Cantrips and At-Will Arcane Attacks History?

[Asmotherion]

I am trying to make a list of how at-will magic (and preferably attacks) has been handled in different/older systems.

So far, my understanting is limited to:

5e: Cantrips are At-Will, Some classes give At-will spells as well
4e: Spells were divided by their frequency, many spells were at-will
3.5e: Reserve Feats allowed the ability to do some magic at-will, Pact Magic (The Warlock and Dragonfire Adept) was at-will.
Pathfinder: Cantrips are At-Will. I don't know anything else.
Classless: Racial Abilities are At-Will; Some feats can give at-will usage of some spells.

I'd like feedback on other systems or if I miss anything on the systems I am familiar with. Thank you in advance.

[Thrudd]

In terms of D&D, that's it. Pathfinder was the first time all cantrips (level 0 spells) were officially and universally "at-will". 1e AD&D introduced the term "cantrip" to the game in Unearthed Arcana (all optional rules), they were level 0 spells with minor effects of which a magic user can cast a set number per studying session, just like all other spells. In 2e AD&D, I believe "cantrip" was actually a single 1st level spell that let you produce a range of minor effects, sort of combining several of the 1e cantrips into one. None of these were useful for attacking in any meaningful way.

Pre 4e, at-will magical attacks were limited to magic items like wands, rods and staves (and even those had a limited number of charges). Magic-users used their weapons when they ran out of spells. They could throw darts or daggers if they wanted a ranged attack. Pre 3e, there were actually rather few actual offensive, damage-dealing spells, and there was no guarantee of even being able to learn all or any of them.

[Khedrac]

In addition to Thrudd's excellent summary (I had forgotten the 2nd Ed spell) let me add a few:

3.5 D&D introduced classes like the warlock with at-will magic attacks.

For 1st Ed AD&D Dragon Magazine (& Imagine) included articles for pre-1st level wizards with them getting from 1 to 3 cantrips per day (a single 1st level spell slot could be used to memorise 4 cantrips for 1st and higher level wizards).

RuneQuest and most systems that use the Basic RolePlaying system don't have any at-will player character magic effects that I am aware of.
The same goes for RoleMaster/MERP.

[Pilo]

In 3.0 Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting and Tome and Blood: A Guidebook to Wizards and Sorcerers, there was a feat called Innate Spell, that allows you to choose a spell, which you can cast once per round as a spell like ability. It was errated in 3.5 to 3 times a day.

[LibraryOgre]

A lot depends on how you're using the term "At Will" (does it mean "as many times per day as there are rounds, in theory" or "without any components"), but Spells and Magic, the 2e supplement, included the capability for at-will magics, as priestly granted powers.

[JeenLeen]

In many non-D&D-based games, most 'magic' powers are at-will. Some might or might have a cost applied to them, but if you can refill your <whatever> pool, you can keep using them. And even in systems with costs, some weaker spells might have no cost at all and thus be more like cantrips.
For example, in Exalted and most World of Darkness games, most powers use a standard resource for whatever supernatural you are + possibly some Willpower (most cost no Willpower). In Mage, spells cost nothing but you risk a detriment (Paradox) due to setting elements.

In Mutants & Masterminds (which is d20, but differs a lot from D&D even if some similarities remain), powers are defaulted as at-will. You can decrease the cost to purchase the power for your character by putting some limitations on it, including usage rates.

[LibraryOgre]

Of course, Turn Undead might be interpreted as an at-will ability, as well.

[Duff]

Of course, Turn Undead might be interpreted as an at-will ability, as well.

Wasn't turn undead also limited to x/day in earlier editions?

[Duff]

Are you only looking at D&D versions/spinoffs or other games as well.
If it's the second, you may want to be a bit more specific in your question.

[thorr-kan]

Wasn't turn undead also limited to x/day in earlier editions?

Nope. Turn at will.

[JadedDM]

Wasn't turn undead also limited to x/day in earlier editions?

In 2E, it was once per encounter.

[Tyrrell]

the model of cast a spell and then resist some sort of mental damage for casting it was pretty common by the late 80's. This allowed unlimited magical attacks providing your character cast a spell that he or she could easily make the resistance roll for.

