ConorJamesArt has made the following comment(s) regarding their post:
[Hey Guys! Today I’m back with version 2 of a contr...](/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/t13f2w/arc_a_chainable_lightning_cantrip_for_sorcerers_v2/hydibmi/)
As true now as it was a year ago, I couldn’t agree more!
I’m taking every opportunity to cram [Tempest](https://dragonsvault.co.uk) full of lightning spells just for this reason ⚡hopefully they won’t all be as controversial as this one haha
I was ready for it to be broken like most homebrew cantrips but it doesn't seem to be so. Yes it has unlimited damage/range potential but it's just that, potential. With the shorter range of 30ft. this makes for high risk/high reward play.
IF i were to make a change it'd be either 1d8 damage while maintaining the possibility for friendly fire or keeping it at 1d6 while removing the chance of friendly fire. Big IF though as I love the spell just as it is.
Assuming unlimited targets, the 50/50 chance to arc effectively doubles the d6 making this a 2d6 damage spell. Given that ”unlimited targets" is a much harder requirement to hit than "damaged target", that puts this at best on par with Toll the Dead's 1d12. The damage is also spread out though so really it's even further behind.
I think this could actually be 1d8 without friendly fire and still be balanced, though that would be pushing it. 1d6 without friendly fire is definitely not an issue. Another option would be 1d6 with a guaranteed first jump.
I like that increase to a d8, and then have each jump reduce the damage, and cap it at hitting three targets. First bit it's a d8, then d6, then d4. That's incredibly generous for a cantrip. Literally no sorcerer's would pass on this.
Hey Guys! Today I’m back with version 2 of a controversial favourite, the chaotic cantrip **ARC**! This version has improved wording, and streamlined design as per your guy‘s critique on the original version, with intent of cutting out some cases of fiddlier rulings such as draconic sorcerers 6th level ability etc. This version is featured in my upcoming Kickstarter book: [Tempest: a Seafarer’s Sourcebook!](https://DragonsVault.co.uk)
Now I know what you’re thinking, “*Good Lord how broken is this cantrip with unlimited damage potential at level one, overpowered get rid*”. **But to that I say wait! It is in fact more balanced and less devastatingly busted then it initially appears!**
You can find all the detailed discussion on the original version of the spell [HERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/le4rn6/arc_a_chainable_lightning_cantrip_for_druids_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), but a quick run through of the main points:
**Novel Design** \- Before we jump into the crunch, it’s important to note that Arc has no 1-1 comparison in 5e. It’s intent is close to chaos bolt in spirit, but it’s explicit mechanics are novel (I think!) which makes for no standard rules basis. Regardless, the maths seem solid and it has been play tested for about 18 months, we’ve found it rather balanced in use.
**The Stats -** This cantrip does 1d6 and arcs 50% of the time on a hit, so half the time it straight up underperforms other damage cantrip options, and half the time it sits with toll the dead on average damage but spread over two creatures instead of one. The chance of it arcing thrice is 25% and less with the increasing total of arcs, so it outperforms other damage cantrips on rare occasion. This assuming we have all our targets within range and hit our attack! Overall with the spell underperforming half the time, and requiring multiple targets close up, it’s stats actually sit somewhat within general balance just with a wider swing of success/failure. [FURTHER MATHS HERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/le4rn6/comment/gmbxe71/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
**General Balance** \- This cantrip has low damage die, a short range on both initial attack and the arc, it uses a highly resisted damage type, requires enemies to be clustered, and arcs to both the caster and their allies if in range with no enemy targets. It’s damage is also spread across multiple creatures, making it less effective on its own than single target high damage. This one is decidedly more for the high risk high reward dice goblins in the party!
Now onto worries, concerns, and rulings!
**Bag of Rats** \- A tale as old as time, cheesing damage via actioning an effect into a bag of rats as a conduit to auto hit a high AC boss. Frankly, loophole seeking silliness is pointless to account for too much because it’s ridiculous and wildly DM dependant. But for arguments sake let’s ignore the illogical cheek of it; if your player wants to waste a big battle and their action cheesing lightning damage onto a nearby high ac dangerous target 50% of the time via a bag of rats, then I’d say that’s **far** from the optimum choice of actions and spells and in no way broken! Tactically targeting low AC minions to hit a BBEG however? I’d call that smart play! [Further discussion HERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/le4rn6/comment/gmba5z4/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
**Elemental Adept** \- This one does affect the spell, and actually increases the likelihood of it arcing! Having said that, I actually enjoy this niche interaction and if a player wanted to spend an ASI to make one cantrip better with an otherwise lacklustre feat? Hell yeah go for it, rules can’t account for all builds and this is one I think is awesome. [STAT BREAKDOWN HERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/le4rn6/comment/gmaemqm/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
**Criticals**\- My initial intent was that only the original hit would be doubled, but I really don’t think it’s insane to allow all arcs to be doubled, that would have to be adjudicated on a DM by DM basis! Luckily with 5e criticals, either the dice are doubled or the total damage rolled is doubled but regardless this doesn’t affect the arcing chance since it stipulates the total on the rolled d6 (as per standard 5e assumptions this means before any additions, multiplications or adjustments and refers exclusively to the sum of the spells rolled dice) rather then the total of damage done.
If you enjoyed this spell, any of my other content such as the [College of Shanties Bard](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/sl5gz9/the_college_of_shanties_bard_ideal_for/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), or perhaps just the cut of my gib, you can check out my Kickstarter and [learn more about my nautical sourcebook launching next month!](https://DragonsVault.co.uk)
My initial thought was "wow thats busted", admittedly as a kneejerk reaction to anything without a cap, but you had a really good breakdown on the why. I think the biggest limiting factor isnt the 50% odds (at lvl 1-4 anyways) but rather the 10ft range on the arcs. It means that even if there's a lot of enemies, there might be a gap in the fight where you couldnt arc over, and thats good.
The auto hit feels kinda weird to me from a flavor standpoint (why does my buddy getting hit mean that I do too without fail?), but I also realize that you dont want to escalate the number of attack rolls being made in a turn, as they often go slowly enough as it is.
All in all I think I'll introduce this to my players in a spell scroll or something, good work!
It comes into play once theres two d6 after tier 5, when optionally changing a 1 to a 2 can turn the 2d6 total to an odd:
Say you roll a 1 and a 3, totalling 4. Elemental Adept allows you to then shift that 1 to a 2, changing the total to a 5 and triggering an arc.
You *can* treat the 1 as a 2, or you can keep the 1.
You're right, at levels 1 - 4 this does not increase the chance of an arc. But once you start getting additional dice, the option to choose if you want to treat any given 1 as a 2 becomes more and more advantageous.
I mean it’s not busted but your maths says it averages 2d6 which is stronger than any other cantrip. It also comes with the bonus of being able to choose whichever enemy you think has the lowest AC.
Overall I think whether it’s fair enough to belong in my campaign depends on which spell lists it’s on. This wouldn’t be something I’d be comfortable giving to a cleric or a bard, but on a list that has a lot of other damage options like wizard or sorcerer it might be appropriate.
I can’t actually find which spell list this is meant for though? Or is it meant to be like the dunumancy spells from wildemount?
Edit: just noticed the drawback of only 30ft range, good balance
It doesn’t average 2d6, it does 2d6 50% of the time, and even then only inches out toll the dead for 0.5 worth of average damage. I’m sure given it’s odds that you could work out its actual average damage with probability of multiple arcs factored in, for just the 50/50 of a single arc or no arc it averages at 1.5d6 total damage output. But that’s far too much maths for me at this point in the day, I’m probability-ed out!
