Maybe not, but in probability, advantage is worth the percentage equivalent of about 4.5 on a D20 for most rolls at most tables (yes, as one's odds get extremely high, or extremely low, this changes). But about 22% more of the time, advantage will still result in a success. For an attack roll, advantage is worth anywhere from 1.25x to 1.5x dpr (give or take for most attack scenarios). I think most people here understand that nobody is talking about a flat bonus.
D&D 5E Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E
Maybe not, but in probability, advantage is worth the percentage equivalent of about 4.5 on a D20 for most rolls at most tables (yes, as one's odds get extremely high, or extremely low, this changes). But about 22% more of the time, advantage will still result in a success. For an attack roll, advantage is worth anywhere from 1.25x to 1.5x dpr (give or take for most attack scenarios). I think most people here understand that nobody is talking about a flat bonus.
Generally we agree here.So first thing. My response about being skeptical about characters not taking feats was in response to the post about what Crawford said, so it was about characters not taking feats across their entire adventuring career. Not taking a feat by 4th level is going to be a higher percentage.
Second, the list of classes not having feats that are better than +2 to a stat by level 4 is subjective. I consider sentinal to be amazing for paladins and I took that at low level and used it to great effect. I think spell sniper is one that some people might consider to be better at low level than bumping the 18 to a 20, as is Observant or . ACs and saves are low enough that a +1 to hit and to DCs is not really needed, so feats do more for you.
I find that groups that don't find a way to get to the wizard tend to lose faster than groups that do, so groups wanting to survive make the attempt to get to the back.
The only thing I would say about the Crawford data is to point out that also based on their data most games played rarely make it out of tier 2.
Now add-in one shots and pick-up games at FLGS and I can see it very easily true that most characters dont take feats.
The key bring it is slanted or skewed by all those brief "adventuring careers" that may span only one or two sessions.
I imagine if the datasets were filtered by "characters that were played in campaigns thru 8 or more levels" the frequency of feats would be very different from one that included one-shots and pick-up games.
But the claim made did not make any claim about "campaigns" just "characters" and if you just look at their pre-gen pics you see for modules (which would be easy go-to for pick-ups) I think the most likely source for the disconnect is apparent.
That why I jumped in when the... ahem... "minor" misstatement was made about it being a statement about **campaigns** not *characters*.
Negating the tactic??? It often does the opposite. It helps the tactic.
The wizard PC can still often move until he has 75% cover (from the edge of a large tree, wall, or pillar) and then cast a spell. Or the wizard might be able move from one side of cover to another (for example, if behind a wall). And if NPCs are readying spells and the wizard PC never shows, then bye bye spell.
A typical wizard with 3/4ths cover and Dex 12 and Mage Armor has AC 19. If the concentration spell is REALLY worth it, he never comes out of total cover. Otherwise, even strong foes at +8 will only hit him maybe 50% of the time and he'll make his save 65% of the time, so with Shield, he loses the spell 12.5% of the time and without Shield, 25% of the time. Against most foes weaker than +8 at low level, those odds improve.
Or Blink, or Mirror Image, Arcane Ward, or heavier armor for multiclass, or a wide variety of other factors that protect him. Yes, wizards get hit. Yes, they once in a while lose concentration. And for some defensive concentration spells like Blur or Invisibility, the wizard wants NPCs to target him instead of his allies. But no, the players typically don't think that their wizards get hit enough to choose WC over +2 Int.
Wizards have high int. If bowmen are readying attacks and the wizard finds out about it on a given round, then he can just either do nothing on his next round, or cast a defensive spell from behind total cover. He still accomplished something by sucking up that readied attacks of the bowmen. And just because the wizard pokes his head out enough for one bowmen to see him doesn't necessarily mean that all bowmen can see him.
If I'm playing a wizard and I get 2 or 3 bowmen readying attacks against me in cover, I have succeeded in helping out party action economy because the bowmen aren't targeting my fellow PCs. Win win.
The fact that you think readying attacks against a wizard in cover is a good NPC tactic, well... I think I'd like to play at your table.
jgsugden
Legend
That would only be a poll of people replying to that poll in this community, which is a heavily biased populaton. Still, the percentage that use this feat at or below level 4 for their wizards would be very low, I'm sure.
I wish D&D Beyond released some stats on what feats, etc... are taken. It would still be a biased population, but it would be interesting to see some of their information on characters that have been upgraded over time.
