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

[GameOgre]

Snark aside, how in the WORLD do you think that spell casters are number 1 in 5E?

I don't know of anyone who thinks this. Our Cleric rarely casts spells and she is one of the least effective meleers in our group (although the Bard is worse). From my experience, ranger archer types generally do the most damage and are the safest far in the back, melee types do a lot of damage and are the most durable, and spell casters show up once every four or five rounds to do a non-cantrip. It might be effective, it might not.

And Wizards are far from the most effective spell casters in 5E.

Wizards are still by far the most powerful class in 5E. Granted just like in any edition it takes time to make them so and in 5E the end game difference between a Caster and Non-Caster is a lot smaller than it used to be BUT it still is there. During the last adventure paths latter levels it became very clear that the Wizard and in a less sense, Caster superiority was still in effect. Now It isn't as wide a gap as it used to be but it is still very much there.

 

[KarinsDad]

How do you get enough leverage to move and try and lift something off you by its edges when you are face down and have spikes petruding from every side but the ground side? Your also in a box with very little light, stuck looking down more or less, and I should also have pointed out the box he was incased in appeared to be made of the same stone the dungeon was made out of, stone is pretty heavy. He essencially couldnt move a hare without in his mind being sliced and poked.

First off, prone is not face down. Nothing in the description of prone indicates that. So most of the rest of your argument falls apart when you replace the prone condition with the "prone and restrained" condition. Your elaborate description is one of preventing the target from moving (or in most cases acting) at all.

Minor Illusion does not have that level of power.

Secondly, your description here is kind of funny. You make a box of stone. If Minor Illusion stops light, then the target cannot see the box, the spikes, or anything else and just stands up. If Minor Illusion does not stop light, then your description of "in a box with very little light" is invalid and not a feature of Minor Light (see this thread).

Minor Illusion and Light

And razor wire??? Seriously? Your DM allowed that in a D&D game? Barbed wire was not invented until 1867 in the real world and razor wire much later than that. How would a medieval wizard even know what razor wire is? Does your DM allow ray guns too?


Quite frankly, Minor Illusion does not have the "restrained" feature, so it doesn't get it. Just like Minor Illusion does not give advantage. There are some circumstances where Minor Illusion might give tactical advantage or even advantage for PCs on one side of it who know it is an illusion firing arrows through it, but a DM would be reasonable to state that arrows coming through an illusionary door is the same as interacting with the illusion and the PCs cannot keep doing that for multiple rounds.

It's a cantrip dude.

I'm all for the players being creative, but there should be limits to that. No Web spell equivalent for a Cantrip.

A player can make a chest, a chair, a pile of gold, a door. But razor wire surrounding the NPC (prone or not prone) is something that the NPC should get out of right away IMO.

Creative? Sure. But no way as a DM do I allow a cantrip to hand out the Restrained condition with no saving throw.

 

[KarinsDad]

Are we still talking about legendary resistance in this thread? I'll say this anyway: what if legendary resistance cost your reaction? It would still prevent save-or-lose for dragons and such, but would come with a real cost and limitation that rewarded you for combined arms tactics, instead of everybody just hammering away with DPR exclusively. (Yes I know, there are spells that bypass LR. Not what I'm talking about.)

I think I like this better than converting LR to old-style MR.

And of course, some monsters like Tiamat get multiple reactions per turn.

If you do this, then Tiamat should get no more than two reactions per turn. Otherwise, you haven't really accomplished your goal of loosening up legendary resistance. As is, Tiamat is going to save fairly frequently, so does not need legendary resistance too often.


Other dragons should be limited to normal reaction.

 

[KarinsDad]

Wizards are still by far the most powerful class in 5E. Granted just like in any edition it takes time to make them so and in 5E the end game difference between a Caster and Non-Caster is a lot smaller than it used to be BUT it still is there. During the last adventure paths latter levels it became very clear that the Wizard and in a less sense, Caster superiority was still in effect. Now It isn't as wide a gap as it used to be but it is still very much there.

We are talking low level here (1 to 4 or so). I agree that Wizards are still the king at higher levels.

 

[KarinsDad]

what about the damage output of scorching ray at L3?

What about it? Sure, once in a blue moon someone can use it to take out 3 kobolds if all 3 attacks hit.

But, the DPR for a level 3 Colossus Slayer archer Ranger with a longbow (vs. AC 12) using Hunter's Mark against a slightly wounded foe is 13.025.

