i think it might be fine if they get rid of the once per day per player restriction, since it wouldnt be spammed, unless players are failing all the time (in which case they need it), which seems to be the primary complaint about its 5e incarnation. If DMs want to say using this in social situations will increase the DC, thats fine, its your table. Also, no more using it on initiative, although, not many were doing this and was easy to ban.
GUIDANCE
0-Level Divination Spell (Divine, Primal)
Casting Time: Reaction, which you take in response to you or an ally within 30 feet of you failing an Ability Check
Range: 30 feet
Component: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You channel magical insight to the creature who failed the Ability Check. That creature can roll a d4 and add the number rolled to the check, potentially turning it into a success.
So, your solution for what already was one of the best cantrips in the game is to essentially buff it from 5e: removing concentration, changing it from an action to a reaction, and giving it 30' of range instead of touch.
I feel like these are the potential solutions that make the most sense to me:
1. Make Guidance a Leveled Spell
Use the new version of Guidance where it's cast as a reaction, and instead of needing to track who has or hasn't had the spell cast on them, just make it a leveled spell. This also assumes that the die will be increased to at least a d6.
2. Guidance can be used freely until it succeeds
Again using the new version of Guidance as a Reaction, but a creature can benefit from Guidance many times until it results in a success, after which it becomes locked until the next Long Rest. Still additional bookkeeping, but it's possible to use it multiple times in a day to justify it being a cantrip.
3. Change the casting time to 1 minute
This time the idea is mostly to revert Guidance to its current form (requires concentration, can be used infinite times per day). However, the Casting time is changed from an action to a full minute, making it much harder to spam.
Personally, I'm in favor of option 3. I know it won't resolve the problem of it being overused at every table, but I think that does the most to make players less likely to constantly be casting Guidance over and over while still making it easy enough to use regularly to justify it being a cantrip. But I'm curious if anyone is passionate about a different fix that I didn't mention, or if there's a particular option in these three concepts that makes the most sense to everyone here.
Option 3 actually sounds really good. There is a precedent for a 1 minute cantrip with Mending. It prevents it from being used in combat. It stops people from asking to retroactively add it after someone rolled. It stops people from using it in awkward social situations.
I also like it thematically. You spend time praying for someone to succeed on an upcoming challenge. I could even see it having concentration and a duration of 10 minutes or more, so you could prepare it before someone goes to try the thing. Like a guardian angel watching over them. "Please guide my friend as he goes to speak with the lord of this realm." Or "I beseech thee to guide her hands as she attempts to disarm this trap to protect your servant."
Just have it get used the first time the target fails a test during the duration. Or on the first roll they make. I wouldn't even mind raising it to a d6 at that point.
I think option 3 would nerf Guidance into oblivion without actually resolving one of the major tension points with it as it currently stands. DMs get annoyed because players ask to use Guidance after the roll has already been called for, because it breaks the flow of the game by trying to rewind time. Players get annoyed because it's hard to anticipate when the DM will decide you're doing something that calls for a roll as opposed to something that will automatically succeed. Making Guidance a reaction fixed that problem, and it's why I think that's a good change. Increasing the casting time exacerbates the problem if anything, because it requires players to forecast even further ahead when the DM is going to ask for a roll, or else ask the DM to rewind time even further so they can use their cantrip.
I think option 3 would nerf Guidance into oblivion without actually resolving one of the major tension points with it as it currently stands. DMs get annoyed because players ask to use Guidance after the roll has already been called for, because it breaks the flow of the game by trying to rewind time. Players get annoyed because it's hard to anticipate when the DM will decide you're doing something that calls for a roll as opposed to something that will automatically succeed. Making Guidance a reaction fixed that problem, and it's why I think that's a good change. Increasing the casting time exacerbates the problem if anything, because it requires players to forecast even further ahead when the DM is going to ask for a roll, or else ask the DM to rewind time even further so they can use their cantrip.
