eberron mythos). The spell is supposed to be a radiant-based competitor to Fire Bolt and Toll the Dead.
The first design is a basic damaging cantrip that does extra damage to enemies of the Silver Flame. To provide some flavor for everyday use, I added a dazzle effect on hit, which I think would be pretty minor in terms of impact. The second design derives from another person's idea for a scaling damage cantrip. While I think this would be fairly balanced with Toll the Dead, a sorcerer could get to max damage in fewer than 3 rounds, and I worry this might overshadow Fire Bolt as a primary nuke.
Any thoughts or suggestions for changes (based on balance or thematic relevance) would be welcomed.
Silverlight
Level: Cantrip
Casting time: 1 Action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You point at one creature you can see within range, and a silver beam of light is launched toward the target. Make a ranged spell attack against the creature. On a hit, the beam explodes in a flash of light, and the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. If the target is a fiend, undead, or lycanthrope it instead takes 1d12 radiant damage. A sighted target hit by this spell is dazzled and suffers a -1 penalty on attack rolls and sight-based Perception checks until the end of your next turn.
The spell’s damage increases by one die when you reach 5th level (2d8 or 2d12), 11th level (3d8 or 3d12), and 17th level (4d8 or 4d12).
Cleansing Flame
Level: Cantrip
Casting time: 1 Action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You launch a ray of silver fire toward one creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On an initial hit, the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. The intensity of the flames increases with succeeding attacks made on the same target. If the target is hit a second time during the encounter it instead takes 1d10 radiant damage, and any subsequent hits to the target deal 1d12 radiant damage.
The spell’s damage increases by one die when you reach 5th level (2d8, 2d10, or 2d12), 11th level (3d8, 3d10, or 3d12), and 17th level (4d8, 4d10, or 4d12).
Silverlight would be more balanced if it was a save instead of an attack roll. Especially if it was a CON save effect, which a lot of enemies are good at. For the most part, I think that cantrips that impose conditions are save-based, and ones with just straight damage more likely to be attack rolls.
Cleansing Flame looks good, but instead of "a second time during the encounter", I would reword that to "on the following round". And I would just jump from 1d8 to 1d12 for that second round, and every subsequent round. Good focus fire dps for 2+ rounds, but you shouldn't be rewarded for tagging and cycling around throughout the whole battlefield, especially because that's more complicated to track.
That said, this belongs in Homebrew.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Thanks for the feedback. Was not aware there’s a forum dedicated to homebrew material and will see if I can move my post there.
I think Cleansing Flame has the potential to be cantrip balanced, but right now looks more like a lvl. 1 spell. I think to back it down to a cantrip that does what you’re proposing mechanically (which I like, by the way) the target should get a dex save to put out the flame. If they fail, and you use your action to repeat the Cleansing Flame on your next turn, the flames synergize and do 2d6 on a hit. If you use your action for anything else on your next turn, the flames die out on their own at the end of the your turn.
I like 2d6 better than 1d12 for this use. If you’re devoting your action for two rounds to this endeavor, you shouldn’t have to tolerate a 1 for the second round damage. I'd normally say 2d8 would be out of bounds for a lowest level cantrip, but I could be convinced that because you need to spend two consecutive turns to make it happen, even that would be fair. But certainly at least 2d6.
Anyway, the target should be able to save again with each hit, or be opened up to (again) taking the hightened damage dice on a hit if the caster uses the same action on the next round.
It would scale to 2d8 and 4d6, etc
My hangup with Silverlight is -1 penalties and “dazzled” feel more Pathfinder than D&D. Maybe to bring it back on brand with 5e, if the target is fiend, undead, or lycanthrope, the target must make a CON save or be blinded for one round. Sad thing is no one’s rolling a d12 this way, but it does give an incentive to aim it at those types of creatures. And it feels more on level with other cantrips.
A level 1 spell that only got good when cast two or more rounds in a row would not be a useable spell. A cantrip that gets better the more rounds you use it is a cool quirk, and is balanced by a couple of things: first, if he were to accept my suggestion, than missing an attack would reset the damage back down to d8. Second, casters usually don't want to be casting cantrips every round (unless they're a warlock), so any cantrip that requires dedicating successive rounds to it to do full damage is balanced by the opportunity cost incurred by doing so. A d12 Cleansing Flame is no better than Toll the Dead would be against that same target; with my suggestion it would actually be worse, since Toll the Dead stays powered up as long as they're damaged, while Cleansing Flame would stand a real risk of resetting. Allowing the target to negate that effect with a save could be a good alternative to my recommendation, but I certainly wouldn't pile them both on, that would really kill the spell.