Ars Magica in 1987 (where you rolled your applicable magical arts versus the spell level) and Shadowrun in 1989 (where you resisted the spell's "drain code") both spring to mind but I wouldn't be surprised to see many similar examples from the period.

[Draz74]

3.5e: Reserve Feats allowed the ability to do some magic at-will, Pact Magic (The Warlock and Dragonfire Adept) was at-will.

Nitpick: "Pact Magic" in 3e was a totally different system, used by the Binder. What the Warlock did wasn't considered "Pact Magic." The Warlock and the Dragonfire Adept together were "Invocation Magic" users.

Wasn't turn undead also limited to x/day in earlier editions?

Yeah, in 3e.

[LibraryOgre]

There was also a Dragon Magazine article, late in 2e, called "The Little Wish", that turned cantrips into a proficiency.

[FreddyNoNose]

Of course, Turn Undead might be interpreted as an at-will ability, as well.

In what edition do you believe that to be true?

[LibraryOgre]

In what edition do you believe that to be true?

In 1e, at least, you can keep turning undead until you fail or run out of undead.

[FreddyNoNose]

In 1e, at least, you can keep turning undead until you fail or run out of undead.

That doesn't address the question. It wasn't at will. It was an action: see DMG page 61.

[Khedrac]

That doesn't address the question. It wasn't at will. It was an action: see DMG page 61.

"At Will" means "without a limit" not "while doing other things". Pretty much all "at will" actions are "actions".

If you want something that can be done without using a significant portion of the options available to a character during a round the answer is "insult them" - to my knowledge no version of D&D has the ability to attack an apponent without using some form of action (and that includes "Free/Swift" actions in 3.0 & later as they are limited in number per round).

[MeeposFire]

"At Will" means "without a limit" not "while doing other things". Pretty much all "at will" actions are "actions".

If you want something that can be done without using a significant portion of the options available to a character during a round the answer is "insult them" - to my knowledge no version of D&D has the ability to attack an apponent without using some form of action (and that includes "Free/Swift" actions in 3.0 & later as they are limited in number per round).

There was ways to attack with no action in 4e but generally it was pulled using specialized abilities and more often other people granting you attacks. Pre errata you could do unlimited free action attacks per round but that did get changed to 1/turn after a bit.

[Khedrac]

Pre errata you could do unlimited free action attacks per round but that did get changed to 1/turn after a bit.

Not really - the only 3.0/core 3.5 "Free action" attack I am aware of is a quickened spell which had an explicit limit of 1/round (+1 per epic feat to increase the cap).
As for other "free actions" - they had a cap of "whatever the DM thought reasonable remembering the 6 second limit," so while talking was a free action, once could not recite War an Peace (arguably a sleep attack) in a round.

I would be interested to know of other "free action" attacks that predate "swift actions".

[LibraryOgre]

That doesn't address the question. It wasn't at will. It was an action: see DMG page 61.

Yes, but it was an at-will action. I see nothing that indicates that "At Will" powers in AD&D do not require actions.

[MeeposFire]

Not really - the only 3.0/core 3.5 "Free action" attack I am aware of is a quickened spell which had an explicit limit of 1/round (+1 per epic feat to increase the cap).
As for other "free actions" - they had a cap of "whatever the DM thought reasonable remembering the 6 second limit," so while talking was a free action, once could not recite War an Peace (arguably a sleep attack) in a round.

I would be interested to know of other "free action" attacks that predate "swift actions".

I think you should check my statement again I said 4e not 3e.

There are some interesting things in ToB for attacks but none of them are at will rather more encounter abilities. Also not magic so not really the point here.

[Khedrac]

I think you should check my statement again I said 4e not 3e.

There are some interesting things in ToB for attacks but none of them are at will rather more encounter abilities. Also not magic so not really the point here.

I misunderstood - thank-you for the clarification.

[Drascin]

I think you should check my statement again I said 4e not 3e.

There are some interesting things in ToB for attacks but none of them are at will rather more encounter abilities. Also not magic so not really the point here.

The Warblade maneuvers depend on if you consider a crossbow to be "at will". You can use them whenever but you need to "reload" .

[Kurald Galain]

Pathfinder: Cantrips are At-Will. I don't know anything else.

Notably, Pathfinder also has "hexes" which are curse-like abilities used by witches and shamen, and which can be used at will. They're comparable to 3E's warlock invocations.