D&D 5E Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E

[Ashrym]

That we're over a thousand posts in, and still ask the same question asked by the OP?

The OP complaint seems based on damage, not the class overall.

Burning hands does more damage from levels 1-3, similar damage at level 4, and less damage at level 5. Similarly, 3 scorching rays at 2d6 each is more than 1 at 4d6. 5e damage spells come online higher than earlier editions. Monsters do have more hit points but the spells initially also do more damage, and higher hit point monsters impacts all classes.

The real concern seemed to stem from damage relative to other classes (per the rogue comment) . Damage isn't a wizard's strong suit and it's a good thing they have damage options instead of damage superiority simply by selecting damage spells.

I don't find that wizards suck in 5e. I do find that they have been reined in. A lot.

 

[Eis]

It's a sad tale of someone who doesn't know how to play a wizard.

surely it has to go beyond that....if you literally are going to cast zero spells you could play a common non classed character.....I want to know if he is wading into melee with a staff or shooting a bow or what....they said he went like 9 levels didn't he?

what made him choose wizard I wonder

 

[CapnZapp]

Do you know what a rhetorical question is?

It's like the old chestnut "Have you stopped beating your wife?" - I'm screwed no matter how I answer!

 

[Gadget]

I'm not seeing how low level wizards are particularly weak, but I do acknowledge that damage is not really what they are about.

The problem is that there are so many spells that are pure damage, it can give one the wrong impression to those with less system mastery. Couple that with less spell slots, especially higher level spell slots, and more monster hit points and I can see how some would find it a frustration. Yes, the martials may be the rightful kings of damage, but they can do so all day, while you just blew you're one 5th level spell slot on immolation or Negative Energy Flood, to less than stellar results.

 

[Stalker0]

while you just blew you're one 5th level spell slot on immolation or Negative Energy Flood, to less than stellar results.

Whoa there....that's an issue with those spells being utterly garbage, not the class! Even a fireball in a 5th level slot will do more bang for the buck.

 

[Gadget]

Whoa there....that's an issue with those spells being utterly garbage, not the class! Even a fireball in a 5th level slot will do more bang for the buck.

Well, the spells make the wizard. My point is that there are far too many spells that fit this category, and they tend to be damage spells, sometimes with additional, minor benefits. Really, most damage spells tend to fall into this category, particularly at higher levels. Sure Fireball and lightning bolt are 'overclocked' and decent, but it does take a bit of system mastery to realize that avoiding damage spells for the most part might be the way to go. WOTC bears responsibility for putting out so many crappy damage spells to choose from.

Look at all the Necromancy spells that do crappy damage and nothing else; or in the unlikely event you kill the target, you get a free, uncontrolled zombie; or, the target is burned to ash if they reach zero HP. I get the feeling that WOTC thinks these largely inconsequential 'ribbons' are what makes these spells worthwhile; or worse yet, WOTC subcribes to the notion I've heard mentioned more and more online lately: the "DM spell." Being burned to ash when you reach zero HP carries more bite when used against a PC. Lesser damage is not as big a problem when applied to the generally lesser HP of PCs in the Bounded Accuracy paradigm. It just creates a system mastery puzzle for PC spell casters to overcome that I don't think was an intentional part of the original design of the system; or at least shouldn't have been, IMHO.

*EDIT* So I can see how a potential player can be frustrated when playing a wizard, depending on the campaign style, DM, and system mastery involved.

 

[KarinsDad]

That is not entirely true. Lets analyse a real example.

Last night i played one wizard in a group of 4 players level 3 (Wizard, Paladin, Rogue, Cleric). We had 3 encounters.

On the first one we faced 2 bugbears, that one was very easy. I have scouted the room with my spider familiar and we know what we are facing. The rogue and myself used stealth to get a surprise round and both gained initiative. The rogue did 3d6+3 and i 1d8+3, on second round the rogue hit the bugbear and killed him, on my turn i casted a Tashas Laugh on the second and the combat was over before even began.

The second fight we crossed paths with a group of scouts, was a Dragonborn Spy (MM349 with breath attack) and 4 scouts (MM349), again i scouted the room with my spider. The rogue failed his stealth check was notice but we are aout of sight of the room around a corner. The paladin moved to close the corridor (still of sight), the dragonborn moved to him and managed to hit. The rogue attacked the dragonborn and also hited, my turn, i concentrated a shatter spell and prepared to release the spell behind the dragonborn at the end of the turn, the cleric also moved but missed the dragonborn, then all scouts moved to get view of the party, unaware of my spell. On the end of the turn i got lucky and rolled 21 damage, all scouts failed the save, i did 94 dmg in a single round. The next turn the party managed to kill the dragonborn.

And the third encounter was against another group of scouts, 6 scouts, 2 spy (no dragonborns this time). Again i scouted ahead with my spider and this time we managed to get surprise, included the paladin. This fight was a lot more hard, i casted my last shatter and one burning hands and we won without any downed character. The paladin and the cleric stoped the enemys using dodge and sanctuary, myself and the rogue attacked from distance.