I think I prefer option 3 mostly because I've never personally had the problem described... I think part of it is because I'm very conscious of Guidance and always keep an eye out for when I can use it. I can think of very few times where someone did something, and then I immediately realized I should have cast guidance instead.
So I think my perspective skews in that direction. I think you're right, though, that the scenario you described is at least common enough that it makes sense to prioritize fixing that aspect of Guidance ahead of anything else. If that's the priority, I think I'm definitely of the mindset that it should just become a leveled spell... it's not as useful as spells that provide benefit over a longer period of time like Enhance Ability or Bless (even though that only applies to attacks/saves), but the emergency option to pull it out as a reaction really ups its utility. Sort of like comparing Levitate to Feather Fall... ultimately Levitate would be more useful if you have the foresight to cast it ahead of time, but sometimes you just want to be ready if someone fails a DEX save and suddenly they're dropping 4 stories.
Yeah, Guidance in 5e basically has two separate but related problems: Timing and efficacy. Timing is the issue I was talking about in my previous post. The way Guidance currently works, you either have to have foresight to cast it ahead of time, or an understanding with the group that you are casting it on one of the PCs every minute out of combat in case something comes up, or else you end up trying to use it retroactively. Making Guidance a reaction to a failed check neatly resolves this issue, but it makes the efficacy issue loom larger: Is it really a good idea for PCs to benefit from +1d4 on most ability checks for the cost of a cantrip slot? Probably not. They try to resolve that by adding a limit to how often someone can benefit from it, but that's an awkward thing to put on a cantrip, which conceptually is supposed to be an always available resource. If they're going to impose a limit like that, I favor making it once per short rest, which limits the bookkeeping needed without being particularly onerous, but it's still awkward, and making Guidance a leveled spell would likely be a more elegant solution.
The Reaction change was a good fix for the flow of the game. But the limits to its use make it pretty much not worth taking at all. I don't like the bookkeeping, and it doesn't feel like a cantrip anymore. As many have said.
I like the option of increasing the casting time, but you are right that it would work at some tables and not others.
There is another component of the 5e Guidance that isn't addressed by any proposal. It is related to the timing issue and still wouldn't be fixed by a reaction. The fact is, some things just don't make since in the game world.
I can see watching your friend line up a difficult shot with their bow, and blessing them at the last second with a spell. Even after the arrow is loosed, you could imagine the gods giving it a nudge in the right direction.
It makes sense to cast when a party member is about to try to pick a lock. You know the door is locked, you see them get out the tools and squat down. You have visual clues that something is happening.
But there are many times people want to use it on things like an Insight roll, or a Knowledge check of some sort. For that to make any sense, you'd have to be able to read their mind. I never liked that part. And the solution is completely in the hands of the DMs judgement. That doesn't make for a very clean rule.
I wonder if we could fix that part too. Without making a very wordy spell description. Or relying on examples to help guide a DM. Is there a mechanical solution?
Yeah, mental checks are a nebulous part of it. By and large, I would assume that my character could benefit from a Guidance spell cast on themself for a mental check. They know that they are (or are about to be, for the prior version) searching their own memory for information or trying to make connections, but they couldn't know that about another character unless there's 1) an outward sign from the character, and 2) they know that character intimately enough to notice their "tells." Even then, it could be argued that it happens so rapidly that there's no opportunity even for a Reaction to intervene.
Ultimately, an "ability check" is a game construct that doesn't correspond to anything precise that a character is aware of. It's not like a spell slot, which the character is able to measure and account for, so there's always going to be some fuzziness about when the check happens and whether another character is properly aware of it happening. After all, picking a lock that the GM decides is trivial and doesn't need a check looks almost identical to picking a lock that is easy, but difficult enough to allow for the possibility of failure, at least from within the narrative. How does the caster know that a check is happening and that it is about to fail and (to get even more game-y) that it is close enough to success to expend a limited resource on it?
