0-level spells

[Phil. L]

Here's another thing that has always bugged me. Why doesn't a creature's relevant ability score affect how many 0-level spells they get? Why are 0-level spells different? Personally, I just follow along with the crowd, but I still think it's wrong.

This has probably been brought up somewhere else, but I'd still like to know why its always been that way.

Thoughts?

[David Schwartz]

Phil. L wrote:

Why doesn't a creature's relevant ability score affect how many 0-level spells they get?

It's not worth the hassle. If the current formula extended to 0-level spells every spellcaster would get a bonus cantrip (which kind of defeats the purpose of it being bonus). If you have a sufficient score to get two (or more) bonus cantrips, you're probably powerful enough that it doesn't matter.

[Rezdave]

Hill Giant wrote:

If the current formula extended to 0-level spells every spellcaster would get a bonus cantrip.

I suppose you could let Int. 10 apprentices cast cantrips with no bonus, but only the 11 Int. go on to cast 1st level spells. Also, doesn't Int. 11 have no bonus anyway?

Whatever. I give it to everyone.

Rez

[The Black Bard]

Houserule Alert!

Because I agree with the "Why doesn't the caster get bonus cantrips for a high score" premise, I houseruled a while ago that caster's get their casting score modifier as bonus cantrips. That way 10-11 stat casters get none, but most PCs get four to five more by the end of their career.

I've found my PCs actually use their cantrips more often, from prestidigitation for cleaning to acid splash for offense. They still often don't use them all, but I find them more likely to consider using them when they have so many available.

[Kirth Gersen]

Wizards get shafted in their daily lives with only 4 per day. I mean, that number of cantips won't get them an eighth of the way through cleaning their tower, and even with a few apprentices helping, they're way behind the curve. I'd almost like to use the sorcerer rules for wizard cantrips, and give them a wide list from which to cast them spontaneously.

[Sebastian]

I would hazard it's because you'd be giving out a bonus spell yet not having a bonus in the relevant casting attribute. Working backward from the bonus spell progression chart, the bonus 0 level spell would be for a 10 Int, and you'd basically be getting something extra despite having a +0 modifier.

Now, that's my guess, not my practice. In my games, I've always house ruled that casters get bonus 0 level spells whenever they get bonus first level spells. Barring any unusual create water/fire elemental interactions, cantrips don't really add much power to a character. But for the cure minor wounds orison and a few others, you could probably get away with letting 0 level spells be cast at will.

[Fake Healer]

Sebastian wrote:

Barring any unusual create water/fire elemental interactions, cantrips don't really add much power to a character.......

Let it go, dude. Release the anger and frustration. Center yourself with deep breathing.

But I totally agree with your post.
EDIT* Fire Elementals should be renamed as Fire Reactionals, I mean they are a chemical reaction and not an element.
OOTS FOREVER!!!!
FH

[Fake Healer]

Friggin edit don't work!!!!!!

Fire elementals should be renamed to fire reactionals as they are a chemical reaction and not an element.
OOTS FOREVER!!!
FH

[Cat Daemon]

Not having any bonus 0-level spells is, I suppose, one way round the complications you have when you have that bonus and no spell list to cast it from. (I'm looking at you, paladin and ranger)

[Sebastian]

Fake Healer wrote:

Let it go, dude. Release the anger and frustration. Center yourself with deep breathing.
But I totally agree with your post.
EDIT* Fire Elementals should be renamed as Fire Reactionals, I mean they are a chemical reaction and not an element.
OOTS FOREVER!!!!
FH

NEVER!!!

But I do agree, OotS does rule.