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

[Celtavian]

This was easy to handle in previous games. One player did not try to step over another player's schtick. If there was a face PC in the party, the player of the wizard rarely took mind influencing spells, or he rarely prep or cast them unless necessary if he did. Solving a potential class conflict issue by nerfing one class seems subpar.

So the wizard player didn't interfere by choice rather than because he lacked the power? And that was somehow acceptable. I would say that fits the criteria for an additional line in your signature stating the "The second sign of a broken rule is when a player has to limit his options not to take the spotlight from another character."

 

[Sacrosanct]

What about this long-time player (30 plus years) who thinks the low level wizard is fine? Who enjoys playing the wizard and thinks the new mechanics are a nice balance between the 4E neutering and the 3E vastly overpowered? Or Piratecat the long-time player who is ok with wizards? Do you think Karin's Dad[/I] has more relevant opinion than ours?

I'm a long time player here...*hand raised*. Played casters in every edition to high level. Favorite characters are casters. Love wizards, that's why I made a wizard my first character in the new edition. I'm finding them quite potent and fun.

So now only the OP has a relevant opinion in your mind? Have you played a 5E wizard to compare them? Or you making assumptions?

Started in 1981 myself. Never had a problem with magic users in the old days either. It was all about understanding what your role was, and playing as a team.

 

[trentonjoe]

Because they couldn't see well in the cloud? The enemies " chose" to leave the fog cloud because it was hampering their sight.

 

[KarinsDad]

Why does KD think something has changed is what I don't understand.

I don't know.

Maybe it is because 4E introduced At Will Wizard powers that could do nearly the same damage as At Will powers from other classes, but then went back to wimpy cantrips.

Maybe it's because the Shield spell could be stretched over multiple encounters in 1E to 3E, but in 5E lasts a round.

Maybe it's because multiple protection spells could be cast in a single encounter to protect fellow PCs, but with concentration, now it is one spell.

Maybe it's because NPCs now get a saving throw every single round.

Are you actually being objective? I cannot be the only one who sees how weak saving every round is, or one protection spell at a time is.


Wizards could often have up multiple spells at the same time, not just protection. Now, a flying wizard has virtually zero protection up (except Mage Armor and possibly Mirror Image). A wizard can no longer be both invisible and flying (unless someone else casts one of the spells). There are entire areas of tactics and strategies that are not only nerfed, they just no longer exist. Protection of others is basically just thrown out the window.

I actually like many of the higher level nerfs, but the lower level nerfs are just unnecessary.


Fog Cloud in 3E has a 20% miss chance at melee range and 50% miss chance at longer range. Now, the chance to hit at any range is the same as if the spell wasn't there (advantage cancels out disadvantage) unless nobody is actually in the Fog Cloud (in which case it's disadvantage). One cannot be protected within the spell radius anymore (shy of the DM ruling that the PC can move around and the NPCs cannot hear him and do not know where he is, that's DM dependent).

 

[KarinsDad]

Started in 1981 myself. Never had a problem with magic users in the old days either. It was all about understanding what your role was, and playing as a team.

The role has changed. Now, the wizard is a scholar at low levels (with the exception of the Sleep spell).

 

[Sacrosanct]

The role has changed. Now, the wizard is a scholar at low levels (with the exception of the Sleep spell).

I disagree. My experience with wizards in the game, even at low levels, are significantly different from your own.

 

[Umbran]

So the wizard player didn't interfere by choice rather than because he lacked the power? And that was somehow acceptable. I would say that fits the criteria for an additional line in your signature stating the "The second sign of a broken rule is when a player has to limit his options not to take the spotlight from another character."

If you already have three front-line fighters in the party, is your first choice to take another front-line fighter, or do you instead go for a niche in the party that isn't filled?

This isn't about rules - it is about player choices to respect the fact that there are other players at the table.

I don't know.