Maybe guidance could be split into two cantrips; one that works on mental ability checks, and another that works on physical ability checks. That would make logical sense, make the limit less necessary (on account of being used less), and effectively allow for regular guidance at the cost of an extra cantrip slot (which I think is pretty fair).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
The Reaction change was a good fix for the flow of the game. But the limits to its use make it pretty much not worth taking at all.
It's worth taking even now, people overestimate how many times per day you're going to make an ability check and fail by a small enough amount to make rolling an extra d4 seem worth it, but it is awkward as a cantrip.
The Reaction change was a good fix for the flow of the game. But the limits to its use make it pretty much not worth taking at all. I don't like the bookkeeping, and it doesn't feel like a cantrip anymore. As many have said.
On a pure optimization level its probably still a decent pick. The reaction is nice and how often in a day does a player miss a roll by 1d4, so it does something and the limit isn't crippling. But the main reason its a okay pick isn't because its good but because after you pick your attack cantrip most cantrips are more for roleplaying flavor. But since this is the divine and primal list meh the choices are pretty slim, i mean attack option, mending, spare the dying, druidcraft/thaumaturgy that's pretty much it for viable options, are you really choosing resistance over guidance that is this nerfed, maybe light i guess though you can hang a lantern from your pack, any other player can carry a lantern/torch like whoever doesn't need both hands etc. Still given how minor the benefit is I'd still rather go for a more role playing choice.
If it was arcane, yeah mechanically the options of cantrips might actually be better. mage hand can be your figurative I wouldn't touch that with a 10' pole etc , minor illusion depending on how the DM adjudicates illusions, but still there are piles of arcane cantrips so you probably aren't taking it mechanically..
I do like the idea of differentiating between physical and mental. I still don't know how mental would be handled, but the physical makes more sense in the world of the game so I think it's easier. A physical skill is obvious when it's happening. Even if the characters aren't aware that a 'roll' is being made, they can see that a friend wrestling with an enemy, trying to pick a pocket, or jumping a pit.
It's easy to visualize a cleric watching the fighter about to miss a jump and praying for them to catch the edge of the cliff at the last moment. Or see the rogue not hiding very well and pray for a convenient shadow to pass over them.
So what if Guidance worked as a Reaction, but can only be used on Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution ability checks?
I say leave the spell as is in most respects, make it a level 1 reaction spell, and tack on a ritual tag so casters can spend 10 minutes casting it ahead of a check if they are in a position to plan things out.
i think it might be fine if they get rid of the once per day per player restriction, since it wouldnt be spammed, unless players are failing all the time (in which case they need it), which seems to be the primary complaint about its 5e incarnation. If DMs want to say using this in social situations will increase the DC, thats fine, its your table. Also, no more using it on initiative, although, not many were doing this and was easy to ban.
GUIDANCE
0-Level Divination Spell (Divine, Primal)
Casting Time: Reaction, which you take in response to you or an ally within 30 feet of you failing an Ability Check
Range: 30 feet
Component: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You channel magical insight to the creature who failed the Ability Check. That creature can roll a d4 and add the number rolled to the check, potentially turning it into a success.
So, your solution for what already was one of the best cantrips in the game is to essentially buff it from 5e: removing concentration, changing it from an action to a reaction, and giving it 30' of range instead of touch.
if the problem is overuse because people are using it for everything always, then limiting its use to only when there are fails would likely reduce use.
Did I misinterpret the intent of the redesign? Was it overpowered? Or was it overpowered because it could be overused?
The Reaction change was a good fix for the flow of the game. But the limits to its use make it pretty much not worth taking at all. I don't like the bookkeeping, and it doesn't feel like a cantrip anymore. As many have said.
I like the option of increasing the casting time, but you are right that it would work at some tables and not others.
There is another component of the 5e Guidance that isn't addressed by any proposal. It is related to the timing issue and still wouldn't be fixed by a reaction. The fact is, some things just don't make since in the game world.
