A Master wizard walks into his study and lets out a deep sigh. “What a day”, he mutters under his breath.
As he walks further into the dark room, he flicks his wand and a rusty old oil lamp hanging from the ceiling quickly lights up the room. While he’s walking towards the comfort of his arm chair, he realizes that the fireplace is empty. He lets out another sigh and makes a small gesture accompanied by a magic word. An armful of firewood by the wall sprouts tiny, wooden, centipede-like legs and crawls slowly but steadily into the fireplace. Another gesture and the firewood bursts into flames. “Steady now”, he mutters and waves his fingers, soothing the flames for a nice and calming fire.
The old Master sits back and relaxes. He gently touches a kettle next to his armchair and it soon begins to boil without any apparent source of heat. After a moment of letting both the water and himself rest, he utters another word between his teeth, barely awake. The kettle is lifted into the air and pours him a nice and soothing cup of midnight tea. Before he can even finish his tea, the Master wizard falls asleep in his favorite armchair, preparing for another day of hard work.
Better multi-purpose cantrips for flavor and fun
The purpose of this homebrew variant rule is to offer strong spellcasters the flavorful feeling of using simple “freeform” magic for everyday life and mundane tasks.
This variant takes DnD one step towards a more narrative play style, that requires co-operative attitude from the player and the DM. Players should not even attempt to abuse this variant and generally it shouldn’t be possible, if you follow the rule of thumb.
The variant modifies the Thaumaturgy, Druidcraft and Prestidigitation cantrips, giving the player a chance to create all sorts of fun and flavorful effects.
Let me know how you would feel like playing or DMing this variant rule. :) We are starting to playtest it in our current campaign next week. We have a transmutation wizard, a druid and a cleric. Should be fun!
How does it work?
In addition to the pre-determined spell effects of Thaumaturgy, Druidcraft and Prestidigation, you can also freely create other effects appropriate for your character, level, class and area of expertise following the “rule of fun”. This is usually a player choice unless the player’s choice is actually harmful to the game.
This homebrew variant rule is designed for High Magic settings and can be used with DM permission. For example in a setting like Harry Potter, most adults can use magic for all sorts of mundane things. The DM has the final say in what is appropriate. I would probably allow anything that isn’t completely out of proportion, as long as it’s not meant as a utility tool for solving a problem.
In my settings, a wizard nearing lvl 10 is already a seasoned Senior Master, able to do all sorts of things. So I would allow them to do all sorts of little things for flavor and fun as a cantrip - especially if they are specialized in conjuration or transmutation.
The rule of thumb for creating additional effects is simple:
The effect cannot be the full effect of another spell or cantrip.
If the effect requires determining any game-mechanical qualities, then it’s not appropriate.
Examples
You can make a bit of light for reading at night, but not enough to require determining a game-mechanical area of bright/dim light, which would step on the Light cantrip
You can animate a chair or a table to sprout legs and walk up to you or your guest, so you don’t need to move it yourself. But if any situation would require determining its speed or dexterity, then it is not appropriate. At high tiers you could have an entire room reorganize itself with the flick of a wrist.
Command vines or twigs to take certain forms, such as knots or a basket. You cannot cause them to deal any damage or restrain a creature as it would require determining game mechanics.
Cause trees around you to swing or move their branches ominously. At high tiers this could affect a very large undetermined area. The movement is not strong enough to deal any damage or restrain anyone.
Cause a harmless critter to come to you for petting and seem domesticated, if you are friendly towards it. The critter is not charmed or under control or able to understand you in any special way.
Make book pages turn automatically
Cause mundane text to be spoken out loud if you are proficient in the language. If you need to determine how far away it can be heard, then it’s probably not appropriate.
Erase mundane writing if you make a mistake. But if you use it to fool someone or forge a document etc. without the appropriate proficiency or feature that allows you to forge documents, then anyone can notice right away without any checks that parts of the text have been erased / tampered with.
Cause an oil lamp or a lamp to become lit, flick a small switch, knock on a door magically, magically cause an unlocked door/window to open
Cause water to boil in a kettle. If you need to ask how long it takes to boil, then it’s probably not appropriate.
Magically polish or shape or color a rock or a chunk of clay etc. Doesn’t grant you any special proficiency. If you are a sculptor or potter by trade, then you can make things faster than by hand. If you need to ask how much material you can shape or how long it takes, then it’s not appropriate.
Cause a small item to hover telekinetically. If you need to determine a weight or a range or exert any fine control, then it’s not appropriate as it steps on the Mage Hand cantrip.
Cause mundane household items to act autonomously, like a tea kettle pouring tea automatically for you and your guests. This is not really telekinesis, even though it probably hovers. More like transmuting the object to perform a certain simple task.
Cause smoke to take simple shapes like Gandalf did with Bilbo.