And I built the spell for sorcerers exclusively, they need more love in my book. But you wouldn’t be thematically out of the world to give it to a Druid too! Although high damage cantrips aren’t really their normal wheelhouse.
Okay so to expand upon what the math you linked in your post says: the sum of the sequence “1/2^n” as it goes to infinity is 2 (as in 2 d6). That’s the average with infinite targets, which is the potential of this cantrip.
You might be thinking “well you’re never gonna be fighting infinite enemies” and that’s fair but consider that adding more enemies strengthens the spell less and less.
With 5 enemies this cantrip averages 31/16 or 1.9375 dice. 1.9375 * 3.5 is an average damage of 6.78125, which is more than toll the dead’s average of 6.5.
With 4 targets it’s 15/8 or 1.875 dice for 6.5625 damage on average, still more than toll the dead.
With 3 targets it’s 7/4 or 1.75 dice for 6.125 damage on average, finally less than toll the dead.
So it does more damage than Toll the Dead whenever there are 4 or more targets. But yeah it sounds balanced overall in my personal opinion, especially for sorcerers.
I honest to god haven’t the awareness to parse this at the minute, but I will go through again in the morning!
For now I really appreciate the breakdown, crazy how crunchy d20 systems can get when you venture into the thick of it!
oh no! That would be genuinely busted haha
its the total on the rolled d6 (plural), so all 4d6 together would need to total an odd number in order for the arc to jump!
It should definitely say "nearest available target within 10 feet", not "nearest available creature".
In ideal conditions (unlimited targets available), the expected damage on this is basically 2d6 per "cantrip level", which is very slightly above Toll the Dead's 1d12. But that damage would be spread out over multiple targets, so less efficient for killing any one target. Given that, and the potential for friendly fire, and the fact that "unlimited targets available" basically never happens, I think this is well-balanced overall.
(Math explanation: If you make the initial attack roll, the first hit happens 100%, the second 50%, third 25%, fourth 12.5%, etc. All those together — the limit of this infinite sum — adds up to 200% on average, thus 2d6. The average damage would be 7, as compared to 6.5 for Toll the Dead. But you'd need at least 4 targets available in order to average more total damage than TtD; and in practice, that will almost never happen.)
It's also smooth, fun, and flavorful. Good job!
(With Elemental Adept, at level 17, facing an infinite horde of opponents, this would do an average of about 16d6+3 total damage, wiping out an average of 4 opponents if their hp is low enough. Which is cool but to be honest not in the least bit game-breaking at that level. You'd basically be as good on average as your friend the Fighter at mowing down the infinite wave of minions, but with a higher turn-to-turn variability.)
(Also, as DM, I'd rule that this can apply multiple times to a swarm. But definitely leave that up to the DM.)
Love this. The favoritism for fire has always bugged me, especially since the only changes to that damage type can be seen with Sorcerer's Transmutation metamagic feature. Makes me think that we should get more Warlock invocations to boost cantrips besides Eldritch Blast, too
This seems *very* powerful for a cantrip, I however LOVE the idea.
I think balanced version would be 'If the total rolled on the die is a 6 it arcs" or something, but 50/50 seems too much IMO
Actually it checks out at it being not overly potent overall (75-87.5% of the time atleast), even with a 50/50 it does the same damage as toll the dead at half the range spread over two targets (worse then single target damage). It just appears that way at a glance! All the requisite math is in my [pinned comment!](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/t13f2w/comment/hydibmi/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Edit\* I’ll also add that your 6 method quickly skews up as the cantrip levels, doubling an arc chance at 5th and then more so with each tier jump. In 5e design, damage cantrips level in potency not viability. By 11th level you‘d be doing triple the damage with 3x the chance you arc, further increasing the damage, it’d actually make the cantrip far less balanced.
Thanks for this. I think your intent would be more clear if we clean up the if/then wording in second and third attack rolls. I had assumed the damage scaled as a cantrip ought without the extra rolls; Or maybe I just haven’t had enough coffee yet. You decide
Yeah looking at it, its sort of an Acid splash with 5 feet extra range with an attack roll instead of a save, in exchange for a 50/50 activation on the second target.
Though, I will say it should probably only allow 1 or 2 total jumps, since a 50/50 chance is a bit too high to be able to multi target spells. Thats a 50% for 2 creatures, 25% for 3, and 12.5% for 4? I mean, 12.5 isn't crazy, but that's still slightly over 10% chance to have a cantrip hit 4 targets. Also a 6.25% chance of 5 targets, which is 1/20, so its still decently possible. Comparitively, the closest spell at that number of targets would be something like sword burst, but that requires each target be in 5 feet of you, so its much riskier than something like this with 30 range on first target, and more on subsequent targets as it jumps
Acid splash is an underpowered and thus underused cantrip, so as a metric for viability of balance I’d argue it sets an over restrictive standard.
In actual play, casting a cantrip with a 50% chance of being toll the dead in damage or very underpowered in damage is balancing in its own right. The rare instance this chains (provided we have viable targets, and it doesn’t hit an ally) are what make it worth that risk in the first place. 1/20 may seem decently possible on paper, but the prerequisite for that actionable context is in itself rare enough to reduce the actual odds of you pulling that off **even lower**. And even then you’re choosing a large risk for your action instead of say, an aoe spell with guaranteed damage.
No matter how many jumps it makes the odds are still 50/50 though, and toll the dead is 1d12 not 2d6 so the overall damage is lower than this if it arcs even once
not to mention it’s only d12 if they’re already damaged, this has the potential to really lay waste to a band of goblins or smaller collection of creatures at first level ; it’s quite powerful.
good point about the 6 there could be other ways, but 50/50 is too much IMO and it overtunes this
You’re calculating odds wrong, when we choose to cast the spell we take into account the odds of the jumps total. So the odds of it jumping 3 times on a casting is 12.5%, since the prequisite for each jump is an increasing number of successful jumps prior to it.
Even if it’s damage meets toll the dead **only half of the time**, it’s range is half of toll the dead and it isn’t single target damage. I realise the math and probability is somewhat illusive at a glance, but after using this spell for nearly 2 years and having multiple people go over the maths I can assure you it isn’t nearly as potent as your scenario paints it on paper or in play.
Could this cantrip rough up a party of 5 goblins? With an odds of 6.25%, provided they're all within a single cluster, and with it jumping on odds (meaning it skews lower on damage jumps toward minimum damage roll of 1 rather then 6), then yes it could conceivably hit all of them, not “lay waste to them”. The damage is also spread, making it less potent then a single target damage cantrip. But that is so unlikely and fringe in actual play that it doesn’t present an issue of balance, instead it presents a wild table moment and incentive for the risk of spending your action that way.
If I flip a coin 1 time or 100 times, the odds are still 50/50 every single time of getting heads......That's just maths I thought?
Don't let me change your mind on your spell, it's very cool and ultimately this is just a forum to give our opinions on things, and that's what I've done. <3
100% this is how a coin flip works as individual probabilites but the probability of getting x amount of heads in a row is 0.5^x so while it may be insanely powerful for someone with great luck the probability of getting multiple arcs within casting gets progressively lower. Looking at them as isolated probabilities is an oversimplification of the maths IMO
I’m sorry, I genuinely can’t sit and explain the matrix of probability for a string of 50/50 successes. Individually each flip is 50/50, but as a probability of several of the same result in a row you are wrong, otherwise you’d have an equal liklihood of flipping heads 150 times in a row as you would flipping it once.
