D&D 5E "But Wizards Can Fly, Teleport and Turn People Into Frogs!"

[Falling Icicle]

Can't xp you yet, but this was very creative and pretty hilarious

Thanks.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Fighters and wizards were balanced in 4e by trimming the numbers gap (the hp and AC differences are smaller than in previous editions) and by giving them different roles. They're no longer competing to do the same thing. The fighter protects, the wizard controls, and they're not both trying to be the best at killing things.

So why is it then that people insist that wizards aren't or can't be balanced with fighters because they have a wider range of abilities (no matter how many drawbacks come along with it, like no armor, low hit points, the ability to have their powers disrupted, dispelled, etc.)?

Because a lot of wizard powers aren't combat powers. The wizard's ability (in 3.x) to Scry/Buff/Teleport would be overpowered even if the wizard wasn't actually going to jump into combat. Wizards could break the economy, bind creatures long term, cast Wish...

The save DC/saving throw system was broken. That wasn't something fighters could contribute to. The fighter could hit you hard. The wizard could outright kill you with one spell, more than 50% of the time.

The duration of combat spells tended to be broken. Otiluke's Resilient Sphere lasts a minimum of 7 minutes (70 rounds) and the victim cannot escape unless they can teleport. (What 7th-level fighter has a Helm of Teleportation?)

Wizards had numerous overpowered defense spells. Greater Invisibility is a great example of this. In 2e, creatures of 10 HD or more and Int 13+ got a save against it. In 3e, they had to make Spot checks, and the wizard got a +20 bonus in combat (more out of it, if not moving).

The reason wizards were overpowered at high levels in the past was mostly due to the fact that they just had so bloody many spells that the whole "limited resource" thing was no longer much of a limitation at all.

I think it was the broken spells more than the number.

Of course, there were some overpowered spells too, but those can be fixed on a case by case basis.

There were lots of spells like that, and every wizard gravitated toward those spells. Spells like Glitterdust and Otiluke's Resilient Sphere came out overpowered. So was Hold Monster. Unless you're taking away all of a wizard's good spells, this was a problem.

We've already seen some good ways of balancing some of the more game-breaking spells of the past, like making it so that long range teleportation can only take you to a teleportation circle.

4e also made it a ritual, so you can't use it in combat. Plus there's more DM control; they determine where the circle is, and what's around it.

 

[FireLance]

The interesting thing, though, is that people generally considered fighters and wizards to be balanced in 4th edition

And one key reason why was something you touched on later in the same post:

The reason wizards were overpowered at high levels in the past was mostly due to the fact that they just had so bloody many spells that the whole "limited resource" thing was no longer much of a limitation at all.

5e seems to be splitting the difference between 4e and earlier editions - the current playtest has 17th level and higher wizards capping out at just 19 daily spells, only four of which are 6th and higher level (one of each level from 6th to 9th). Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. Maybe it will work well enough for people who are fine with 3e's level of balance, but not well enough for people who prefer 4e's level of balance.

I confess to a certain amount of academic interest in the answer, but I think I'd rather wait for someone far more interested in 5e than I am to post a detailed mathematical analysis.

 

[RangerWickett]

I think it's easy: fewer spells, more fragile wizards.

I played Conan, and in there wizards were worrisome, but not 'overpowered.' You feared them because if they got their spell off, you were likely toast. But they feared you, because if you resisted their spell, you'd chop them in two.

Why does a high-level wizard need to be able to cast 30 spells of all different levels. Let him cast 5 spells per day, plus some cantrips and filthy wizard tricks. Make those five spells ridiculous - like 1st level casters paralyzing someone or dominating them for as long as they concentrate, and 10th level wizards tearing huge chunks of earth free from the ground and hurling it at foes.

 

[Derren]

The interesting thing, though, is that people generally considered fighters and wizards to be balanced in 4th edition, even though the exact same thing was true of that edition too! Fighters may have gotten powers just like wizards, but those powers were limited to strictly martial-themed things. Fighters couldn't fly, teleport, throw fireballs or do anything blatantly reality-bending. They certainly could do some things that were amazing and even stretched belief, but they were always feats of physical prowess, never anything outright magical.

Thats because 4E removed all non combat spells from wizards. On the battlefield it is balanced to shoot a 1d6 magic missile or a 1d6 arrow. What makes wizards strong is their non combat versatility. And as 4E ignored non combat this wasn't an issue there.

 

[Evenglare]

.... that's the inherent problem with magic. It's better than fighting flat out. By definition magic allows people to do things that you can not normally do. Balancing magic with normalcy is doomed from the start, because then magic wouldnt be magic. At least not in the way magic is supposed to be magic. But god help us if we wont still try to balance magic and melee.

 

[Evenglare]

Thats because 4E removed all non combat spells from wizards. On the battlefield it is balanced to shoot a 1d6 magic missile or a 1d6 arrow. What makes wizards strong is their non combat versatility. And as 4E ignored non combat this wasn't an issue there.

http://i53.tinypic.com/15mlhg5.jpg

sorry what was that about 4e ignoring non combat?

 

[D'karr]

Thats because 4E removed all non combat spells from wizards. On the battlefield it is balanced to shoot a 1d6 magic missile or a 1d6 arrow. What makes wizards strong is their non combat versatility. And as 4E ignored non combat this wasn't an issue there.

Disinformation and lies. 4e has quite a bit of non-combat spells, or are utility spells not spells? Obviously you also forgot rituals the vast majority of which are non-combat.

I get it, you hate 4e, but please stop spreading lies. It makes your point seem petty, ridiculous, and ill conceived.

 

[D'karr]

http://i53.tinypic.com/15mlhg5.jpg

sorry what was that about 4e ignoring non combat?

A picture, figuratively worth a thousand words.

 

[Dausuul]

.... that's the inherent problem with magic. It's better than fighting flat out. By definition magic allows people to do things that you can not normally do. Balancing magic with normalcy is doomed from the start, because then magic wouldnt be magic. At least not in the way magic is supposed to be magic. But god help us if we wont still try to balance magic and melee.

This argument pops up every time wizard power levels are discussed, and it's always wrong. Just because you can do things other people can't, doesn't make you omnipotent. I'm a software developer; I can do things with my mind that most people can't do and will never be able to do. But which would you rather have on your side in a fight, me or a Navy Seal? The Seal, after all, can also do things that most people can't do and will never be able to do, and the stuff the Seal can do is a lot more useful in combat.

"But," the usual reply goes, "the wizard can break the laws of physics!" No. No, the wizard cannot break the laws of physics. Physics just has different laws in D&D-world, such that it is possible to produce fireballs by chanting, waving your hands, and tossing bat crap at people. The wizard has learned to take advantage of this branch of physics, just as the fighter has learned to take advantage of the branch that deals with momentum and kinetic energy. There's no reason why the wizard's tricks need to be more powerful than the fighter's.