Maybe it is because 4E introduced At Will Wizard powers that could do nearly the same damage as At Will powers from other classes, but then went back to wimpy cantrips.

Maybe it's because the Shield spell could be stretched over multiple encounters in 1E to 3E, but in 5E lasts a round.

Maybe it's because multiple protection spells could be cast in a single encounter to protect fellow PCs, but with concentration, now it is one spell.

Maybe it's because NPCs now get a saving throw every single round.

Are you actually being objective? I cannot be the only one who sees how weak saving every round is, or one protection spell at a time is.

The thing is, KD, that all those changes are not necessarily, in and of themselves, a weakening. They must be analyzed in the context of the changes in math between editions.

Not allowing a wizard to stack a ton of protective spells, for example, is really only enforcement of that math - you can't have bounded accuracy if spellcasters blow the roof off required target numbers on a regular basis. 5e dials back a bit of the arms race - you should not *need* to be able to stack numbers to the roof in 5e to get through the adventure.

 

[pkt77242]

If you already have three front-line fighters in the party, is your first choice to take another front-line fighter, or do you instead go for a niche in the party that isn't filled?

This isn't about rules - it is about player choices to respect the fact that there are other players at the table.



The thing is, KD, that all those changes are not necessarily, in and of themselves, a weakening. They must be analyzed in the context of the changes in math between editions.

Not allowing a wizard to stack a ton of protective spells, for example, is really only enforcement of that math - you can't have bounded accuracy if spellcasters blow the roof off required target numbers on a regular basis. 5e dials back a bit of the arms race - you should not *need* to be able to stack numbers to the roof in 5e to get through the adventure.

While I probably wouldn't pick a front-line warrior in that case, I wouldn't want it mandated that I couldn't pick a front-line warrior either. I believe that it should still be my choice.

 

[ExploderWizard]

The role has changed. Now, the wizard is a scholar at low levels (with the exception of the Sleep spell).

I think this depends on the rest of the group. If the wizard is the only member of the party with any arcane magic then they will be much more than that. If the wizard is in a party with other arcane magic users then his/her contributions won't be quite as unique as they might otherwise be.

This is no different in older editions in a party with multiple magic users. The casters needed to take different spell loadouts to cover all the bases of offense, defense, and utility.

 

[pkt77242]

I don't know.

Maybe it is because 4E introduced At Will Wizard powers that could do nearly the same damage as At Will powers from other classes, but then went back to wimpy cantrips.

Maybe it's because the Shield spell could be stretched over multiple encounters in 1E to 3E, but in 5E lasts a round.

Maybe it's because multiple protection spells could be cast in a single encounter to protect fellow PCs, but with concentration, now it is one spell.

Maybe it's because NPCs now get a saving throw every single round.

Are you actually being objective? I cannot be the only one who sees how weak saving every round is, or one protection spell at a time is.


Wizards could often have up multiple spells at the same time, not just protection. Now, a flying wizard has virtually zero protection up (except Mage Armor and possibly Mirror Image). A wizard can no longer be both invisible and flying (unless someone else casts one of the spells). There are entire areas of tactics and strategies that are not only nerfed, they just no longer exist. Protection of others is basically just thrown out the window.

I actually like many of the higher level nerfs, but the lower level nerfs are just unnecessary.


Fog Cloud in 3E has a 20% miss chance at melee range and 50% miss chance at longer range. Now, the chance to hit at any range is the same as if the spell wasn't there (advantage cancels out disadvantage) unless nobody is actually in the Fog Cloud (in which case it's disadvantage). One cannot be protected within the spell radius anymore (shy of the DM ruling that the PC can move around and the NPCs cannot hear him and do not know where he is, that's DM dependent).

I don't find cantrips that underpowered at low levels, especially since proficiency bonuses are the same across all the classes at the same level. Am I missing something, are they really that underpowered, as the wizard, and warlock in my group are doing pretty well at levels 1-3 with their attack cantrips.