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

[KarinsDad]

Okay. You're in a mid-level party (four 7th-level PCs, say one melee Paladin of Devotion, a Sharpshooter fighter, a Moon Druid, and an Enchanter wizard) and you've just bumped into the Troll Cavern: five Trolls in a 60'-wide cavern, all looking directly at you, standing there in the 5'-wide tunnel which leads into the Troll Cavern. Can you name a buff which is more cost-effective than Web in this situation? (Restrained = disadvantage to attack, advantage to be attacked, zero movement. Allows you to take on only one or two trolls at a time, at a heavy advantage.) Freedom of Movement lasts for one hour, but for the sake of argument we'll say it's dedicated specifically to this fight, so you can choose any two buffs under 4th level. This is nearly a triple-Deadly fight so spending a 4th level + 2nd level spell slot on this fight is a reasonable thing to do.

Web does not cover a 60 foot wide cavern. Depending on the depth of the cavern (anywhere from 20 feet to 60 feet say), the web spell would cover anywhere from 11% to 33% of the room. The wizard would need to see into the room, so he would have to be near the front of the group. Odds are that he might get 2 of the 5 trolls in the spell and odds are that both of them will be out of it within 2 rounds. The trolls cannot all fight the PCs anyway due to the 5' wide chokepoint tunnel that you created, so the Web spell would be totally wasted. The wizard could put the web spell 5 feet away from the tunnel so that the Paladin can move to melee on the one side and the Druid on the other, but meh. Hardly much better than staying in the tunnel.

Sure, we can all come up with contrived situations where a given spell might work great. This particular scenario is advantageous for the PCs because the trolls cannot even fit in the 5 foot wide tunnel into their own cavern. I'm not even sure why you posted this. It doesn't illustrate anything.


And having used Web a lot for my wizard, it gets old after a while. What good is having a versatile wizard if in order for him to be even partially effective, he has to cast the same few spells all of the time?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Web does not cover a 60 foot wide cavern. Depending on the depth of the cavern (anywhere from 20 feet to 60 feet say), the web spell would cover anywhere from 11% to 33% of the room. The wizard would need to see into the room, so he would have to be near the front of the group. Odds are that he might get 2 of the 5 trolls in the spell and odds are that both of them will be out of it within 2 rounds. The trolls cannot all fight the PCs anyway due to the 5' wide chokepoint tunnel that you created, so the Web spell would be totally wasted. The wizard could put the web spell 5 feet away from the tunnel so that the Paladin can move to melee on the one side and the Druid on the other, but meh. Hardly much better than staying in the tunnel.

Except for the part where the trolls that attack you suffer action denial and/or the Restrained condition, you mean?

This particular scenario is advantageous for the PCs because the trolls cannot even fit in the 5 foot wide tunnel into their own cavern.

I forgot that trolls require 10' wide spaces. Consider the tunnel widened. In fact, make it a 30' wide crack if you like, it doesn't really change anything.

I'm not even sure why you posted this. It doesn't illustrate anything.

It illustrates the use case for Web spells: indoor, crowded conditions with large quantities of big tough bruisers. When constructing a PC, I try to ensure that I can have a tactical decision tree that goes something like this:

0.) Use stealth whenever possible to gain intel and initiative/surprise.
1.) If wide open spaces, kill them to death at long range.
2.) If cramped quarters vs. melee monsters, use melee kiting and/or Web spells to gain tactical advantage.
3.) If small numbers of tough monsters with special abilities, use summons to beat them with action economy.
4.) If mind flayers/beholders, run away! (Or any other case where overmatched.)

If it weren't for Web spells, there would be a giant hole in my feasible scenarios. That's why I posted this scenario--it's nearly a worst-case for ranged fighters. The only worse case is to start off surrounded.

 

[KarinsDad]

Except for the part where the trolls that attack you suffer action denial and/or the Restrained condition, you mean?



I forgot that trolls require 10' wide spaces. Consider the tunnel widened.