Cause a nearby book that you own and are familiar with to fly into your hand from a pile of books or a bookcase etc. If you would normally have to make an investigation check to find it, then it is not appropriate.
Turn a cup of water into wine. A high tier character could turn a significant amount of water into wine. (at that point mundane money is worthless anyway)
Split or cut rocks. It does take time, just a bit less than using a hammer. If you are proficient in masonry, then you can probably make pretty nice and seamless stone walls that look out-of-this-world etc.
Etc. Let your imagination and character cocncept guide you. Just keep in mind the rule of thumb. The higher your level, the more dramatic the effect can be. :)
Who is this for?
This is meant for experienced players/DMs, who are looking for extra flavor and a more narrative feel to DnD. If this feels like a burden rather than a fun possibility, then I don’t recommend it. If your table has a tendency of arguing about things and trying to exploit abilities and spells, then I don’t recommend it.
But if you are confident that you and your players can use this variant in a fun way, then it could be very entertaining.
I love the ideas and suggested uses, but this really does just fall under general DM fiat; both in and out of combat we have the ability to essentially ask the DM for anything we want, and they decide if it's possible, and if so, how it works.
Strictly speaking you don't even need specific spells like prestidigitation to be capable of some of these things; simply being a spellcaster means you could arguably know a bunch of handy little minor spells that don't have explicit game rules.
What I would say though is that if you want a rule of thumb, then I as a DM would prefer players to have spells/abilities that are at least similar to what they want to be able to do, but if what they want is purely for flavour with no real game impact (not fishing for advantage on a check, or to produce real light or an obstruction etc.) then there's no need to cast the spell or be bound by its normal limitations.
For example, I wouldn't allow prestidigitation/thaumaturgy to animate a table so it can move itself, but if the player has animate objects I'd be fine with them doing that for flavour without actually casting the spell, e.g- narratively they cast a much less demanding minor version of the spell as a cantrip. Similarly a character with creation might be able to use it to temporarily conjure a chair for themselves but I wouldn't insist they burn a 5th-level spell slot if all they want is to have a sit down in a cool way.
This can also be a good way to encourage players to think of cool flavour they can add for spells that they have prepared but don't necessarily use often. Creation is a good example of that because a 5th-level slot is a steep cost for a spell you probably won't use all that often (though when it is useful it can be great to have), but if you use it for flavour instead it can be a much more rewarding thing to keep prepared. I'd say spells like plant growth (amazing when there's a good sized area to control, less useful if not) is a great excuse to just cause flowers to emerge everywhere you go, or turn a horrible spooky nightmare ruin into a lovely vibrant happy place etc.
But yeah, this is kind of stuff that you can already do just by asking the DM; like using minor illusion to create an animated reenactment to amuse some children. It's not strictly something minor illusion can do (it just does static images, and it takes a turn to add sound etc.) but if it's a purely narrative device or a description of how you do a broader action ("I entertain the children") then there's no need to get bogged down on mechanics.
And even some cases that do have impact should be allowable with DM discretion; for example, a lawful good character of mine went into a house of the Morning Lord where the light was no longer shining through the roof like it's supposed to, and I asked if I could use light to cause it to do so to help inspire hope and the DM allowed it without forcing my character to fly up and cast it via touch like you're supposed to.
So yeah, I think it's better to not try and formalise this, because there's a risk of mechanics becoming a distraction, when it really just falls under "tell your DM what you want to do"; I can only really speak for myself, but personally I prefer for players to think in narrative rather than mechanical terms, and then we can decide whether to go by what a spell says, or may an exception.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The purpose is to sort of to just find a common ground for DMs and players on this. I agree with you that this wouldn't necessarily require any ruling. But if wording / examples / common ground helps with not having to ask the DM for permission every time or discussing it, then I would personally find it helpful and more dynamic. 🙂
In a more narrative system I probably wouldn't make something like this. But dnd is quite rule/mechanic heavy, so a sort of a clear permission with examples could encourage players and make things smoother.
But I like your thinking and I think you captured the essence of what I had in mind really well.
And I like your idea of using a simpler version of a spell you have. I used a broader scope for the same purpose. Like for example a transmutation wizard could easily create simple transmutation effects like a simpler version of tiny servant even if they didn't have the spell. But the idea is the same just a sort of broader expertise rather than specific spells. 🙂
This idea of yours of using lesser versions of more powerful spells is actually really nice. I think I'll go with that instead. It would bring out the differences between classes too as they have different spell lists. In addition to spell, class features are ok too. I'll probably allow spells that aren't prepared but are on the list/in your spellbook and you would have the slots for the actual spell.