I can see watching your friend line up a difficult shot with their bow, and blessing them at the last second with a spell. Even after the arrow is loosed, you could imagine the gods giving it a nudge in the right direction.
It makes sense to cast when a party member is about to try to pick a lock. You know the door is locked, you see them get out the tools and squat down. You have visual clues that something is happening.
But there are many times people want to use it on things like an Insight roll, or a Knowledge check of some sort. For that to make any sense, you'd have to be able to read their mind. I never liked that part. And the solution is completely in the hands of the DMs judgement. That doesn't make for a very clean rule.
I wonder if we could fix that part too. Without making a very wordy spell description. Or relying on examples to help guide a DM. Is there a mechanical solution?
i just imagined the person feeling supported that is trying to remember or think of something, like an inspiration, but divine.
i think it might be fine if they get rid of the once per day per player restriction, since it wouldnt be spammed, unless players are failing all the time (in which case they need it), which seems to be the primary complaint about its 5e incarnation. If DMs want to say using this in social situations will increase the DC, thats fine, its your table. Also, no more using it on initiative, although, not many were doing this and was easy to ban.
GUIDANCE
0-Level Divination Spell (Divine, Primal)
Casting Time: Reaction, which you take in response to you or an ally within 30 feet of you failing an Ability Check
Range: 30 feet
Component: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You channel magical insight to the creature who failed the Ability Check. That creature can roll a d4 and add the number rolled to the check, potentially turning it into a success.
So, your solution for what already was one of the best cantrips in the game is to essentially buff it from 5e: removing concentration, changing it from an action to a reaction, and giving it 30' of range instead of touch.
if the problem is overuse because people are using it for everything always, then limiting its use to only when there are fails would likely reduce use.
Did I misinterpret the intent of the redesign? Was it overpowered? Or was it overpowered because it could be overused?
OVERUSE That has always been its problem. Ever play a game of MTG? With a Blue Player? There is a card that says any time an opponent casts a spell unless they pay 1 mana more you get to draw a card. Here is how that goes... P1: casts a spell, P2: you gonna pay for that? P1: casts another spell, P2: You gonna pay for that? (rinse and repeat).
Conversations at the table with that cantrip... Acrobatic Rogue: I am going to parkour up to the roof. Cleric: Guidance! Fast Talking Bard: I am going to ... Cleric: Guidance! Fighter: I am... Cleric: Guidance! DM: Ranger make a survival... Cleric: Guidance!
The Reaction change was a good fix for the flow of the game. But the limits to its use make it pretty much not worth taking at all. I don't like the bookkeeping, and it doesn't feel like a cantrip anymore. As many have said.
I like the option of increasing the casting time, but you are right that it would work at some tables and not others.
There is another component of the 5e Guidance that isn't addressed by any proposal. It is related to the timing issue and still wouldn't be fixed by a reaction. The fact is, some things just don't make since in the game world.
I can see watching your friend line up a difficult shot with their bow, and blessing them at the last second with a spell. Even after the arrow is loosed, you could imagine the gods giving it a nudge in the right direction.
It makes sense to cast when a party member is about to try to pick a lock. You know the door is locked, you see them get out the tools and squat down. You have visual clues that something is happening.
But there are many times people want to use it on things like an Insight roll, or a Knowledge check of some sort. For that to make any sense, you'd have to be able to read their mind. I never liked that part. And the solution is completely in the hands of the DMs judgement. That doesn't make for a very clean rule.
I wonder if we could fix that part too. Without making a very wordy spell description. Or relying on examples to help guide a DM. Is there a mechanical solution?
i just imagined the person feeling supported that is trying to remember or think of something, like an inspiration, but divine.
Sorry, I think I didn't explain my thoughts very well. I can definitely imagine how a Guidance spell would inspire a person to do better in knowledge checks. It's very thematic really. Many of our myths talk about divine inspiration, higher powers sparking thoughts in mortal minds. The way the spell would play out is a believable fantasy.