It illustrates the use case for Web spells: indoor, crowded conditions with large quantities of big tough bruisers. When constructing a PC, I try to ensure that I can have a tactical decision tree that goes something like this:

0.) Use stealth whenever possible to gain intel and initiative/surprise.
1.) If wide open spaces, kill them to death at long range.
2.) If cramped quarters vs. melee monsters, use melee kiting and/or Web spells to gain tactical advantage.
3.) If small numbers of tough monsters with special abilities, use summons to beat them with action economy.
4.) If mind flayers/beholders, run away! (Or any other case where overmatched.)

If it weren't for Web spells, there would be a giant hole in my feasible scenarios. That's why I posted this scenario--it's nearly a worst-case for ranged fighters. The only worse case is to start off surrounded.

In which case a Wall of Fire, x distance (TBD by scenario) works better than spamming some Web spells that rarely do anything. The Paladin and Druid can always be in the tunnel where only one troll can attack. Anyone dumb enough to go out into a room of trolls and fight, hoping that the wizard can spam enough Web spells once each Web spell is vacated is just begging for a beat down.

I still don't see where your example is that impressive. There are a lot of times where Web is great. This still isn't one of them. The only time it has any traction against 5 trolls when there are only 4 PCs is if the trolls can easily attack the PCs. At that point, having the wizard lock down a few trolls at a time MIGHT be advantageous, but even there, the odds are not good since Web is concentration and he can only have one up at a time.

Yes, the wizard could, in your scenario, web up the one troll in the front line of the tunnel (two if the PCs were at the edge of the tunnel and the trolls each cover half of it, but the trolls could technically get 2 to 4 trolls often attacking back, room dependent; 2 in the web, 0-2 outside it) and the PCs could beat down on it on some rounds. No doubt. But is the wizard going to cast multiple web spells in order to manage it once the trolls stop trying to go through the web? Even trolls might go off and get reinforcements if their only way to the party means walking through a web spell. Personally, I like Fireball in this scenario a lot more than Web, especially if the trolls bunch up trying to get to the party. It won't kill them, but it will typically take the front trolls down faster, giving the party more action economy overall.

I even like the Paladin and Druid holding the tunnel from 10 feet in and the wizard firing Fire Bolts and the archer firing arrows. 7th level PCs could probably wipe out at least a troll per round that way, assuming that the DM does not have the trolls grappling and pulling PCs out of the tunnel. That could be really bad.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

In which case a Wall of Fire, x distance (TBD by scenario) works better than spamming some Web spells that rarely do anything. The Paladin and Druid can always be in the tunnel where only one troll can attack. Anyone dumb enough to go out into a room of trolls and fight, hoping that the wizard can spam enough Web spells once each Web spell is vacated is just begging for a beat down.

I still don't see where your example is that impressive. There are a lot of times where Web is great. This still isn't one of them. The only time it has any traction against 5 trolls when there are only 4 PCs is if the trolls can easily attack the PCs. At that point, having the wizard lock down a few trolls at a time MIGHT be advantageous, but even there, the odds are not good since Web is concentration and he can only have one up at a time.

Yes, the wizard could, in your scenario, web up the one troll in the front line of the tunnel (two if the PCs were at the edge of the tunnel and the trolls each cover half of it, but the trolls could technically get 2 to 4 trolls often attacking back, room dependent; 2 in the web, 0-2 outside it) and the PCs could beat down on it on some rounds. No doubt. But is the wizard going to cast multiple web spells in order to manage it once the trolls stop trying to go through the web? Even trolls might go off and get reinforcements if their only way to the party means walking through a web spell. Personally, I like Fireball in this scenario a lot more than Web, especially if the trolls bunch up trying to get to the party. It won't kill them, but it will typically take the front trolls down faster, giving the party more action economy overall.

I even like the Paladin and Druid holding the tunnel from 10 feet in and the wizard firing Fire Bolts and the archer firing arrows. 7th level PCs could probably wipe out at least a troll per round that way, assuming that the DM does not have the trolls grappling and pulling PCs out of the tunnel. That could be really bad.

First you say it's a contrived scenario tilted toward Web. Then you say Web is "not that impressive." Make up your mind! I don't mean that in a harsh way, but it has to be one or the other.