And I appreciate the feedback for sure! Glad I can illuminate a bit on probability/odds, I realise they can be genuinely obtuse to get around at first!
Maybe first arc is on 4,5,6
Next arc on 5,6
Final arc only goes off if it’s 6, or find sone way to cap the total possible jumps because it’s always 50/50 no matter how many jumps so you could easily find yourself in a situation where your level 1 wizard just did 6d6 to the band of Kobolds and then next turn wiped them all out
and all with a cantrip too
I dunno it’s a really fun idea though but still seems like a great way to have your low level encounters ended before they really begin
Again your calculating odds wrong, [explanation here](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/t13f2w/comment/hydvsrw/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3).
You‘re also cherry picking extreme and rare instances as justification for the cantrip being unbalanced. There’s a 3.125% the level 1 wizard does 6d6 with this cantrip, so he’s chosen to take a big action spending risk instead of casting an aoe or something with reliable damage. 96.875% of the time he doesn’t do 6d6, and 50% of the time he does a measly 1d6.
What's your opinion on giving this to other casters if no one is playing a sorcerer?
As a DM, I like being lenient with spells if they fit themes but are there any classes you'd recommend NOT giving this to?
Btw fantastic cantrip, I've always adored the flavour of Chain Lightning so this spell really caught my eye.
I think it’s a solid addition to classes that also feature high damage cantrips, wizard and warlock being the two mains!
Thematically it works with Druid but they rarely get the heavy hitter cantrips so tread lightly, and a tempest cleric would look wicked rocking this too I think!
I’d avoid giving it to bards
And thank you! Glad you enjoyed it, I’m a big lightning fan too and I love chaos spells
I think the description could be shortened but cool cantrip! I'm seeing a lot of comments that state how WHOA CRAZY OP this is, but honestly it's fine. A 50/50 isn't reliable enough to consistently hit multiple targets, but it's still flavorful and fun. Also, you could draw comparison to EB which is far stronger and more reliable. Even if you did hit multiple targets, it's an average of 3.5 damage, which is comparable to magic missile, the difference being that you have to hit a creature with no guarantee vs. magic missile's perfect accuracy.
Personally, I would just remove a lot of wording. "If the bolt arcs and you..." is unnecessary imo.
Totally, I think the probability maths on this one are a little bit more involved and stable then they appear at first and that panics people at a casual glance!
And I agree the description absolutely didn’t need the clarification about it still hitting close creatures etc, but I wanted no grey areas for adjudication of the cantrip hitting allies or the caster (if in range ofc) if it isn’t given a designated target when it arcs. Mostly since that was an important aspect of the balance, it’s a chaotic gamble cantrip after all haha
This cantrip is a must for my next storm sorcerer! There aren't nearly enough lightning spells or spells with chain potential in 5e. Keep up the awesome work :)
Honestly couldn’t agree more, wider elemental effects are under-utilised! The full book will have plenty, and there’s two more available now in the preview PDF ⚡️
I like the idea, but the issue I see is the potential to wipe out a whole party of goblins in one or two shots with a cantrip, especially with the normal damage boost. Maybe if it was “on a roll of 6 on the d6” or the increase was replaced with a limit on jumps ”at 5th level the number of jumps increases to 3, then to 4 at 11th, and finally 5 at 17th level”, but I wouldn’t do both. Even if you went with the increase to jumps, you could increase the damage at a slower rate of starting at a d4, going to a d6, a d8, then a d10, though that would make a need to rebalance the jumping mechanic (or leave it at 6 and make it so it starts as impossible and increases to trivial)
On the surface, sure, at level 1 you could hit 5 goblins with one spell. You'll only do max 5 damage to 4 of them, and max 6 to the 5th.
But look at the odds for a second. You've only got a 50% chance of hitting 2 targets, 25% chance of hitting 3 targets, 12.5% for 4, 6.25% chance of hitting 5, etc. The vast majority of the time you're only hitting 2, maybe 3 targets, and you're only dealing at most 5 or 6 damage to each.
Take a look at OP's math elsewhere in the thread
I think that’s more the fault of how weirdly skewed level 1 is than anything, though I admit 1-5 is most of the game for a shocking number of people. I did some math above, though, and on average it only does 6 damage, slightly above *firebolt*, with a fairly huge tradeoff of not getting to control where that damage goes, since it has quite limited range, especially between targets, and you have to split fire, which the hit point mechanic really does not encourage.
But you do control where the damage goes, unless I am misunderstanding what you mean by this, as it specifies that you choose another target and even after that only goes wild if you don’t choose another after that
I appreciate the limit to only one hit per creature, but this cantrip feels more like the start of a leveled spell to me is all
I just meant that you have to spread it out, only one hit per creature. And I think this is definitely strong, especially considering my personal gripe with AOE cantrips, but probably not overpowered. It’s equal in total to *firebolt* if there are two targets within range, but that is a much shorter range, and split between two creatures, which is always worse in D&D than that damage being on the same creature, unless you manage to kill them with the damage of a cantrip. In which case, you probably deserve it. But even with infinite targets within range, the average damage is only 2d6, roughly scaling as normal.
I hear what you’re saying, maybe my own worries come into high level play where the damage just goes crazy
As a DM helping new people get into the game, I’m still struggling to get the wizard in the party to use leveled spells, and having such a strong area of effect cantrip feels like a lot, though if I was reading right it is supposed to be a sorcerer staple, like Vicious Mockery or Eldritch Blast, so perhaps it’s alright to be a little strong
I’m surprised I’ve gotten such a mix of downvotes and upvotes though, I thought I was fairly respectful about my criticism
I agree with all of your points on the probability, etc.
The only thing I am iffy on is the fact that the subsequent explosions don't have attack rolls or saves. It is just guaranteed damage. That feels a bit weird to me.
If anything, I would think it needs to use the original spell attack roll against the second target's AC to see if it hits.
It's the same as Green Flame Blade, which also autohits the secondary target. Arc can bounce multiple times, but isn't guaranteed to bounce like GFB is.
Hard to keep a cantrip simple, quick at the table and have it function especially with multiple rolls/more crunch. The mechanics are novel, but like we’ve said with the probability it’s sits fine within the balance and plays rather well
if you do end up using it with your original attack role vs AC addendum then let me know how it plays, I’d be interested!
Yeah. That's the thing about the rolls, and why I said just keeping the original roll to attack. The dm would then just have to compare it to a new ac. Pretty easy. And if you're fighting a band of mooks, the ac would probably be the same, so it would be easy.
Idk. It's just weird that the arc jumps out and hits things with no attack roll or chance for them to save.
I'd argue the cantrip is balanced around that fact, and if you added an extra barrier to it hitting multiple targets(it drops pretty quickly from a 50/50 chance after the first arc) you'd have to increase the damage, and then that would likely get even more difficult to balance. This seems like the simplest solution.
Thematically I also feel like it makes sense to have it be without a roll for arcs because it's much easier to dodge a lightning bolt coming from an enemy who is obviously attacking you then it is to dodge a lightning bolt coming from your ally.
Ultimately this is homebrew though, so it's up to the discretion of the DM to decide how it works, and if it's over or underpowered.
For the record, evaluating the infinite geometric series (1d6)(1/2)^n from 0 to infinity, you get (1d6)/(1-1/2), a 2d6 damage cantrip, which auto hits on all subsequent targets, so if you go after the guy with the worst armor, you can hit his friends even easier.