That was a regular day of combats for that group, at the end:
1o Encounter
Paladin Dmg 5/ Cleric Dmg 0/ Rogue Dmg 26/ Wizard Dmg 6
2o Encounter
Paladin Dmg 15/ Cleric Dmg 0/ Rogue Dmg 10/ Wizard Dmg 94
3o Encounter
Paladin Dmg 23/ Cleric Dmg 3/ Rogue Dmg 42/ Wizard Dmg 82

I always calculate info from the games i play like damage per character, and several other things to help me analyse the game.

As can be seen, with a wizard i managed to be top DPR in two of three encounters and the one that i was not i completely disabled the only enemy alive.

In no way im saying that a wizard HAS to be a DPR character, or that this is the best strategy, but what im saying is that IF he wants to be a DPR character he can be, after all the best status a controler can apply to monsters are DEAD.

Wow! You are really lucky. If I was as lucky as you are when I posted this thread, I would have never posted this thread.

Encounter 1: Bugbears are stealthy creatures, but you get surprise on them instead of them getting surprise on you. What a nice DM you have.

The NPCs do not notice the spider. Lucky you. You are successful on both attacks. Assuming a bow with 16 Dex for that damage (I know of no cantrips or first level spells that do D8+3), that's a 40% chance of hitting. Round 2, it's a 65% of the Bugbear failing the save.

40% * 65% = 26%

Encounter 2: Again, the NPCs do not notice the spider, even though Spys and Scouts have better Perception than your Spider has Stealth. Readied Shatter spell. So, the DM bunches up the four foes into a 10 radius. If he doesn't bring them into the hallway, you lose a spell. Hmmm. The odds of rolling a 21 or higher on a Shatter spell, 20 in 512. The odds of each foe missing the save is 55%.

20 / 512 * 55% * 55% * 55% * 55% = 0.36% or 1 encounter in 280

And the loud noise of the Shatter spell doesn't alert the foes in encounter 3. You are really lucky.

Encounter 3: Again, the perceptive NPCs do not notice the spider. Phew. I assume that your Encounter 2 damage was 82 and your Encounter 3 damage was 94. Otherwise, the 150 points of damage in Encounter 3 would not have killed the 154 points of enemies.

Having said that, the odds of you being successful every single time (6 in a row) in encounters 1 and 2 along with the major damage you did with your spell are about 1 in 1077. Throw in the spider making his +4 stealth against passive perceptions of 9, 16, and 16 is another 1 in 5 or 1 in 5385 (dropping the odds of your shatter damage, still 1 in 210). This doesn't take into account the huge damage in encounter 3 from a 3D6 and a 3D8 spell (10.5 and 13.5 average, so you had to hit 4 foes on average with each of those spells as well, maybe a little less if you hit with a cantrip or your bow multiple times).

Yup. I never got as lucky as you did.


The player of your Cleric did 3 points of damage in 3 encounters. Maybe I should have titled this thread "Low Level Clerics Really Do Suck in 5E".


PS. Readying a spell for the end of the turn isn't technically legal. PCs do not know about end of turns. Only players do. End of turn is not a "perceivable circumstance" of the PCs.

Edit: Fixed some numbers.

 

[Stalker0]

Wow! You are really lucky. If I was as lucky as you are when I posted this thread, I would have never posted this thread.

Encounter 1: Bugbears are stealthy creatures, but you get surprise on them instead of them getting surprise on you. What a nice DM you have.

The NPCs do not notice the spider. Lucky you. You are successful on both attacks. Assuming a bow with 16 Dex for that damage (I know of no cantrips or first level spells that do D8+3), that's a 40% chance of hitting. Round 2, it's a 65% of the Bugbear failing the save.

40% * 65% = 26%

Encounter 2: Again, the NPCs do not notice the spider, even though Spys and Scouts have better Perception than your Spider has Stealth. Readied Shatter spell. So, the DM bunches up the four foes into a 10 radius. If he doesn't bring them into the hallway, you lose a spell. Hmmm. The odds of rolling a 21 or higher on a Shatter spell, 20 in 512. The odds of each foe missing the save is 55%.

20 / 512 * 55% * 55% * 55% * 55% = 0.36% or 1 encounter in 280

And the loud noise of the Shatter spell doesn't alert the foes in encounter 3. You are really lucky.

Encounter 3: Again, the perceptive NPCs do not notice the spider. Phew. I assume that your Encounter 2 damage was 82 and your Encounter 3 damage was 94. Otherwise, the 150 points of damage in Encounter 3 would not have killed the 154 points of enemies.

Having said that, the odds of you being successful every single time (6 in a row) in encounters 1 and 2 along with the major damage you did with your spell are about 1 in 1077. Throw in the spider making his +4 stealth against passive perceptions of 9, 16, and 16 is another 1 in 5 or 1 in 5385 (dropping the odds of your shatter damage, still 1 in 210). This doesn't take into account the huge damage in encounter 3 from a 3D6 and a 3D8 spell (10.5 and 13.5 average, so you had to hit 4 foes on average with each of those spells as well, maybe a little less if you hit with a cantrip or your bow multiple times).