Wall of Fire is good, but it's twice as expensive as Web, and it doesn't deny movement, it just inflicts some damage. (It might work against trolls because they hate fire and wouldn't want to take that damage, but it might not.) Web however inflicts the Restrained condition so they can't just ignore it and overbear you, they have to deal with it. Fireball... is relatively meh in this scenario--unless you throw multiple Fireballs, which is expensive, the trolls will just regenerate the damage round after next. At least that's what happens when I game this out: it takes 2 rounds or more to kill each troll, so by the time you're actually killing the third troll the Fireball no longer affects him at all.

I even like the Paladin and Druid holding the tunnel from 10 feet in and the wizard firing Fire Bolts and the archer firing arrows. 7th level PCs could probably wipe out at least a troll per round that way, assuming that the DM does not have the trolls grappling and pulling PCs out of the tunnel. That could be really bad.

You're overestimating damage output. Paladin is doing 10 to 15-ish points of damage per round (depending on build), wizard does about 7 points of damage per round, sharpshooter does 30 points of damage if heavily optimized w/ Crossbow Expert (cheesey interpretation to get 3 attacks per round) + Sharpshooter, druid does 14 points of damage... you'll be lucky to kill one troll per round even with the Crossbow Expert cheese, unless you use spells like Web/Faerie Fire to gain advantage.

 

[KarinsDad]

First you say it's a contrived scenario tilted toward Web. Then you say Web is "not that impressive." Make up your mind! I don't mean that in a harsh way, but it has to be one or the other.

This is a typical thing on the forums. I did not say it was tilted towards Web. I said that "Sure, we can all come up with contrived situations where a given spell might work great" and "This particular scenario is advantageous for the PCs because the trolls cannot even fit in the 5 foot wide tunnel into their own cavern.".

You'll note that I did NOT state that it was advantageous because of web.

So in response here, I would suggest that you read what is actually written, not what you think is meant.

Wall of Fire is good, but it's twice as expensive as Web, and it doesn't deny movement, it just inflicts some damage. (It might work against trolls because they hate fire and wouldn't want to take that damage, but it might not.) Web however inflicts the Restrained condition so they can't just ignore it and overbear you, they have to deal with it. Fireball... is relatively meh in this scenario--unless you throw multiple Fireballs, which is expensive, the trolls will just regenerate the damage round after next. At least that's what happens when I game this out: it takes 2 rounds or more to kill each troll, so by the time you're actually killing the third troll the Fireball no longer affects him at all.

If you say so.

If the party enters the room, Web doesn't matter. This will be 5 CR 5 creatures against a party of 4 7th level PCs and Web or no Web, this will be a super tough fight where the trolls will probably beat down on the PCs a lot.

If the party does not enter the room and puts a web in front of the tunnel, if just one troll either makes his save there or makes his Str check and then makes his save, there's either a good chance of that troll grappling a front liner and bringing him into a room full of trolls, or else the troll doesn't even try to do that and retreats back out of the web and the PCs cannot get to the trolls. Even stupid trolls will try to back out of a place where they are restrained (and even stupid trolls will try to pull food/enemies out of a hole and bring them into the open).

Ranged attacks through a web are at disadvantage, so the odds of seriously damaging the trolls through a web are pretty low. The PCs might be able to damage one troll with this tactic, but it can probably just retreat out of sight and regenerate.

I think that you are just trying to justify a lousy scenario for Web as a good scenario. Sorry. Don't see it.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Ranged attacks through a web are at disadvantage, so the odds of seriously damaging the trolls through a web are pretty low. The PCs might be able to damage one troll with this tactic, but it can probably just retreat out of sight and regenerate.

That isn't true. Webs cause light obscurement, not heavy.

I ran this fight with a 20' wide neck instead of 5', so two trolls could engage at once. (Slightly different PCs but about the same power level.) The PCs won the fight in 42 seconds, expending 35 arrows (18 recovered), 43 HP (24 temp + 18 real), 1 ki (to stun a fleeing troll at the end of the fight), 1 warlock slot (Hex), and 1 2nd level wizard slot (Web). The fight would have been substantially harder without Web, because at any given time at least half of the trolls were hors de combat and/or easy to attack.