The part that I struggle with is how the caster of the spell knows WHEN to cast it for these checks. If his friend is having an arm wrestling contest, it is easy for him to see his friend needs some divine help. But how does he know when a friend is... thinking?
Often I have seen situations like these:
Wizard : "Do I know anything about these runes on the floor?"
DM: "Roll Arcana and let's see."
Wizard: "14"
Cleric: "OH! I cast Guidance!"
In this scenario, I'm left wondering how the Cleric knew the Wizard was thinking about runes at that exact moment? Why would he cast the spell? Because he saw the Wizard thinking hard? So often these cases would require the Guidance caster to read the mind of the other characters to know that they are even trying to recall a memory, or judge an NPC's motives, or look for trap doors.
It's basically up to the DM to decide case by case if it makes sense. And that's hard to write a rule for. I was just curious if we could design a spell that took the guesswork and interpretation out of the equation.
The Reaction change was a good fix for the flow of the game. But the limits to its use make it pretty much not worth taking at all. I don't like the bookkeeping, and it doesn't feel like a cantrip anymore. As many have said.
I like the option of increasing the casting time, but you are right that it would work at some tables and not others.
There is another component of the 5e Guidance that isn't addressed by any proposal. It is related to the timing issue and still wouldn't be fixed by a reaction. The fact is, some things just don't make since in the game world.
I can see watching your friend line up a difficult shot with their bow, and blessing them at the last second with a spell. Even after the arrow is loosed, you could imagine the gods giving it a nudge in the right direction.
It makes sense to cast when a party member is about to try to pick a lock. You know the door is locked, you see them get out the tools and squat down. You have visual clues that something is happening.
But there are many times people want to use it on things like an Insight roll, or a Knowledge check of some sort. For that to make any sense, you'd have to be able to read their mind. I never liked that part. And the solution is completely in the hands of the DMs judgement. That doesn't make for a very clean rule.
I wonder if we could fix that part too. Without making a very wordy spell description. Or relying on examples to help guide a DM. Is there a mechanical solution?
i just imagined the person feeling supported that is trying to remember or think of something, like an inspiration, but divine.
Sorry, I think I didn't explain my thoughts very well. I can definitely imagine how a Guidance spell would inspire a person to do better in knowledge checks. It's very thematic really. Many of our myths talk about divine inspiration, higher powers sparking thoughts in mortal minds. The way the spell would play out is a believable fantasy.
The part that I struggle with is how the caster of the spell knows WHEN to cast it for these checks. If his friend is having an arm wrestling contest, it is easy for him to see his friend needs some divine help. But how does he know when a friend is... thinking?
Often I have seen situations like these:
Wizard : "Do I know anything about these runes on the floor?"
DM: "Roll Arcana and let's see."
Wizard: "14"
Cleric: "OH! I cast Guidance!"
In this scenario, I'm left wondering how the Cleric knew the Wizard was thinking about runes at that exact moment? Why would he cast the spell? Because he saw the Wizard thinking hard? So often these cases would require the Guidance caster to read the mind of the other characters to know that they are even trying to recall a memory, or judge an NPC's motives, or look for trap doors.
It's basically up to the DM to decide case by case if it makes sense. And that's hard to write a rule for. I was just curious if we could design a spell that took the guesswork and interpretation out of the equation.
Yeah, I hate when people do stuff like that after a roll. I always preface it as "If it looks like they are trying to think of something, I'll try to help and cast guidance" before the roll to see if its allowed.
I think a reasonable question to ask is "how does the existence of this spell make for a better game?" If there's no answer.. maybe just remove it?
The 5e version is just "be better at every non-combat task as long as you're willing to spam it", which is boring, overpowered, and annoying.
The One D&D version is "be better at any non-combat task, but only once per day". This mostly produces better gameplay (it means there's actual decision making involved in using the spell, it's somewhat less powerful, and it means you don't have to spam it), but it adds another resource to track, and it's still a fairly boring effect that doesn't obviously make the game better.