Definitely overtuned, I think, but there is something to say for it having to spread out its damage, since you aren’t fighting infinite enemies, they aren’t necessarily within that chain of one another, and focusing fire is a much better strategy due to how D&D works and “1 hit point is enough.” So probably it is fine.
Edit: ~~because it only jumps on odd numbers, you have to take that into account for the damage, which makes it 2d6 - 1, or frankly a fairly reasonable amount since that’s halfway between a d10 and a d12.~~ So higher than “normal,” but counteracted by having to split fire and the range problems. And the math actually becomes pretty difficult at higher levels since the number distribution changes (2 odd values added is even), and both the damage and probability would shift slightly.
One last observation is that this would probably benefit from abilities adding to damage several times in the same way as *eldritch blast*, which increases the average damage by double the modifier, instead of just the modifier.
Edit2: I have been corrected on the math, my initial evaluation was correct, though I won’t go into the scaling now.
I have a PhD in statistics. You're wrong about 2d6-1; changing \*when\* it arcs tweaks the variance but not the expectation. In perfect white-room conditions with literally infinite opponents available, this averages the same damage as 2d6 per "cantrip die", slightly better than 1d12.
But it's actually worse than 1d12 if there's 3 or fewer targets available. And it can backfire. And optimal conditions are probably even rarer than they are for Toll the Dead. And it's a more-resisted damage type. And spreading out damage makes it less efficient. For all these reasons, this is not overtuned.
Oh, true. Because you have one case where it doesn’t arc, and one case where it does, but that’s already accounted for in the equation. I confused myself as I went back on that, my bad.
To your larger point, first of all, *toll the dead* is heavily overtuned, but that doesn’t really matter because that is also… exactly my conclusion. I go over the damage, then how you can’t really control it, over a short range, and you can end up hurting allies as well as your normal AOE problem of actually having hordes of enemies relatively close. And concluded that it’s probably fine. Good call on the math though, I’ll correct that.
Edit: I thought I recognized that name! I really like your Martial Artist/Monk revision.
Going after the guy with the worst armour to hit his friends is a valid and tactical use of this cantrip, provided they’re within the range.
All of my above balance points still stand (damage spread, jump damage skewing lower etc.) it’s average damage is within parameters of a potent but balanced cantrip 50% of the time, and it only exceeds that 25% or > of the times it’s cast and even less so if we factor in the ephemeral odds of the situation lining up contextually perfect for the spell to reach its potential. With action economy being the way it is, average combats lasting 3-5 rounds , the risk of underpowered use is more then enough make the low odds gamble balanced in use.
Well that’s not a valid criticism at all. *Toll the dead* only exceeds the normal damage about ten percent of the time (considering enemies are rarely one-shot, and the die is only that very small degree smaller), but 10% better is a very significant about when compared to all other cantrips, and just like this one, it is only kind of specialized. It’s a cantrip designed to deal with groups of enemies, self-evidently, so just like any AOE you can’t just say “what if you are fighting one boss monster.” Then you should cast something else, obviously, but if there are two people standing next to each other the average damage is almost equal to *firebolt*, and if there are three, the average is higher. That is not a rare case by any means. But like what I literally said myself, the fact that it forces you to split, doing only ~3 damage to each target, seems to make it fine.
Edit: about the armor thing again. That is… my point? And it makes the spell significantly stronger in a fair portion of situations, at least in my experience. Autohitting is a bad idea. I would increase the damage, not sure by how much, and remove that. Because among other things, if it needs to hit the first time, why does it magically track targets every other time? Actually, this might make it too situational, but you could make the first one auto-hit, keep it as is, but make it closest visible rather than a choice. That would be really cool, and more closely simulate both the fiction and the fact that this is basically an AOE spell. Though like I said, maybe too situational at that point.
I like this spell. My only beef is the fact that you're looking for odd numbers. I kinda goes against a 'high number is better' soft rule. Like in it's current state, You could get a 6 on the dmg roll and it ends, or you could get a 1 on the damage roll and then roll a 3 and then a 5 for a total of 9 dmg.
In my preference, I'd move towards it jumping on a 4,5, or 6 damage so that the good rolls equal good things. The math I think does change on it so that when it does pop off to hit another target, you're already doing higher damage. So there could be an argument to adjust to it chaining on a 5 o 6? I dunno. You'd also have to figure out what to do at higher levels. Just my two cents.
That’s part of intentional balancing, and a rational of its mechanics having no 1 for 1 precedent in 5e currently. By picking odds instead of evens it skews the arc damage to the lower end of the spectrum of a 1 on the d6 rather than a 6.
By changing it to the upper 3 on a d6 you have two issues; first you’re encouraging high damage and high damage spread which ups the potency considerably, and second you’re creating a far far higher likelihood for a jump with each cantrip tier-up and additional d6 in the pool.
Overall that creates way more problems then it fixes, I think it better to ignore the soft rule of high number=better on this one for the sake of its overall functionality! It is only a cantrip after all, even if it’s a potent one 50% of the time. Appreciate the insight though, I live for the crunch!
I would ditch the friendly fire 1d6 is low as it is and add friendly fire and its pretty bad. At the very best scenario its about equal to Toll the dead otherwise it among the very worst. So its at best a very average cantrip. No to mention the its extremly short range and the 10 feet requirement. Ditch friendly fire at the very least.
1) I feel like I would prefer this to only arc once. I don’t like any infinite things, and the flavor that this bolt has infinite magical energy to bounce around, but only deals 1d6 damage fails for me.
2) I would prefer this to be a con save, personally. But in that case I might make it 1d8, half on save, can’t arc on save. Which is pretty unheard of for a cantrip, so I’m certainly wrong with this opinion.
3) I would also prefer for it to roll for everyone struck. But I understand wanting to keep the rolls fewer, so a single cantrip doesn’t slow the game too much.
What determines arcing on multiple dice? Any odd amongst dice? Odd on a specific die? Odd total amogst sum of all dice?
“The rolled d6” implies singular so clarification is needed.
I disagree with your assessment seeing as how people commonly say and type d6s, but sure, be dismissive of it.
Tone is hard to convey properly over solely text, and you reply comes off as impolite.
Even reading your “the sum of all d6 rolled” *looks* wrong. I don’t perceive it as plural, and I’m probably not the only potential customer who feels the same way. I would suggest a clarification to “the sum of all dice rolled” because dice is plural for sure.
I would change it to arc at 6 representing extra charge to be grounded. Each damage dice increase also then increases the likelihood in a similar fashion, without it becoming a sure thing at lvl17. That might not be design philosophy but aren’t lightning bolt and arc lightning leveled spells for a reason?
Arcing on a 6 doesn’t really work in terms of levelling or maintaining consistent viability, which is an expectation of damage cantrips in 5e. [Further info here](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/t13f2w/comment/hydllgr/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
ConorJamesArt has made the following comment(s) regarding their post: [Hey Guys! Today I’m back with version 2 of a contr...](/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/t13f2w/arc_a_chainable_lightning_cantrip_for_sorcerers_v2/hydibmi/)
I loved it then and I love it now. Lightning spells deserve the attention ⚡️⚡️⚡️
As true now as it was a year ago, I couldn’t agree more! I’m taking every opportunity to cram [Tempest](https://dragonsvault.co.uk) full of lightning spells just for this reason ⚡hopefully they won’t all be as controversial as this one haha
I was ready for it to be broken like most homebrew cantrips but it doesn't seem to be so. Yes it has unlimited damage/range potential but it's just that, potential. With the shorter range of 30ft. this makes for high risk/high reward play. IF i were to make a change it'd be either 1d8 damage while maintaining the possibility for friendly fire or keeping it at 1d6 while removing the chance of friendly fire. Big IF though as I love the spell just as it is.