Actually in my campaign, I allow a concept harking back to Dragon Magazine # 59-61 later made official in 1985 1st edition of Unearthed Arcana. I will forgo using the word Cantrip here to avoid confusion with the 5e spell mechanic of same name, and instead use Orison (the divine version of the minor magic mentioned in these sources).
These minor magics cannot (no matter how creatively cast) cause damage or be used to inflict a status condition, but if you were to take my homebrew 5e cantrip 'Orison' it would make minor magical effects available that allow effects in a controllable and scripted fashion. I generally allow 2 Orisons to be cast at the cost of a single action in Combat (initiative dependent situations) or at will outside of combat.
I think I would ok with this kind of thing in most of my games, but I do think that you need to consider more than just mechanical effects. Flavor is free, but this is also an area where you can step on others' toes or be too "greedy" about it to the point where no one else feels special.
For example, maybe a bard took the telekinesis feat and has incorporated that a lot into how their character interacts with the world. It's a big part of what makes them special. In that case allowing any wizard to also just casually "telekinesis" stuff all over the place out of combat can really diminish the impact of the bard's choices and characterization. I'm going to call this "flavor trampling."
Wizard is a seductive class and its tempting to let them do basically anything they want (within reason) with magic. The majority of the "martials vs. casters" gap stems from this same approach in official material in my opinion, as higher level casters have a spell to do pretty much anything a martial could contribute to an out-of-combat challenge. Letting casters do even more essentially for free is certainly fun for the caster, but less fun for others unless you are similarly giving them free powers as well. But I haven't seen a great system proposed for that. "The fighter polishes their sword to a super extra bright sheen" just doesn't evoke the same wonder as the examples above.
Better multi-purpose cantrips for flavor and fun
The purpose of this homebrew variant rule is to offer strong spellcasters the flavorful feeling of using simple “freeform” magic for everyday life and mundane tasks.
This variant takes DnD one step towards a more narrative play style, that requires co-operative attitude from the player and the DM. Players should not even attempt to abuse this variant and generally it shouldn’t be possible, if you follow the rule of thumb.
The variant modifies the Thaumaturgy, Druidcraft and Prestidigitation cantrips, giving the player a chance to create all sorts of fun and flavorful effects.
Let me know how you would feel like playing or DMing this variant rule. :) We are starting to playtest it in our current campaign next week. We have a transmutation wizard, a druid and a cleric. Should be fun!
How does it work?
In addition to the pre-determined spell effects of Thaumaturgy, Druidcraft and Prestidigation, you can also freely create other effects appropriate for your character, level, class and area of expertise following the “rule of fun”. This is usually a player choice unless the player’s choice is actually harmful to the game.
This homebrew variant rule is designed for High Magic settings and can be used with DM permission. For example in a setting like Harry Potter, most adults can use magic for all sorts of mundane things. The DM has the final say in what is appropriate. I would probably allow anything that isn’t completely out of proportion, as long as it’s not meant as a utility tool for solving a problem.
In my settings, a wizard nearing lvl 10 is already a seasoned Senior Master, able to do all sorts of things. So I would allow them to do all sorts of little things for flavor and fun as a cantrip - especially if they are specialized in conjuration or transmutation.
The rule of thumb for creating additional effects is simple:
The effect cannot be the full effect of another spell or cantrip.
If the effect requires determining any game-mechanical qualities, then it’s not appropriate.
Examples
Etc. Let your imagination and character cocncept guide you. Just keep in mind the rule of thumb. The higher your level, the more dramatic the effect can be. :)
Who is this for?
This is meant for experienced players/DMs, who are looking for extra flavor and a more narrative feel to DnD. If this feels like a burden rather than a fun possibility, then I don’t recommend it. If your table has a tendency of arguing about things and trying to exploit abilities and spells, then I don’t recommend it.
But if you are confident that you and your players can use this variant in a fun way, then it could be very entertaining.
Cheers!
Finland GMT/UTC +2
This isn't a variant rule it is simply a bunch of text explaining the "rule of cool".
Well as this isn't normally a part of the rules, it makes it a variant/optional rule.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
I love the ideas and suggested uses, but this really does just fall under general DM fiat; both in and out of combat we have the ability to essentially ask the DM for anything we want, and they decide if it's possible, and if so, how it works.
Strictly speaking you don't even need specific spells like prestidigitation to be capable of some of these things; simply being a spellcaster means you could arguably know a bunch of handy little minor spells that don't have explicit game rules.
What I would say though is that if you want a rule of thumb, then I as a DM would prefer players to have spells/abilities that are at least similar to what they want to be able to do, but if what they want is purely for flavour with no real game impact (not fishing for advantage on a check, or to produce real light or an obstruction etc.) then there's no need to cast the spell or be bound by its normal limitations.