I would actually be tempted to completely replace it with some sort of omen (essentially, a weaker equivalent to augury).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, your solution for what already was one of the best cantrips in the game is to essentially buff it from 5e: removing concentration, changing it from an action to a reaction, and giving it 30' of range instead of touch.
I feel like these are the potential solutions that make the most sense to me:
1. Make Guidance a Leveled Spell
Use the new version of Guidance where it's cast as a reaction, and instead of needing to track who has or hasn't had the spell cast on them, just make it a leveled spell. This also assumes that the die will be increased to at least a d6.
2. Guidance can be used freely until it succeeds
Again using the new version of Guidance as a Reaction, but a creature can benefit from Guidance many times until it results in a success, after which it becomes locked until the next Long Rest. Still additional bookkeeping, but it's possible to use it multiple times in a day to justify it being a cantrip.
3. Change the casting time to 1 minute
This time the idea is mostly to revert Guidance to its current form (requires concentration, can be used infinite times per day). However, the Casting time is changed from an action to a full minute, making it much harder to spam.
Personally, I'm in favor of option 3. I know it won't resolve the problem of it being overused at every table, but I think that does the most to make players less likely to constantly be casting Guidance over and over while still making it easy enough to use regularly to justify it being a cantrip. But I'm curious if anyone is passionate about a different fix that I didn't mention, or if there's a particular option in these three concepts that makes the most sense to everyone here.
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
I also prefer option #3.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Option 3 actually sounds really good. There is a precedent for a 1 minute cantrip with Mending. It prevents it from being used in combat. It stops people from asking to retroactively add it after someone rolled. It stops people from using it in awkward social situations.
I also like it thematically. You spend time praying for someone to succeed on an upcoming challenge. I could even see it having concentration and a duration of 10 minutes or more, so you could prepare it before someone goes to try the thing. Like a guardian angel watching over them. "Please guide my friend as he goes to speak with the lord of this realm." Or "I beseech thee to guide her hands as she attempts to disarm this trap to protect your servant."
Just have it get used the first time the target fails a test during the duration. Or on the first roll they make. I wouldn't even mind raising it to a d6 at that point.
I think option 3 would nerf Guidance into oblivion without actually resolving one of the major tension points with it as it currently stands. DMs get annoyed because players ask to use Guidance after the roll has already been called for, because it breaks the flow of the game by trying to rewind time. Players get annoyed because it's hard to anticipate when the DM will decide you're doing something that calls for a roll as opposed to something that will automatically succeed. Making Guidance a reaction fixed that problem, and it's why I think that's a good change. Increasing the casting time exacerbates the problem if anything, because it requires players to forecast even further ahead when the DM is going to ask for a roll, or else ask the DM to rewind time even further so they can use their cantrip.
I think I prefer option 3 mostly because I've never personally had the problem described... I think part of it is because I'm very conscious of Guidance and always keep an eye out for when I can use it. I can think of very few times where someone did something, and then I immediately realized I should have cast guidance instead.
So I think my perspective skews in that direction. I think you're right, though, that the scenario you described is at least common enough that it makes sense to prioritize fixing that aspect of Guidance ahead of anything else. If that's the priority, I think I'm definitely of the mindset that it should just become a leveled spell... it's not as useful as spells that provide benefit over a longer period of time like Enhance Ability or Bless (even though that only applies to attacks/saves), but the emergency option to pull it out as a reaction really ups its utility. Sort of like comparing Levitate to Feather Fall... ultimately Levitate would be more useful if you have the foresight to cast it ahead of time, but sometimes you just want to be ready if someone fails a DEX save and suddenly they're dropping 4 stories.