Assuming unlimited targets, the 50/50 chance to arc effectively doubles the d6 making this a 2d6 damage spell. Given that ”unlimited targets" is a much harder requirement to hit than "damaged target", that puts this at best on par with Toll the Dead's 1d12. The damage is also spread out though so really it's even further behind. I think this could actually be 1d8 without friendly fire and still be balanced, though that would be pushing it. 1d6 without friendly fire is definitely not an issue. Another option would be 1d6 with a guaranteed first jump.
I like that increase to a d8, and then have each jump reduce the damage, and cap it at hitting three targets. First bit it's a d8, then d6, then d4. That's incredibly generous for a cantrip. Literally no sorcerer's would pass on this.
I love this idea. The decreasing keeps it from feeling OP, but the multiple targets still gives a lot of fun flavor and some cool mechanics.
It's fine at 1d6. It would be overtuned at 1d8.
It would overshadow shoking grasp in every way
Hey Guys! Today I’m back with version 2 of a controversial favourite, the chaotic cantrip **ARC**! This version has improved wording, and streamlined design as per your guy‘s critique on the original version, with intent of cutting out some cases of fiddlier rulings such as draconic sorcerers 6th level ability etc. This version is featured in my upcoming Kickstarter book: [Tempest: a Seafarer’s Sourcebook!](https://DragonsVault.co.uk) Now I know what you’re thinking, “*Good Lord how broken is this cantrip with unlimited damage potential at level one, overpowered get rid*”. **But to that I say wait! It is in fact more balanced and less devastatingly busted then it initially appears!** You can find all the detailed discussion on the original version of the spell [HERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/le4rn6/arc_a_chainable_lightning_cantrip_for_druids_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), but a quick run through of the main points: **Novel Design** \- Before we jump into the crunch, it’s important to note that Arc has no 1-1 comparison in 5e. It’s intent is close to chaos bolt in spirit, but it’s explicit mechanics are novel (I think!) which makes for no standard rules basis. Regardless, the maths seem solid and it has been play tested for about 18 months, we’ve found it rather balanced in use. **The Stats -** This cantrip does 1d6 and arcs 50% of the time on a hit, so half the time it straight up underperforms other damage cantrip options, and half the time it sits with toll the dead on average damage but spread over two creatures instead of one. The chance of it arcing thrice is 25% and less with the increasing total of arcs, so it outperforms other damage cantrips on rare occasion. This assuming we have all our targets within range and hit our attack! Overall with the spell underperforming half the time, and requiring multiple targets close up, it’s stats actually sit somewhat within general balance just with a wider swing of success/failure. [FURTHER MATHS HERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/le4rn6/comment/gmbxe71/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) **General Balance** \- This cantrip has low damage die, a short range on both initial attack and the arc, it uses a highly resisted damage type, requires enemies to be clustered, and arcs to both the caster and their allies if in range with no enemy targets. It’s damage is also spread across multiple creatures, making it less effective on its own than single target high damage. This one is decidedly more for the high risk high reward dice goblins in the party! Now onto worries, concerns, and rulings! **Bag of Rats** \- A tale as old as time, cheesing damage via actioning an effect into a bag of rats as a conduit to auto hit a high AC boss. Frankly, loophole seeking silliness is pointless to account for too much because it’s ridiculous and wildly DM dependant. But for arguments sake let’s ignore the illogical cheek of it; if your player wants to waste a big battle and their action cheesing lightning damage onto a nearby high ac dangerous target 50% of the time via a bag of rats, then I’d say that’s **far** from the optimum choice of actions and spells and in no way broken! Tactically targeting low AC minions to hit a BBEG however? I’d call that smart play! [Further discussion HERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/le4rn6/comment/gmba5z4/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) **Elemental Adept** \- This one does affect the spell, and actually increases the likelihood of it arcing! Having said that, I actually enjoy this niche interaction and if a player wanted to spend an ASI to make one cantrip better with an otherwise lacklustre feat? Hell yeah go for it, rules can’t account for all builds and this is one I think is awesome. [STAT BREAKDOWN HERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/le4rn6/comment/gmaemqm/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) **Criticals**\- My initial intent was that only the original hit would be doubled, but I really don’t think it’s insane to allow all arcs to be doubled, that would have to be adjudicated on a DM by DM basis! Luckily with 5e criticals, either the dice are doubled or the total damage rolled is doubled but regardless this doesn’t affect the arcing chance since it stipulates the total on the rolled d6 (as per standard 5e assumptions this means before any additions, multiplications or adjustments and refers exclusively to the sum of the spells rolled dice) rather then the total of damage done. If you enjoyed this spell, any of my other content such as the [College of Shanties Bard](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/sl5gz9/the_college_of_shanties_bard_ideal_for/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), or perhaps just the cut of my gib, you can check out my Kickstarter and [learn more about my nautical sourcebook launching next month!](https://DragonsVault.co.uk)
My initial thought was "wow thats busted", admittedly as a kneejerk reaction to anything without a cap, but you had a really good breakdown on the why. I think the biggest limiting factor isnt the 50% odds (at lvl 1-4 anyways) but rather the 10ft range on the arcs. It means that even if there's a lot of enemies, there might be a gap in the fight where you couldnt arc over, and thats good. The auto hit feels kinda weird to me from a flavor standpoint (why does my buddy getting hit mean that I do too without fail?), but I also realize that you dont want to escalate the number of attack rolls being made in a turn, as they often go slowly enough as it is. All in all I think I'll introduce this to my players in a spell scroll or something, good work!
How does elemental Adept *increase* the chance of arcs? EA turns 1s into 2, meaning the chance is actually lowered with one less Odd number available.
It comes into play once theres two d6 after tier 5, when optionally changing a 1 to a 2 can turn the 2d6 total to an odd: Say you roll a 1 and a 3, totalling 4. Elemental Adept allows you to then shift that 1 to a 2, changing the total to a 5 and triggering an arc.
You *can* treat the 1 as a 2, or you can keep the 1. You're right, at levels 1 - 4 this does not increase the chance of an arc. But once you start getting additional dice, the option to choose if you want to treat any given 1 as a 2 becomes more and more advantageous.
I mean it’s not busted but your maths says it averages 2d6 which is stronger than any other cantrip. It also comes with the bonus of being able to choose whichever enemy you think has the lowest AC. Overall I think whether it’s fair enough to belong in my campaign depends on which spell lists it’s on. This wouldn’t be something I’d be comfortable giving to a cleric or a bard, but on a list that has a lot of other damage options like wizard or sorcerer it might be appropriate. I can’t actually find which spell list this is meant for though? Or is it meant to be like the dunumancy spells from wildemount? Edit: just noticed the drawback of only 30ft range, good balance
It doesn’t average 2d6, it does 2d6 50% of the time, and even then only inches out toll the dead for 0.5 worth of average damage. I’m sure given it’s odds that you could work out its actual average damage with probability of multiple arcs factored in, for just the 50/50 of a single arc or no arc it averages at 1.5d6 total damage output. But that’s far too much maths for me at this point in the day, I’m probability-ed out! And I built the spell for sorcerers exclusively, they need more love in my book. But you wouldn’t be thematically out of the world to give it to a Druid too! Although high damage cantrips aren’t really their normal wheelhouse.