Over the course of this thread, I've started a lvl 1 wizard in Dragon Heist. We just leveled, and now he's level 2. Neither myself or any of the other players would have the sentiment that low level wizards suck from our experience over the last four sessions. I haven't overpowered the content by any means, but I've seemed to provide the utility needed to put us in an advantageous position as a party. I've also had just as much fun as playing other classes in the past at 1st level.
p.s. AC 11, I'm still alive at Lvl 2. Miracle of miracles.
p.s. AC 11, I'm still alive at Lvl 2. Miracle of miracles.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Readying an action to shoot at the wizard popping up and down in an up field when he pops up will never help the tactic.
This is what is known as Moving the Goal Posts. You specified a wizard popping up and down in the middle of a field and I supplied a tactic which completely negated that tactic. Moving the goal posts to walking behind a large tree, wall or pillar doesn't get you very far. Especially when a different tactic like walking right, left or around so that your cover is gone negates those tactics.
Will your tactics work sometimes? Sure. Will they work most of the time? Probably not, or at least not unless you have one of those generous DMs you were saying earlier in the thread that you didn't like to play with. The enemy often will not be stupid and just allow your tactics to work.
e.
Blink isn't happening until 5th level. Arcane ward will fail to stop damage from reaching you a lot of the time at low levels, and is only available to one type of wizard. Heavy armor is expensive, so will take a number of levels to achieve. Invisibility will give the enemy disadvantage, but sure, go ahead and cast invisibility so that you can't actually use another concentration spell or attack. Mirror image works against attacks, but fails to work at all against enemy spells. Blur similarly only works against attacks and not spells. And the thing about these spells is that at low levels you don't have many slots, so you are using precious slots in one fight and not getting them back until after the adventuring day ends.
So. A wizard doing nothing in a round is a win for the bowmen. And there is no total cover in the middle of the open field you described.
Possibly. And possibly they all see him.
My error. I thought you were discussing something else. My reply was to your reply which was to someone else's reply to a post of mine. I got confused in that tangle.
Sometimes. Typically not at longer ranges unless the cover is fairly narrow.
A 15 foot wall perpendicular cover outdoors with foes 100 feet away means that they have to walk 70 feet at a 45 degree angle so that they can attack 3/4ths cover instead of total cover (if using squares). That takes a minimum of 2 rounds for most foes, and once they get in position, the wizard gets +5 AC for 3/4ths cover.
Or, a good sized room with the wizard taking cover outside of it 10 feet to the right or left of a doorway means that the bowmen have to move through the entire room and typically the rest of the party in order to get outside the room in order to attack the wizard (sure, the scenario might have other ways around the room, but that typically means one or more rounds of movement which helps PC action economy).
The terrain in most of the encounters in the games that I have played (and most of the encounter in adventure modules the WotC put out) have some type of cover available. Even if it just fellow PCs.
As for the "bob up and down" scenario. Sure, the bowmen might eventually start readying actions to fire at the wizard when he stands. Once the PC figures out there are bowmen or that they are targeting him, he doesn't have to stand up. In fact, he never had to stand up in the first place (this might only be a good tactic if he is using a to hit spell like Fire Bolt). He doesn't have to stand back up right away. He can cast saving throw cantrips (or higher level save spells) from the ground at no penalty and only needs to stand when foes get close enough to get into melee range soon.
My point isn't that any give tactics for certain specific scenarios are a great set of tactics. It's that NPCs tend to have very few options whereas PCs have a lot of options. Versatility tends to win out.
And because PCs tend to have a lot of options, it means that WC is mostly a waste of time for anyone who isn't often in melee combat. If your wizard PC at your table is attacked in combat a lot and isn't designed to handle it (like my plate and shield cleric/necromances), then sure, WC might help. But, better tactics and spells would probably help a lot more without using up an ability score gain for a feat.
If a low level wizard PC casts Web and gets 3 foes and has no cover in a field, he's better off Dodging for a few rounds (or using the drop prone trick if he really wants to cast some more). Unless it is a big fight, it's doubtful that most wizard players will be doing anything more than throwing some cantrips anyway. Will the DM sometimes throw a Fireball on the low level wizard prone on the ground? Sure, maybe. But if the low level wizard is taking a Fireball to the face, he's got bigger problems than keeping a concentration spell up.
WC doesn't prevent the wizard from taking damage. Dodge, or dropping prone, or total cover often does. Tactics (and spells) over once in a blue moon abilities.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