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
Yeah, Guidance in 5e basically has two separate but related problems: Timing and efficacy. Timing is the issue I was talking about in my previous post. The way Guidance currently works, you either have to have foresight to cast it ahead of time, or an understanding with the group that you are casting it on one of the PCs every minute out of combat in case something comes up, or else you end up trying to use it retroactively. Making Guidance a reaction to a failed check neatly resolves this issue, but it makes the efficacy issue loom larger: Is it really a good idea for PCs to benefit from +1d4 on most ability checks for the cost of a cantrip slot? Probably not. They try to resolve that by adding a limit to how often someone can benefit from it, but that's an awkward thing to put on a cantrip, which conceptually is supposed to be an always available resource. If they're going to impose a limit like that, I favor making it once per short rest, which limits the bookkeeping needed without being particularly onerous, but it's still awkward, and making Guidance a leveled spell would likely be a more elegant solution.
The Reaction change was a good fix for the flow of the game. But the limits to its use make it pretty much not worth taking at all. I don't like the bookkeeping, and it doesn't feel like a cantrip anymore. As many have said.
I like the option of increasing the casting time, but you are right that it would work at some tables and not others.
There is another component of the 5e Guidance that isn't addressed by any proposal. It is related to the timing issue and still wouldn't be fixed by a reaction. The fact is, some things just don't make since in the game world.
I can see watching your friend line up a difficult shot with their bow, and blessing them at the last second with a spell. Even after the arrow is loosed, you could imagine the gods giving it a nudge in the right direction.
It makes sense to cast when a party member is about to try to pick a lock. You know the door is locked, you see them get out the tools and squat down. You have visual clues that something is happening.
But there are many times people want to use it on things like an Insight roll, or a Knowledge check of some sort. For that to make any sense, you'd have to be able to read their mind. I never liked that part. And the solution is completely in the hands of the DMs judgement. That doesn't make for a very clean rule.
I wonder if we could fix that part too. Without making a very wordy spell description. Or relying on examples to help guide a DM. Is there a mechanical solution?
Yeah, mental checks are a nebulous part of it. By and large, I would assume that my character could benefit from a Guidance spell cast on themself for a mental check. They know that they are (or are about to be, for the prior version) searching their own memory for information or trying to make connections, but they couldn't know that about another character unless there's 1) an outward sign from the character, and 2) they know that character intimately enough to notice their "tells." Even then, it could be argued that it happens so rapidly that there's no opportunity even for a Reaction to intervene.
Ultimately, an "ability check" is a game construct that doesn't correspond to anything precise that a character is aware of. It's not like a spell slot, which the character is able to measure and account for, so there's always going to be some fuzziness about when the check happens and whether another character is properly aware of it happening. After all, picking a lock that the GM decides is trivial and doesn't need a check looks almost identical to picking a lock that is easy, but difficult enough to allow for the possibility of failure, at least from within the narrative. How does the caster know that a check is happening and that it is about to fail and (to get even more game-y) that it is close enough to success to expend a limited resource on it?
Maybe guidance could be split into two cantrips; one that works on mental ability checks, and another that works on physical ability checks. That would make logical sense, make the limit less necessary (on account of being used less), and effectively allow for regular guidance at the cost of an extra cantrip slot (which I think is pretty fair).
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
It's worth taking even now, people overestimate how many times per day you're going to make an ability check and fail by a small enough amount to make rolling an extra d4 seem worth it, but it is awkward as a cantrip.
On a pure optimization level its probably still a decent pick. The reaction is nice and how often in a day does a player miss a roll by 1d4, so it does something and the limit isn't crippling. But the main reason its a okay pick isn't because its good but because after you pick your attack cantrip most cantrips are more for roleplaying flavor. But since this is the divine and primal list meh the choices are pretty slim, i mean attack option, mending, spare the dying, druidcraft/thaumaturgy that's pretty much it for viable options, are you really choosing resistance over guidance that is this nerfed, maybe light i guess though you can hang a lantern from your pack, any other player can carry a lantern/torch like whoever doesn't need both hands etc. Still given how minor the benefit is I'd still rather go for a more role playing choice.
If it was arcane, yeah mechanically the options of cantrips might actually be better. mage hand can be your figurative I wouldn't touch that with a 10' pole etc , minor illusion depending on how the DM adjudicates illusions, but still there are piles of arcane cantrips so you probably aren't taking it mechanically..