Yup. I never got as lucky as you did.


The player of your Cleric did 3 points of damage in 3 encounters. Maybe I should have titled this thread "Low Level Clerics Really Do Suck in 5E".


PS. Readying a spell for the end of the turn isn't technically legal. PCs do not know about end of turns. Only players do. End of turn is not a "perceivable circumstance" of the PCs.

Edit: Fixed some numbers.

There’s a valid point here, but on the other hand if you cut the wizards damage in half he would still have been at the top of DPR for two encounters, so there is some wiggle room here.

To me that post was really focusing on what a wizard can do and how he can contribute. Would a wizards spider always get stealth? No...but the fact that the wizard has a scout at low levels is very cool.

Would a Tasha’s always hit? No...but the fact that a wizard can take a monster out of the fight immediately is very cool.

 

[KarinsDad]

There’s a valid point here, but on the other hand if you cut the wizards damage in half he would still have been at the top of DPR for two encounters, so there is some wiggle room here.

Part of my post was illustrating how the DM did not appear to make it difficult for the players. The spider was never spotted, there was 3 or 4 opponents in most of the 3 area effect spells, even one spell which was readied and could have done virtually nothing if the NPCs had performed different actions. With a different DM and/or different rolls, he could have also done 20% of the damage that he did, and the other 3 PCs would have had to pick up the other 80% slack.

To me that post was really focusing on what a wizard can do and how he can contribute. Would a wizards spider always get stealth? No...but the fact that the wizard has a scout at low levels is very cool.

Agreed. My issue with the post is that it made playing a wizard all rainbows and unicorns if a player is just capable, experienced, and thoughtful, but does not take into account bad decision making by other players, unlucky rolls, rat bastard DMs, or a wide variety of other variables that could make playing a wizard go from wonderful to tedious or difficult.

Just because a player is capable doesn't mean that at a given table, his experience with a wizard will be enjoyable. Each story is its own anecdote which is what many people didn't understand from my original post here because their experience differed from mine and they couldn't wrap their head around that fact.

Would a Tasha’s always hit? No...but the fact that a wizard can take a monster out of the fight immediately is very cool.

On the other hand, there are quite a few subpar or even trash low level spells in 5E that it makes one wonder. Did anyone even review or playtest those spells? Charm Person being one example of subpar, Witch Bolt an example of trash. Like you mentioned with Tasha's, both of these spells can be awesome given the proper circumstances. Unfortunately, the proper circumstances tend to be so few and far between that many players will almost never prep them. Even Tasha's which is considered a great spell in most of the wizard's guides is mostly limited to combat scenarios. Use it out of combat and at best it's a distraction because it mostly just annoys an NPC since they bust out of the spell so quickly (in non-combat terms). And solo foes in combat tend to bust out of it even faster. It really isn't that good of a spell at very low level compared to Sleep which has way more control (until levels where Sleep finally peters out and Tasha's becomes better) except for less frequent situations against foes with a lot of hit points.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Part of my post was illustrating how the DM did not appear to make it difficult for the players. The spider was never spotted, there was 3 or 4 opponents in most of the 3 area effect spells, even one spell which was readied and could have done virtually nothing if the NPCs had performed different actions. With a different DM and/or different rolls, he could have also done 20% of the damage that he did, and the other 3 PCs would have had to pick up the other 80% slack.



Agreed. My issue with the post is that it made playing a wizard all rainbows and unicorns if a player is just capable, experienced, and thoughtful, but does not take into account bad decision making by other players, unlucky rolls, rat bastard DMs, or a wide variety of other variables that could make playing a wizard go from wonderful to tedious or difficult.

Just because a player is capable doesn't mean that at a given table, his experience with a wizard will be enjoyable. Each story is its own anecdote which is what many people didn't understand from my original post here because their experience differed from mine and they couldn't wrap their head around that fact.



On the other hand, there are quite a few subpar or even trash low level spells in 5E that it makes one wonder. Did anyone even review or playtest those spells? Charm Person being one example of subpar, Witch Bolt an example of trash. Like you mentioned with Tasha's, both of these spells can be awesome given the proper circumstances. Unfortunately, the proper circumstances tend to be so few and far between that many players will almost never prep them. Even Tasha's which is considered a great spell in most of the wizard's guides is mostly limited to combat scenarios. Use it out of combat and at best it's a distraction because it mostly just annoys an NPC since they bust out of the spell so quickly (in non-combat terms). And solo foes in combat tend to bust out of it even faster. It really isn't that good of a spell at very low level compared to Sleep which has way more control (until levels where Sleep finally peters out and Tasha's becomes better) except for less frequent situations against foes with a lot of hit points.

This now seems less a problem with the wizard class and more a problem with your DM.