 

[KarinsDad]

That isn't true. Webs cause light obscurement, not heavy.

Oops. You are right. Off the top of my head, I got the disadvantage perception confused with the disadvantaged attack.

I ran this fight with a 20' wide neck instead of 5', so two trolls could engage at once. (Slightly different PCs but about the same power level.) The PCs won the fight in 42 seconds, expending 35 arrows (18 recovered), 43 HP (24 temp + 18 real), 1 ki (to stun a fleeing troll at the end of the fight), 1 warlock slot (Hex), and 1 2nd level wizard slot (Web). The fight would have been substantially harder without Web, because at any given time at least half of the trolls were hors de combat and/or easy to attack.

So two trolls could engage at once??? At least half of the trolls were hors de combat without web.

So you set up a scenario where only two trolls could attack at the same time and you kept them fighting in a web spell so that they would have to make the saving throw every round and set it up so that the five trolls were too stupid to realize that fighting inside a spell area of effect was a major mistake. zzzzzzzzzz Did the trolls pull any of the front line PCs through the web? Did the trolls who couldn't attack throw rocks or go get more reinforcements? Talk about contrived.

I can't believe you went to all that trouble and still proved nothing other than the fact that web can be a great spell, but there are virtually no other first or second or even third level wizard spells that could be set up to do this, so wizard players are still stuck with spamming web at low level.

Yup, those low level wizards are real versatile if the players want to be effective in combat. Sleep at first level. Web at second. Got it.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Oops. You are right. Off the top of my head, I got the disadvantage perception confused with the disadvantaged attack.

So two trolls could engage at once??? At least half of the trolls were hors de combat without web.

So you set up a scenario where only two trolls could attack at the same time and you kept them fighting in a web spell so that they would have to make the saving throw every round and set it up so that the five trolls were too stupid to realize that fighting inside a spell area of effect was a major mistake. zzzzzzzzzz Did the trolls pull any of the front line PCs through the web? Did the trolls who couldn't attack throw rocks or go get more reinforcements? Talk about contrived.

No, without web zero trolls would be hors de combat. They would have the option of grappling PCs and pulling them back, or overrunning them and smashing through the front lines, or running away. They would have full mobility and could melee kite in order for all five of them to attack at once, at the cost of eating one opportunity attack from each frontline PC. That's a trade I would gladly make in their shoes.

Trolls aren't really rock-throwers, and it is beyond me why you think "running to go get reinforcements" is a good tactic. (It just splits the trolls up further.) At the beginning, the trolls see easy meat and lope on over to go eat it. The wizard held his spell until the trolls had already engaged, then there was a lot of snarling and snapping and thunking and sticky confusion and then three of the trolls were dead, one was out of the web and running away (he got caught by the Shadow Monk next round), and one was still stuck in the web getting beat on by the PCs.

If it hadn't been for the Web, the trolls would at least have been able to coordinate effectively. They're probably not smart enough to melee kite, but they are smart enough to hold their attacks looking for an opening, so at minimum they'd have been inflicting 2 full Trolls' worth of attacks every round, or about 236 HP of damage over the course of the 7-round fight. And of course, without Web, the fight would have lasted longer than 7 rounds as well. Web was totally worth it.

I can't believe you went to all that trouble and still proved nothing other than the fact that web can be a great spell, but there are virtually no other first or second or even third level wizard spells that could be set up to do this, so wizard players are still stuck with spamming web at low level.

You misunderstand. This is not a proof that Web is the only worthwhile spell. This is a response to Gadget's post #447. "Perhaps a few too many spells are concentration, does web really need this limitation?" I'm just pointing out that Web is already a fantastic spell, not a poster child for underpowered spells as I thought he was implying. (Also, it is in fact convenient to be able to drop Web at will by ceasing to concentrate on it.)

 

[chriton227]

The familiar was useful at low level. Now it's a one hit against anything we fight. My DM was even kind of enough to give me a pseudodragon. It's AC is 13 or 14. It has 7 hit points. All that we've been fighting at this point hits it on a 5 or better and kills it in one hit. Am I missing something where it gets more hit points? A familiar is useless in combat. It's less useful in scouting as well given the higher Passive Perceptions of opponents. Now that it is easily struck and killed in one hit, sending it out to die all the time doesn't seem like a good role-playing choice.

