D&D 5E So it looks as if the mountain dwarf will still make the best overall wizard.

[transtemporal]

If you are being targeted as a wizard having that extra cantrip to take Shocking Grasp could be very helpful. Another vote for the elf?

Sorry Grumpy, I'm leaning towards human with the variant racial package and a free heavy armor feat (if thats a thing, I haven't seen the PHB yet) over elf because I don't think high initiative is all that useful to Wizards. Assuming your DM doesn't give all monsters automatic wizard-seeking missiles, I think you ideally want to act after the monsters and meatshields.

 

[The Black Ranger]

i don´t know if someone said it, but with charge out of the game and allies providing cover, attacking the wizard in the back is not that easy. opportunity attack rules allow for run around tactics RAW, but as a dm i am willing to bend the rules a bit.

3 archers are in the back along with an enemy spellcaster. Two of the archers fire at the wizard while the other archer and the spellcaster fire at the cleric.

How exactly are your fellow party members supposed to protect you?

 

[Shiroiken]

3 archers are in the back along with an enemy spellcaster. Two of the archers fire at the wizard while the other archer and the spellcaster fire at the cleric.

How exactly are your fellow party members supposed to protect you?

By getting the Archers/Spellcaster into melee.
By providing cover by being in the way.

You can also help yourself by staying the far edge of the range of the battle (ie. Artillery - Melee - Artillery). You can also get around corners and become untargetable. Cover from terrain (trees, rubble, etc.) is also a big benefit.

It really depends on how the DM designs the encounters. If they design things where monsters come from all directions, then AC is very important. If things are more straight on, then there are several strategies that can be used to limit the amount of danger the spellcaster (or archer) is ever in.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Not immune to attacks, it's just that in 1e/2e (and to a lesser extent 3e), there was nothing really protecting the Wizard at all. ESPECIALLY at first level. So, any enemy that went out of their way to attack the Wizard would pretty much automatically succeed.

This isn't true at all.

Before 3E opportunity attacks were brutal. And unlimited in number. The cleric, and especially the fighter were sticky. 3.0 seriously nerfed this form of protection, making it easy to run past the fighter.

2e largely took the game out of the dungeon. In a dungeon environment runaround attacks will be rare as there's solid rock in the way. 2e seriously weakened this form of protection.

1e lowered the role of Hirelings - extra NPC meatshields make for good wizard protection. In oD&D you'd have a "party" of a couple of dozen of which a third would be PCs. And probably one wizard in the middle of an armoured company.

The closer you get to the D&D roots the better protected the wizard is. (4e is a special case because rather than remain overextended it put down new roots right where D&D was rather than tried to keep it balanced on 1974 roots with some scaffolding - and once more protected the wizard).

 

[The Black Ranger]

By getting the Archers/Spellcaster into melee.
By providing cover by being in the way.

You can also help yourself by staying the far edge of the range of the battle (ie. Artillery - Melee - Artillery). You can also get around corners and become untargetable. Cover from terrain (trees, rubble, etc.) is also a big benefit.

It really depends on how the DM designs the encounters. If they design things where monsters come from all directions, then AC is very important. If things are more straight on, then there are several strategies that can be used to limit the amount of danger the spellcaster (or archer) is ever in.

Getting in the way would only provide a bonus to AC, it doesn't "draw the fire".

You would have to get past the enemy melee in order to get their ranged into melee.

You don't always have terrain and other obstacles to hide behind.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

This isn't true at all.

Before 3E opportunity attacks were brutal. And unlimited in number. The cleric, and especially the fighter were sticky. 3.0 seriously nerfed this form of protection, making it easy to run past the fighter.

Wait...what? There were no opportunity attacks at all in 1e or 2e. You couldn't act outside of your own turn. When it wasn't your turn, you'd watch the enemies run right past you without doing anything to stop them. There was a whole debate about how you wouldn't even turn around if the enemy ran around behind you so you'd just let them stab you in the back.

In fact, that was the reason 3e introduced Opportunity Attacks as a thing. A lot of people writing into Dragon Magazine and TSR saying "D&D doesn't feel real time. It feels like you get to acts for your turn and then you sit there ignoring everything until your next turn." That's also the reason the Immediate Actions became a thing. Also, the reason facing was removed.

Before 3e came out, we spent a lot of time arguing about making a house rule where you might be able to stop people from running past you somehow.

 

[Savage Wombat]

Wait...what? There were no opportunity attacks at all in 1e or 2e. You couldn't act outside of your own turn. When it wasn't your turn, you'd watch the enemies run right past you without doing anything to stop them. There was a whole debate about how you wouldn't even turn around if the enemy ran around behind you so you'd just let them stab you in the back.

It confused me too, but remember, opportunity attacks (possibly under a different name) actually started in Combat & Tactics for 2e.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It confused me too, but remember, opportunity attacks (possibly under a different name) actually started in Combat & Tactics for 2e.

I believe what Neon is referring to is the fact that if an enemy got within melee range of you, then tried to leave, in 1E/2E, you got a free swing at them. That long predates C&T. I know a lot of DMs ignored this rule, or were really inconsistent about enforcing it (like only remember it when PCs tried to flee or the like!), but it was there.

This became way less powerful in 2E, because huge movement ranges combined with outdoor settings meant enemies could run AROUND you, instead of having to go past you, as Neon points out.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Getting in the way would only provide a bonus to AC, it doesn't "draw the fire".

You would have to get past the enemy melee in order to get their ranged into melee.

You don't always have terrain and other obstacles to hide behind.

This is once again where this concept comes into play...as an enemy archer do you fire at the fighters in the front row who are one round away from killing your front line and getting past them to attack you in melee where you don't want to be? Or fire at the caster in the back who likely has cover to their AC, making them harder to hit while there's a fighter in front of them? Especially when the default in 5e is that Wizards/Clerics do quite a bit less damage on an average round and only do more damage 2 rounds a day at first level. They might not even have spells left or they might have no offensive spells prepared at all.

Obviously, that choice is up to each DM. But, I can say that it seems a better idea to get rid of the guy hitting 75% of the time for 11 damage a round with his sword than the one who has a 50% chance of doing 4.

 

[Jack99]

Wizards now get d6 for HPs, not d4, so are ~40% less squishy (before CON bonus).

Wizard in my campaign has 102 hit points at level 10. On top of that, he is an enchanter, so all melee attacks have disadvantage against him. It's nuts. I really hope Mearls wasn't wrong when he said he was pretty sure they had nerfed that ability.