I do agree with kcb that the dazzled effect doesn't feel very 5e. Static +1/-1's are pretty rare in 5e, and handing out advantage/disadvantage is normally preferred. Blinded is too strong for a cantrip I feel, since it entirely prevents several attacks and abilities that require "a target you can see", gives everyone advantage against that target, gives that target disadvantage when attacking everyone else, and prevents them from making opportunity attacks. Too much. "A target that fails its save takes 1d8 radiant damage, or 1d12 if fiend/lycanthrope/undead, and suffers disadvantage on attacks and perception checks until the start of your next round if it relies on vision to see." Actually, swap out "lycanthrope" for "shapechanger", that's the actual tag used in the 5e manual to pick out werecreatures.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Silverlight is awkward. Making it a save against having disadvantage on next attack is still strictly better than frostbite even if you lowered the damage to d6 and made creatures immune to blinded auto save. It is also pretty close to being a strictly better Chill touch. I can't think of a balance fix for the attack penalty except to drop or change it completely. For the creatures that take extra damage, you can swap lycanthropes for shapeshifters (which includes lycanthropes). You could maybe make the second effect be to dispel illusions on the target and/or reveal their true form if transformed, but might be too much for a cantrip.
Cleansing flame is just a worse toll the dead that uses attack roll instead of WIS save. But I have a cool solution to this. Instead of increasing the number of dice, increase the number of attacks (like eldritch blast) and have it do d12 damage if the target has taken damage from this spell since the begining of your last turn.
That idea for Cleansing Flame is actually pretty good... a cantrip that levels up to be a multi-target cantrip, which does increased damage against anyone its already tagged at least once? Does slightly less than an un-enhanced Eldritch Blast against untagged targets, slightly more against tagged targets, and has the potential to benefit from features like a Radiant Warlock 6's Radiant Soul (and thus actually give them a potential justification for not using Eldritch Blast?). I like. it.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
My thoughts on silverlight... Many friends and undead are already weak against radiant damage, so having a radiant damage spell that also gets more powerful against them is often unnecessary.
Although it's kind of a moot point because I think cleansing flame is overall a better, more interesting spell.
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
The intended role for Cleansing Flame is use against targets resistant to fire damage or in longer fights (i.e., targets with more HP). If the spell jumps from d8 to d12 by round 2, then this will affect its relative balance vs. Fire Bolt. Assuming an "average" fight is 3 rounds, Cleansing Flame with this scaling would roughly equal the damage output of Fire Bolt over 3 rounds (math below). Thus, the only differentiators would be damage type and range. Overall, this would devalue Fire Bolt as a primary nuke.
@kcbcollier, ChickenChamp (other comments), DxJxC : As written, Cleansing Flame's damage scales on successive hits during the encounter (combat) and resets only once the combat has ended. I considered the possibility of a "branding" mechanic that would start with d8 and scale to d12 if the same target is hit on the next turn. However, it would be difficult to maintain this buff to make damage competitive with other options. Below, I link results from some calculations of expected damage values for Fire Bolt, Toll the Dead, and various Cleansing Flame designs.
Comparators: FB, Fire Bolt; TtD, Toll the Dead; CF, Cleansing Flame as written; CF2, Cleansing Flame using ChickenChamp's initial suggestion (ramp from d8 to d12 on second and subsequent hits); CF3, Cleansing Flame with branding mechanic (d8 base damage ramping to d12 only on a consecutive hit).
Scenarios: Combat over 3, 4, and 5 rounds (including CF3 only in 3-round scenario)
Assumptions: One attack per round (no Quicken Spell), Toll the Dead always hits damaged target, no resistances
Results: https://photos.google.com/search/_tra_/photo/AF1QipOqKjEoNxmbdDsvyL_83OyF2ZAnrVzGXUbbhnAP
Conclusions:
(1) Toll the Dead exceeds all comparators.
(2) Cleansing Flame as written is inferior to Fire Bolt in rounds 3 and 4 and is only slightly better in round 5.
(3) CF2 is roughly equal to Fire Bolt in 3 rounds, slightly better in 4 rounds, and begins to pull away in 5 rounds.