I don't know of any edition of D&D where familiars were particularly useful in combat except in situations of desperation. As far as the familiar getting spotted when scouting, why pick a familiar that the enemies will care about if they see it? In 5e you can change your familiar by recasting Find Familiar. The wizard in my game has been careful to pick useful forms that won't attract undue attention. For example, they were travelling at night, an owl or bat is a perfect choice. During the day in wilderness, a hawk, raven, spider, of snake would not appear out of place. In many urban areas, a rat, raven, or spider would blend in well. In natural caves, a spider, rat, or bat are all reasonable. Something like a pseudodragon is just going to draw attention as a scout.

 

[KarinsDad]

No, without web zero trolls would be hors de combat. They would have the option of grappling PCs and pulling them back, or overrunning them and smashing through the front lines, or running away. They would have full mobility and could melee kite in order for all five of them to attack at once, at the cost of eating one opportunity attack from each frontline PC. That's a trade I would gladly make in their shoes.

Trolls aren't really rock-throwers, and it is beyond me why you think "running to go get reinforcements" is a good tactic. (It just splits the trolls up further.) At the beginning, the trolls see easy meat and lope on over to go eat it. The wizard held his spell until the trolls had already engaged, then there was a lot of snarling and snapping and thunking and sticky confusion and then three of the trolls were dead, one was out of the web and running away (he got caught by the Shadow Monk next round), and one was still stuck in the web getting beat on by the PCs.

If it hadn't been for the Web, the trolls would at least have been able to coordinate effectively. They're probably not smart enough to melee kite, but they are smart enough to hold their attacks looking for an opening, so at minimum they'd have been inflicting 2 full Trolls' worth of attacks every round, or about 236 HP of damage over the course of the 7-round fight. And of course, without Web, the fight would have lasted longer than 7 rounds as well. Web was totally worth it.

Of course it is. That's one problem. Even with all of its warts, the scenario where you put it between the PCs and the NPCs and the NPCs do not have ranged attacks, the PCs win. A lot. In this scenario that you devised, it can be really nice. Course, you decided that the NPCs were, on those few occasions when a troll in the web saved, not going to run away. Not going to grapple and pull a PC into the web, not going to move to the sides of the room where the PCs would have a hard time attacking them outside of the web.

Btw, you think that running to get reinforcements is NOT a good tactic? Leave two trolls to fight and the rest go off into the dungeon and set up ambushes and alert others? That's dumb to you?

You misunderstand. This is not a proof that Web is the only worthwhile spell. This is a response to Gadget's post #447. "Perhaps a few too many spells are concentration, does web really need this limitation?" I'm just pointing out that Web is already a fantastic spell, not a poster child for underpowered spells as I thought he was implying. (Also, it is in fact convenient to be able to drop Web at will by ceasing to concentrate on it.)

Web CAN BE a fantastic spell and it is probably a top entry for best action economy second level wizard spell of 5E. But, it's a bit boring too. It's a delaying tactic and a bit of a monster debuff. zzzzzz

I'd much rather have a second level explosion spell that does some minor damage like 2D6 or so, hurls opponents through the air and knocks them down. That's fun. That's exciting. That makes my wizard, at least on the surface, appear like a bad ass.

With the concept of a) most non-instantaneous spells have saves every round, b) many non-instantaneous spells have concentration, c) defenses against spells (like legendary resistance or magic resistance) have practically no way to bypass, d) they are expected to spam cantrips (which basically suck pre-level 5), it's not as much fun.

Now, the decision making process of Wizards (and all spell casters) is even more straight jacketed. You cannot cast fly on one PC and invisibility on another. You cannot cast web and blur. You cannot do this and that and the next thing, all of the things that made spell casters fun to play.

And I do think that for the most part, the only adjustment needed (for those of us that do want to play more fun spell casters) is to get rid of the concentration limit (possibly with a penalty based on how many concentration spells the caster has up). All of the other aspects, even the low level "most spells suck, especially cantrips" can be tolerated. But concentration is the elephant in the room. IMO.