I do like the idea of differentiating between physical and mental. I still don't know how mental would be handled, but the physical makes more sense in the world of the game so I think it's easier. A physical skill is obvious when it's happening. Even if the characters aren't aware that a 'roll' is being made, they can see that a friend wrestling with an enemy, trying to pick a pocket, or jumping a pit.
It's easy to visualize a cleric watching the fighter about to miss a jump and praying for them to catch the edge of the cliff at the last moment. Or see the rogue not hiding very well and pray for a convenient shadow to pass over them.
So what if Guidance worked as a Reaction, but can only be used on Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution ability checks?
I say leave the spell as is in most respects, make it a level 1 reaction spell, and tack on a ritual tag so casters can spend 10 minutes casting it ahead of a check if they are in a position to plan things out.
if the problem is overuse because people are using it for everything always, then limiting its use to only when there are fails would likely reduce use.
Did I misinterpret the intent of the redesign? Was it overpowered? Or was it overpowered because it could be overused?
i just imagined the person feeling supported that is trying to remember or think of something, like an inspiration, but divine.
OVERUSE
That has always been its problem.
Ever play a game of MTG? With a Blue Player?
There is a card that says any time an opponent casts a spell unless they pay 1 mana more you get to draw a card.
Here is how that goes... P1: casts a spell, P2: you gonna pay for that? P1: casts another spell, P2: You gonna pay for that? (rinse and repeat).
Conversations at the table with that cantrip...
Acrobatic Rogue: I am going to parkour up to the roof.
Cleric: Guidance!
Fast Talking Bard: I am going to ...
Cleric: Guidance!
Fighter: I am...
Cleric: Guidance!
DM: Ranger make a survival...
Cleric: Guidance!
every... single... time... every... Thirty seconds... at... the... table...
The spell is not just BAH - ROH - KEN it is annoying to every player at the table except the user.
Sorry, I think I didn't explain my thoughts very well. I can definitely imagine how a Guidance spell would inspire a person to do better in knowledge checks. It's very thematic really. Many of our myths talk about divine inspiration, higher powers sparking thoughts in mortal minds. The way the spell would play out is a believable fantasy.
The part that I struggle with is how the caster of the spell knows WHEN to cast it for these checks. If his friend is having an arm wrestling contest, it is easy for him to see his friend needs some divine help. But how does he know when a friend is... thinking?
Often I have seen situations like these:
Wizard : "Do I know anything about these runes on the floor?"
DM: "Roll Arcana and let's see."
Wizard: "14"
Cleric: "OH! I cast Guidance!"
In this scenario, I'm left wondering how the Cleric knew the Wizard was thinking about runes at that exact moment? Why would he cast the spell? Because he saw the Wizard thinking hard? So often these cases would require the Guidance caster to read the mind of the other characters to know that they are even trying to recall a memory, or judge an NPC's motives, or look for trap doors.
It's basically up to the DM to decide case by case if it makes sense. And that's hard to write a rule for. I was just curious if we could design a spell that took the guesswork and interpretation out of the equation.
Yeah, I hate when people do stuff like that after a roll. I always preface it as "If it looks like they are trying to think of something, I'll try to help and cast guidance" before the roll to see if its allowed.
I think a reasonable question to ask is "how does the existence of this spell make for a better game?" If there's no answer.. maybe just remove it?
The 5e version is just "be better at every non-combat task as long as you're willing to spam it", which is boring, overpowered, and annoying.
The One D&D version is "be better at any non-combat task, but only once per day". This mostly produces better gameplay (it means there's actual decision making involved in using the spell, it's somewhat less powerful, and it means you don't have to spam it), but it adds another resource to track, and it's still a fairly boring effect that doesn't obviously make the game better.
I would actually be tempted to completely replace it with some sort of omen (essentially, a weaker equivalent to augury).