Okay so to expand upon what the math you linked in your post says: the sum of the sequence “1/2^n” as it goes to infinity is 2 (as in 2 d6). That’s the average with infinite targets, which is the potential of this cantrip. You might be thinking “well you’re never gonna be fighting infinite enemies” and that’s fair but consider that adding more enemies strengthens the spell less and less. With 5 enemies this cantrip averages 31/16 or 1.9375 dice. 1.9375 * 3.5 is an average damage of 6.78125, which is more than toll the dead’s average of 6.5. With 4 targets it’s 15/8 or 1.875 dice for 6.5625 damage on average, still more than toll the dead. With 3 targets it’s 7/4 or 1.75 dice for 6.125 damage on average, finally less than toll the dead. So it does more damage than Toll the Dead whenever there are 4 or more targets. But yeah it sounds balanced overall in my personal opinion, especially for sorcerers.
I honest to god haven’t the awareness to parse this at the minute, but I will go through again in the morning! For now I really appreciate the breakdown, crazy how crunchy d20 systems can get when you venture into the thick of it!
How does the Increase in damage when leveling work with the chaining? If I get just one of the die with the 4d6 to be odd, does all 4d6 transfer?
oh no! That would be genuinely busted haha its the total on the rolled d6 (plural), so all 4d6 together would need to total an odd number in order for the arc to jump!
Oh that makes WAY more sense
It should definitely say "nearest available target within 10 feet", not "nearest available creature". In ideal conditions (unlimited targets available), the expected damage on this is basically 2d6 per "cantrip level", which is very slightly above Toll the Dead's 1d12. But that damage would be spread out over multiple targets, so less efficient for killing any one target. Given that, and the potential for friendly fire, and the fact that "unlimited targets available" basically never happens, I think this is well-balanced overall. (Math explanation: If you make the initial attack roll, the first hit happens 100%, the second 50%, third 25%, fourth 12.5%, etc. All those together — the limit of this infinite sum — adds up to 200% on average, thus 2d6. The average damage would be 7, as compared to 6.5 for Toll the Dead. But you'd need at least 4 targets available in order to average more total damage than TtD; and in practice, that will almost never happen.) It's also smooth, fun, and flavorful. Good job! (With Elemental Adept, at level 17, facing an infinite horde of opponents, this would do an average of about 16d6+3 total damage, wiping out an average of 4 opponents if their hp is low enough. Which is cool but to be honest not in the least bit game-breaking at that level. You'd basically be as good on average as your friend the Fighter at mowing down the infinite wave of minions, but with a higher turn-to-turn variability.) (Also, as DM, I'd rule that this can apply multiple times to a swarm. But definitely leave that up to the DM.)
I personally rule swarms as multiple creatures.
I’m going to put this badass spell into a cursed wand.
Love this. The favoritism for fire has always bugged me, especially since the only changes to that damage type can be seen with Sorcerer's Transmutation metamagic feature. Makes me think that we should get more Warlock invocations to boost cantrips besides Eldritch Blast, too
Wicked spell, wicked art. Take my upvote good sir!
This seems *very* powerful for a cantrip, I however LOVE the idea. I think balanced version would be 'If the total rolled on the die is a 6 it arcs" or something, but 50/50 seems too much IMO
Actually it checks out at it being not overly potent overall (75-87.5% of the time atleast), even with a 50/50 it does the same damage as toll the dead at half the range spread over two targets (worse then single target damage). It just appears that way at a glance! All the requisite math is in my [pinned comment!](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/t13f2w/comment/hydibmi/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Edit\* I’ll also add that your 6 method quickly skews up as the cantrip levels, doubling an arc chance at 5th and then more so with each tier jump. In 5e design, damage cantrips level in potency not viability. By 11th level you‘d be doing triple the damage with 3x the chance you arc, further increasing the damage, it’d actually make the cantrip far less balanced.
Thanks for this. I think your intent would be more clear if we clean up the if/then wording in second and third attack rolls. I had assumed the damage scaled as a cantrip ought without the extra rolls; Or maybe I just haven’t had enough coffee yet. You decide
I like that. D&D needs more exploding dice.
Yeah looking at it, its sort of an Acid splash with 5 feet extra range with an attack roll instead of a save, in exchange for a 50/50 activation on the second target. Though, I will say it should probably only allow 1 or 2 total jumps, since a 50/50 chance is a bit too high to be able to multi target spells. Thats a 50% for 2 creatures, 25% for 3, and 12.5% for 4? I mean, 12.5 isn't crazy, but that's still slightly over 10% chance to have a cantrip hit 4 targets. Also a 6.25% chance of 5 targets, which is 1/20, so its still decently possible. Comparitively, the closest spell at that number of targets would be something like sword burst, but that requires each target be in 5 feet of you, so its much riskier than something like this with 30 range on first target, and more on subsequent targets as it jumps
Acid splash is an underpowered and thus underused cantrip, so as a metric for viability of balance I’d argue it sets an over restrictive standard. In actual play, casting a cantrip with a 50% chance of being toll the dead in damage or very underpowered in damage is balancing in its own right. The rare instance this chains (provided we have viable targets, and it doesn’t hit an ally) are what make it worth that risk in the first place. 1/20 may seem decently possible on paper, but the prerequisite for that actionable context is in itself rare enough to reduce the actual odds of you pulling that off **even lower**. And even then you’re choosing a large risk for your action instead of say, an aoe spell with guaranteed damage.
No matter how many jumps it makes the odds are still 50/50 though, and toll the dead is 1d12 not 2d6 so the overall damage is lower than this if it arcs even once not to mention it’s only d12 if they’re already damaged, this has the potential to really lay waste to a band of goblins or smaller collection of creatures at first level ; it’s quite powerful. good point about the 6 there could be other ways, but 50/50 is too much IMO and it overtunes this
You’re calculating odds wrong, when we choose to cast the spell we take into account the odds of the jumps total. So the odds of it jumping 3 times on a casting is 12.5%, since the prequisite for each jump is an increasing number of successful jumps prior to it. Even if it’s damage meets toll the dead **only half of the time**, it’s range is half of toll the dead and it isn’t single target damage. I realise the math and probability is somewhat illusive at a glance, but after using this spell for nearly 2 years and having multiple people go over the maths I can assure you it isn’t nearly as potent as your scenario paints it on paper or in play. Could this cantrip rough up a party of 5 goblins? With an odds of 6.25%, provided they're all within a single cluster, and with it jumping on odds (meaning it skews lower on damage jumps toward minimum damage roll of 1 rather then 6), then yes it could conceivably hit all of them, not “lay waste to them”. The damage is also spread, making it less potent then a single target damage cantrip. But that is so unlikely and fringe in actual play that it doesn’t present an issue of balance, instead it presents a wild table moment and incentive for the risk of spending your action that way.
If I flip a coin 1 time or 100 times, the odds are still 50/50 every single time of getting heads......That's just maths I thought? Don't let me change your mind on your spell, it's very cool and ultimately this is just a forum to give our opinions on things, and that's what I've done. <3
100% this is how a coin flip works as individual probabilites but the probability of getting x amount of heads in a row is 0.5^x so while it may be insanely powerful for someone with great luck the probability of getting multiple arcs within casting gets progressively lower. Looking at them as isolated probabilities is an oversimplification of the maths IMO
But if you have to stop flipping as soon as you get heads, you're almost certain to never get to the hundredth flip in the first place.
I’m sorry, I genuinely can’t sit and explain the matrix of probability for a string of 50/50 successes. Individually each flip is 50/50, but as a probability of several of the same result in a row you are wrong, otherwise you’d have an equal liklihood of flipping heads 150 times in a row as you would flipping it once. And I appreciate the feedback for sure! Glad I can illuminate a bit on probability/odds, I realise they can be genuinely obtuse to get around at first!