(4) CF3 is inferior to Fire Bolt and CF2 in 3 rounds.
Based on the above, I think a branding mechanic would be overly complicated and produce a generally inferior spell. Among the Cleansing Flame designs discussed thus far, CF2 is the most realistic candidate, and as noted above, it is still generally better than Fire Bolt for general use.
I believe there are only 2 undead that are vulnerable to radiant damage, including the shadow and one other.
Appreciate your pointing out the "shapechanger" classification in 5e. Also, I recognize that dazzle is not a conventional 5e condition, but as someone noted earlier, blinded is too powerful a condition for a cantrip.
Based on the assessments I've made this morning, I am not convinced I can carve out a defined role for Cleansing Flame. Toll the Dead will always dominate it in terms of damage, and the separation between Cleansing Flame and Fire Bolt is so fine as to call into question general applications of the latter. Again, the whole purpose of this exercise is to develop a secondary nuke with Fire Bolt serving as the primary damage cantrip.
While the mechanics of Silverlight may not be as interesting as those of Cleansing Flame, the role of the spell is clearer to me: use against foes of the Silver Flame or radiant resistant targets. The only sticking point is coming up with some flavor utility for targets who are not fiends, undead, or shapechangers. If dazzle is deemed a poor fit, then an alternate solution might be to combine a spell attack roll with a saving throw for the condition on hit. For instance: "On a hit, the beam explodes in a flash of light, and the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. If the target is a fiend, undead, or shapechanger it instead takes 1d12 radiant damage. A sighted target hit by this spell that fails a Constitution saving throw suffers disadvantage on attacks and perception checks until the start of your next turn."
I think this might be too powerful as disadvantage would likely occur on 1/3 to 2/3 of hits. By comparison, Frostbite does 1d6 imposing disadvantage on weapon attacks only (based on a single CON save), and Chill Touch does 1d8 with disadvantage imposed on undead only (with a single spell attack).
In going back through comments, I believe others were aligning on something akin to the following for Cleansing Flame:
Cleansing Flame
Level: Cantrip
Casting time: 1 Action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You launch a ray of silver fire toward one creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On an initial hit, the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. The intensity of the flames increases with succeeding attacks made on the same target. If the target is hit again during the same encounter it instead takes 1d12 radiant damage.
The spell creates more than one ray when you reach higher levels: two at 5th level, three at 11th level, and four at 17th level. You can direct the rays at the same target or at different ones. A separate attack is made for each ray.
A problem with this design is that it would render Fire Bolt of questionable use by level 11 and definitively by level 17. The expected damage values I provided for Fire Bolt and CF2 over 4 rounds, assuming one attack per round, apply equally to scenarios in which a single attack with multiple dice (Fire Bolt) or multiple attacks (Cleansing Flame) would be made in round 1. A multi-attack version of Cleansing Flame would benefit disproportionately from advantage (much like Eldritch Blast) and would synergize well with Bestow Curse or Hex. However, I believe the Draconic Sorcerer's elemental affinity and Celestial Warlock's radiant soul abilities would still apply to one damage roll of the spell (unlike Eldritch Blast). Moreover, because the spell could affect multiple targets, it could not be duplicated using Twin Spell, which would normally allow the elemental affinity and radiant soul abilities to be applied to multiple targets.
I can understand how this could ramp up damage too quickly compared to firebolt. How about if the d12 damage specifically required the enemy to have been hit with this spell last turn. That way it can do d8+3d12 damage on the first turn. That would make it average with firebolt over 2 turns and beat it on turn 3. Or even if you stick with your original damage scaling, the multiple beams option at least makes it easier to read and more interesting than "worse firebolt."
What spell list are you developing this for? Based on the radiant damage and evil things hatred I assumed cleric, but they don't get firebolt. Sorcerers don't need stronger cantrips, they are set. Wizards dont either, but are less broken. Warlock, druid, bard, or artificer would be ok.
You mentioned not being able to twin it if it has beams, but you can still quicken it.
This is being developed for a DS sorcerer. Life would be so much simpler if I just stayed with the dominant choice (Toll the Dead) or thematically appropriate choice (Sacred Flame)...
I had linked expected values for CF with branding mechanic assuming one attack per round over 3 rounds. The results would also apply to comparisons over 1 round at level 11 (i.e., 3 dice for FB or TtD or 3 rays for CF). With 4 rays and multiple rounds of attacks, the math gets more involved.