For example, I wouldn't allow prestidigitation/thaumaturgy to animate a table so it can move itself, but if the player has animate objects I'd be fine with them doing that for flavour without actually casting the spell, e.g- narratively they cast a much less demanding minor version of the spell as a cantrip. Similarly a character with creation might be able to use it to temporarily conjure a chair for themselves but I wouldn't insist they burn a 5th-level spell slot if all they want is to have a sit down in a cool way.
This can also be a good way to encourage players to think of cool flavour they can add for spells that they have prepared but don't necessarily use often. Creation is a good example of that because a 5th-level slot is a steep cost for a spell you probably won't use all that often (though when it is useful it can be great to have), but if you use it for flavour instead it can be a much more rewarding thing to keep prepared. I'd say spells like plant growth (amazing when there's a good sized area to control, less useful if not) is a great excuse to just cause flowers to emerge everywhere you go, or turn a horrible spooky nightmare ruin into a lovely vibrant happy place etc.
But yeah, this is kind of stuff that you can already do just by asking the DM; like using minor illusion to create an animated reenactment to amuse some children. It's not strictly something minor illusion can do (it just does static images, and it takes a turn to add sound etc.) but if it's a purely narrative device or a description of how you do a broader action ("I entertain the children") then there's no need to get bogged down on mechanics.
And even some cases that do have impact should be allowable with DM discretion; for example, a lawful good character of mine went into a house of the Morning Lord where the light was no longer shining through the roof like it's supposed to, and I asked if I could use light to cause it to do so to help inspire hope and the DM allowed it without forcing my character to fly up and cast it via touch like you're supposed to.
So yeah, I think it's better to not try and formalise this, because there's a risk of mechanics becoming a distraction, when it really just falls under "tell your DM what you want to do"; I can only really speak for myself, but personally I prefer for players to think in narrative rather than mechanical terms, and then we can decide whether to go by what a spell says, or may an exception.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The purpose is to sort of to just find a common ground for DMs and players on this. I agree with you that this wouldn't necessarily require any ruling. But if wording / examples / common ground helps with not having to ask the DM for permission every time or discussing it, then I would personally find it helpful and more dynamic. 🙂
In a more narrative system I probably wouldn't make something like this. But dnd is quite rule/mechanic heavy, so a sort of a clear permission with examples could encourage players and make things smoother.
But I like your thinking and I think you captured the essence of what I had in mind really well.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
And I like your idea of using a simpler version of a spell you have. I used a broader scope for the same purpose. Like for example a transmutation wizard could easily create simple transmutation effects like a simpler version of tiny servant even if they didn't have the spell. But the idea is the same just a sort of broader expertise rather than specific spells. 🙂
Finland GMT/UTC +2
This idea of yours of using lesser versions of more powerful spells is actually really nice. I think I'll go with that instead. It would bring out the differences between classes too as they have different spell lists. In addition to spell, class features are ok too. I'll probably allow spells that aren't prepared but are on the list/in your spellbook and you would have the slots for the actual spell.
The same examples still apply.
Thanks! :)
Finland GMT/UTC +2
Actually in my campaign, I allow a concept harking back to Dragon Magazine # 59-61 later made official in 1985 1st edition of Unearthed Arcana. I will forgo using the word Cantrip here to avoid confusion with the 5e spell mechanic of same name, and instead use Orison (the divine version of the minor magic mentioned in these sources).
These minor magics cannot (no matter how creatively cast) cause damage or be used to inflict a status condition, but if you were to take my homebrew 5e cantrip 'Orison' it would make minor magical effects available that allow effects in a controllable and scripted fashion. I generally allow 2 Orisons to be cast at the cost of a single action in Combat (initiative dependent situations) or at will outside of combat.
"If you've got to fight, fight like your the third monkey on the ramp to Noah's Ark; and brother it's starting to rain."
I think I would ok with this kind of thing in most of my games, but I do think that you need to consider more than just mechanical effects. Flavor is free, but this is also an area where you can step on others' toes or be too "greedy" about it to the point where no one else feels special.
For example, maybe a bard took the telekinesis feat and has incorporated that a lot into how their character interacts with the world. It's a big part of what makes them special. In that case allowing any wizard to also just casually "telekinesis" stuff all over the place out of combat can really diminish the impact of the bard's choices and characterization. I'm going to call this "flavor trampling."
Wizard is a seductive class and its tempting to let them do basically anything they want (within reason) with magic. The majority of the "martials vs. casters" gap stems from this same approach in official material in my opinion, as higher level casters have a spell to do pretty much anything a martial could contribute to an out-of-combat challenge. Letting casters do even more essentially for free is certainly fun for the caster, but less fun for others unless you are similarly giving them free powers as well. But I haven't seen a great system proposed for that. "The fighter polishes their sword to a super extra bright sheen" just doesn't evoke the same wonder as the examples above.
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