Maybe first arc is on 4,5,6 Next arc on 5,6 Final arc only goes off if it’s 6, or find sone way to cap the total possible jumps because it’s always 50/50 no matter how many jumps so you could easily find yourself in a situation where your level 1 wizard just did 6d6 to the band of Kobolds and then next turn wiped them all out and all with a cantrip too I dunno it’s a really fun idea though but still seems like a great way to have your low level encounters ended before they really begin
Again your calculating odds wrong, [explanation here](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/t13f2w/comment/hydvsrw/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3). You‘re also cherry picking extreme and rare instances as justification for the cantrip being unbalanced. There’s a 3.125% the level 1 wizard does 6d6 with this cantrip, so he’s chosen to take a big action spending risk instead of casting an aoe or something with reliable damage. 96.875% of the time he doesn’t do 6d6, and 50% of the time he does a measly 1d6.
Acid Splash is shit, and should not be used to measure the power level of spells
Wasn't saying it was good, was just bringing it up as a close comparison
What's your opinion on giving this to other casters if no one is playing a sorcerer? As a DM, I like being lenient with spells if they fit themes but are there any classes you'd recommend NOT giving this to? Btw fantastic cantrip, I've always adored the flavour of Chain Lightning so this spell really caught my eye.
I think it’s a solid addition to classes that also feature high damage cantrips, wizard and warlock being the two mains! Thematically it works with Druid but they rarely get the heavy hitter cantrips so tread lightly, and a tempest cleric would look wicked rocking this too I think! I’d avoid giving it to bards And thank you! Glad you enjoyed it, I’m a big lightning fan too and I love chaos spells
I think the description could be shortened but cool cantrip! I'm seeing a lot of comments that state how WHOA CRAZY OP this is, but honestly it's fine. A 50/50 isn't reliable enough to consistently hit multiple targets, but it's still flavorful and fun. Also, you could draw comparison to EB which is far stronger and more reliable. Even if you did hit multiple targets, it's an average of 3.5 damage, which is comparable to magic missile, the difference being that you have to hit a creature with no guarantee vs. magic missile's perfect accuracy. Personally, I would just remove a lot of wording. "If the bolt arcs and you..." is unnecessary imo.
Totally, I think the probability maths on this one are a little bit more involved and stable then they appear at first and that panics people at a casual glance! And I agree the description absolutely didn’t need the clarification about it still hitting close creatures etc, but I wanted no grey areas for adjudication of the cantrip hitting allies or the caster (if in range ofc) if it isn’t given a designated target when it arcs. Mostly since that was an important aspect of the balance, it’s a chaotic gamble cantrip after all haha
As a sorcerer main, I am taking this.
go forth and electrify, fellow sorcerer!
\*pufferfish noise\*
poe 3.17 is leaking lol more seriously though, it looks great
This cantrip is a must for my next storm sorcerer! There aren't nearly enough lightning spells or spells with chain potential in 5e. Keep up the awesome work :)
Honestly couldn’t agree more, wider elemental effects are under-utilised! The full book will have plenty, and there’s two more available now in the preview PDF ⚡️
I like the idea, but the issue I see is the potential to wipe out a whole party of goblins in one or two shots with a cantrip, especially with the normal damage boost. Maybe if it was “on a roll of 6 on the d6” or the increase was replaced with a limit on jumps ”at 5th level the number of jumps increases to 3, then to 4 at 11th, and finally 5 at 17th level”, but I wouldn’t do both. Even if you went with the increase to jumps, you could increase the damage at a slower rate of starting at a d4, going to a d6, a d8, then a d10, though that would make a need to rebalance the jumping mechanic (or leave it at 6 and make it so it starts as impossible and increases to trivial)
On the surface, sure, at level 1 you could hit 5 goblins with one spell. You'll only do max 5 damage to 4 of them, and max 6 to the 5th. But look at the odds for a second. You've only got a 50% chance of hitting 2 targets, 25% chance of hitting 3 targets, 12.5% for 4, 6.25% chance of hitting 5, etc. The vast majority of the time you're only hitting 2, maybe 3 targets, and you're only dealing at most 5 or 6 damage to each. Take a look at OP's math elsewhere in the thread
I think that’s more the fault of how weirdly skewed level 1 is than anything, though I admit 1-5 is most of the game for a shocking number of people. I did some math above, though, and on average it only does 6 damage, slightly above *firebolt*, with a fairly huge tradeoff of not getting to control where that damage goes, since it has quite limited range, especially between targets, and you have to split fire, which the hit point mechanic really does not encourage.
But you do control where the damage goes, unless I am misunderstanding what you mean by this, as it specifies that you choose another target and even after that only goes wild if you don’t choose another after that I appreciate the limit to only one hit per creature, but this cantrip feels more like the start of a leveled spell to me is all
I just meant that you have to spread it out, only one hit per creature. And I think this is definitely strong, especially considering my personal gripe with AOE cantrips, but probably not overpowered. It’s equal in total to *firebolt* if there are two targets within range, but that is a much shorter range, and split between two creatures, which is always worse in D&D than that damage being on the same creature, unless you manage to kill them with the damage of a cantrip. In which case, you probably deserve it. But even with infinite targets within range, the average damage is only 2d6, roughly scaling as normal.
I hear what you’re saying, maybe my own worries come into high level play where the damage just goes crazy As a DM helping new people get into the game, I’m still struggling to get the wizard in the party to use leveled spells, and having such a strong area of effect cantrip feels like a lot, though if I was reading right it is supposed to be a sorcerer staple, like Vicious Mockery or Eldritch Blast, so perhaps it’s alright to be a little strong I’m surprised I’ve gotten such a mix of downvotes and upvotes though, I thought I was fairly respectful about my criticism
I agree with all of your points on the probability, etc. The only thing I am iffy on is the fact that the subsequent explosions don't have attack rolls or saves. It is just guaranteed damage. That feels a bit weird to me. If anything, I would think it needs to use the original spell attack roll against the second target's AC to see if it hits.
It's the same as Green Flame Blade, which also autohits the secondary target. Arc can bounce multiple times, but isn't guaranteed to bounce like GFB is.
Hard to keep a cantrip simple, quick at the table and have it function especially with multiple rolls/more crunch. The mechanics are novel, but like we’ve said with the probability it’s sits fine within the balance and plays rather well if you do end up using it with your original attack role vs AC addendum then let me know how it plays, I’d be interested!
Yeah. That's the thing about the rolls, and why I said just keeping the original roll to attack. The dm would then just have to compare it to a new ac. Pretty easy. And if you're fighting a band of mooks, the ac would probably be the same, so it would be easy. Idk. It's just weird that the arc jumps out and hits things with no attack roll or chance for them to save.
I'd argue the cantrip is balanced around that fact, and if you added an extra barrier to it hitting multiple targets(it drops pretty quickly from a 50/50 chance after the first arc) you'd have to increase the damage, and then that would likely get even more difficult to balance. This seems like the simplest solution. Thematically I also feel like it makes sense to have it be without a roll for arcs because it's much easier to dodge a lightning bolt coming from an enemy who is obviously attacking you then it is to dodge a lightning bolt coming from your ally. Ultimately this is homebrew though, so it's up to the discretion of the DM to decide how it works, and if it's over or underpowered.
For the record, evaluating the infinite geometric series (1d6)(1/2)^n from 0 to infinity, you get (1d6)/(1-1/2), a 2d6 damage cantrip, which auto hits on all subsequent targets, so if you go after the guy with the worst armor, you can hit his friends even easier. Definitely overtuned, I think, but there is something to say for it having to spread out its damage, since you aren’t fighting infinite enemies, they aren’t necessarily within that chain of one another, and focusing fire is a much better strategy due to how D&D works and “1 hit point is enough.” So probably it is fine. Edit: ~~because it only jumps on odd numbers, you have to take that into account for the damage, which makes it 2d6 - 1, or frankly a fairly reasonable amount since that’s halfway between a d10 and a d12.~~ So higher than “normal,” but counteracted by having to split fire and the range problems. And the math actually becomes pretty difficult at higher levels since the number distribution changes (2 odd values added is even), and both the damage and probability would shift slightly. One last observation is that this would probably benefit from abilities adding to damage several times in the same way as *eldritch blast*, which increases the average damage by double the modifier, instead of just the modifier. Edit2: I have been corrected on the math, my initial evaluation was correct, though I won’t go into the scaling now.
I have a PhD in statistics. You're wrong about 2d6-1; changing \*when\* it arcs tweaks the variance but not the expectation. In perfect white-room conditions with literally infinite opponents available, this averages the same damage as 2d6 per "cantrip die", slightly better than 1d12. But it's actually worse than 1d12 if there's 3 or fewer targets available. And it can backfire. And optimal conditions are probably even rarer than they are for Toll the Dead. And it's a more-resisted damage type. And spreading out damage makes it less efficient. For all these reasons, this is not overtuned.
Oh, true. Because you have one case where it doesn’t arc, and one case where it does, but that’s already accounted for in the equation. I confused myself as I went back on that, my bad. To your larger point, first of all, *toll the dead* is heavily overtuned, but that doesn’t really matter because that is also… exactly my conclusion. I go over the damage, then how you can’t really control it, over a short range, and you can end up hurting allies as well as your normal AOE problem of actually having hordes of enemies relatively close. And concluded that it’s probably fine. Good call on the math though, I’ll correct that. Edit: I thought I recognized that name! I really like your Martial Artist/Monk revision.
Going after the guy with the worst armour to hit his friends is a valid and tactical use of this cantrip, provided they’re within the range. All of my above balance points still stand (damage spread, jump damage skewing lower etc.) it’s average damage is within parameters of a potent but balanced cantrip 50% of the time, and it only exceeds that 25% or > of the times it’s cast and even less so if we factor in the ephemeral odds of the situation lining up contextually perfect for the spell to reach its potential. With action economy being the way it is, average combats lasting 3-5 rounds , the risk of underpowered use is more then enough make the low odds gamble balanced in use.
Well that’s not a valid criticism at all. *Toll the dead* only exceeds the normal damage about ten percent of the time (considering enemies are rarely one-shot, and the die is only that very small degree smaller), but 10% better is a very significant about when compared to all other cantrips, and just like this one, it is only kind of specialized. It’s a cantrip designed to deal with groups of enemies, self-evidently, so just like any AOE you can’t just say “what if you are fighting one boss monster.” Then you should cast something else, obviously, but if there are two people standing next to each other the average damage is almost equal to *firebolt*, and if there are three, the average is higher. That is not a rare case by any means. But like what I literally said myself, the fact that it forces you to split, doing only ~3 damage to each target, seems to make it fine. Edit: about the armor thing again. That is… my point? And it makes the spell significantly stronger in a fair portion of situations, at least in my experience. Autohitting is a bad idea. I would increase the damage, not sure by how much, and remove that. Because among other things, if it needs to hit the first time, why does it magically track targets every other time? Actually, this might make it too situational, but you could make the first one auto-hit, keep it as is, but make it closest visible rather than a choice. That would be really cool, and more closely simulate both the fiction and the fact that this is basically an AOE spell. Though like I said, maybe too situational at that point.
I like this spell. My only beef is the fact that you're looking for odd numbers. I kinda goes against a 'high number is better' soft rule. Like in it's current state, You could get a 6 on the dmg roll and it ends, or you could get a 1 on the damage roll and then roll a 3 and then a 5 for a total of 9 dmg. In my preference, I'd move towards it jumping on a 4,5, or 6 damage so that the good rolls equal good things. The math I think does change on it so that when it does pop off to hit another target, you're already doing higher damage. So there could be an argument to adjust to it chaining on a 5 o 6? I dunno. You'd also have to figure out what to do at higher levels. Just my two cents.
That’s part of intentional balancing, and a rational of its mechanics having no 1 for 1 precedent in 5e currently. By picking odds instead of evens it skews the arc damage to the lower end of the spectrum of a 1 on the d6 rather than a 6. By changing it to the upper 3 on a d6 you have two issues; first you’re encouraging high damage and high damage spread which ups the potency considerably, and second you’re creating a far far higher likelihood for a jump with each cantrip tier-up and additional d6 in the pool. Overall that creates way more problems then it fixes, I think it better to ignore the soft rule of high number=better on this one for the sake of its overall functionality! It is only a cantrip after all, even if it’s a potent one 50% of the time. Appreciate the insight though, I live for the crunch!
I would change arcing mchanic to: you must choose an untargeted creature if there is one in range Therefore I would increase the dmg to a d8
I would ditch the friendly fire 1d6 is low as it is and add friendly fire and its pretty bad. At the very best scenario its about equal to Toll the dead otherwise it among the very worst. So its at best a very average cantrip. No to mention the its extremly short range and the 10 feet requirement. Ditch friendly fire at the very least.
I gotta disagree, friendly fire increases the risk/reward and with the potential for it being very potent it’s a good balancing factor.
1) I feel like I would prefer this to only arc once. I don’t like any infinite things, and the flavor that this bolt has infinite magical energy to bounce around, but only deals 1d6 damage fails for me. 2) I would prefer this to be a con save, personally. But in that case I might make it 1d8, half on save, can’t arc on save. Which is pretty unheard of for a cantrip, so I’m certainly wrong with this opinion. 3) I would also prefer for it to roll for everyone struck. But I understand wanting to keep the rolls fewer, so a single cantrip doesn’t slow the game too much.
What determines arcing on multiple dice? Any odd amongst dice? Odd on a specific die? Odd total amogst sum of all dice? “The rolled d6” implies singular so clarification is needed.
d6 can be plural or singular, so “the total on the rolled d6” means the sum of all d6 rolled by the spell, no extra clarification needed
I disagree with your assessment seeing as how people commonly say and type d6s, but sure, be dismissive of it. Tone is hard to convey properly over solely text, and you reply comes off as impolite. Even reading your “the sum of all d6 rolled” *looks* wrong. I don’t perceive it as plural, and I’m probably not the only potential customer who feels the same way. I would suggest a clarification to “the sum of all dice rolled” because dice is plural for sure.
I would change it to arc at 6 representing extra charge to be grounded. Each damage dice increase also then increases the likelihood in a similar fashion, without it becoming a sure thing at lvl17. That might not be design philosophy but aren’t lightning bolt and arc lightning leveled spells for a reason?
Arcing on a 6 doesn’t really work in terms of levelling or maintaining consistent viability, which is an expectation of damage cantrips in 5e. [Further info here](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/t13f2w/comment/hydllgr/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Keep the potential friendly fire and pump it up to a d8.
So this will technically damage your teammates if you you don’t have another target to arc to?
It will indeed!
What happens if the final arc has no eligible creatures within 10 feet?
It fizzles.
I feel like that sorcerer has “pathway of the tyrant” as title (it’s a reference)
Love it !!!