The DPR for a level 3 Wizard using Scorching Ray (vs. AC 12) is 15.75.

Edit: Forgot to post the DPR for a level 3 Wizard using Fire Bolt (vs. AC 12) is 4.125.

So in two rounds, the Ranger does 13.025 average DPR and the Wizard does 9.9375 average DPR.

Sure, the Wizard did a hair more average damage on his mini-nova round and can target multiple foes, but the Ranger (or Rogue or Fighter) does this round in and round out, encounter in and encounter out. Not a couple of times per adventuring day. The Wizard goes back to doing dinky damage while the Ranger is still doing solid damage.

Having used Scorching Ray in a game, typically, it's two rays hitting for about 14 damage (about 1 time in 3, all 3 rays hit against moderate AC foes). 14 damage is not that huge at level 3. Solid to be sure, but a normal hit from the same level 3 Colossus Slayer archer Ranger is often 2D8+D6+3 or 15.5 points. This typically happens at least a dozen rounds per day, not just twice a day.

The Scorching Ray mini-nova is not impressive when the level 3 Colossus Slayer archer Ranger does more damage nearly every round.

And when the Wizard wants to use his Scorching Ray (against BBEGs or lieutenants), the foe has a higher AC and his chances of getting all 3 rays to hits drops to about 1 in 8 (AC 16).

 

[keterys]

But, IMX, at low level, if you have Cure Wounds, you cast Cure Wounds, a lot. It's more a burden than an added option. At higher levels, that effect is moderated a bit, as you're not constantly needing to bring PCs back up.

Offense over defense over recovery. Been adventuring for several levels with no one ever casting cure wounds, especially not in combat, and it works great.

Which is not to say that we aren't taking steps to heal damage. I took the Healer feat, which encourages the group to take more short rests, which is good for my warlock for his offensive output. At the start of every day the druid also hands out some goodberries. During combat, she shifts into a beast, and I nuke stuff.

After combat, we address damage.

Now that we're higher level, we're also starting to ponder buying healing potions in bulk because we've gotten a fair amount of coin and that's an easy backup option.

 

[Chocolategravy]

We are talking low level here (1 to 4 or so). I agree that Wizards are still the king at higher levels.

I don't really agree. Cantrips inexplicably got nerfed from the play test and most are relatively useless. If you're doing the prescribed ~7 fights/day it is hard for a wizard to be king over 30 rounds. There will certainly be a few rounds where they'll shine but most of the time they'll at best be a duke and often only a baron or squire. Much like everyone else.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'm definitely in the camp of "DMs should say YES", but it does need to be tempered a bit so that they aren't allowing things that are way off what spell descriptions imply. Personally I'm really hoping my L3 wizard gets a chance at using his newly taken Phantasmal Force in our session today, but I'm not sure how open to DM interpretation that one is going to end up being!

My group has an official house rule called the "rule of YES", which is that the first time in a campaign that someone tries something new, it automatically works. The second time you try it, the DM will stop and figure out an actual rule for it, but the first time it just works. So I would have let my PCs get away with the "spike box" illusion the first time for sure. It keeps play moving and encourages them to be creative.

 

[keterys]

I don't really agree. Cantrips inexplicably got nerfed from the play test and most are relatively useless. If you're doing the prescribed ~7 fights/day it is hard for a wizard to be king over 30 rounds. There will certainly be a few rounds where they'll shine but most of the time they'll at best be a duke and often only a baron or squire. Much like everyone else.

I'll say, a lot of adventures I've seen fail to do ~7 fights/day. It's the classic problem with balancing around a day economy, and I was a bit sad that the system didn't account for it at all. In some campaigns, daily-based classes will be much stronger than at-will classes. And vice versa.

Beyond that, a fireball (or hypnotic pattern or...) that hits 12 guys can easily account for several rounds of cantrips. So now it depends on the types of encounters the DM throws. I did one adventure where every single encounter had bystanders, hostages, or the enemies were spread 40+ ft from each other; coincidentally the same level we got fireball and wanted to try it out. The next adventure every encounter was solved in round 1 by mass damage. Like enemies don't get to act kinda thing.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't really agree. Cantrips inexplicably got nerfed from the play test and most are relatively useless. If you're doing the prescribed ~7 fights/day it is hard for a wizard to be king over 30 rounds. There will certainly be a few rounds where they'll shine but most of the time they'll at best be a duke and often only a baron or squire. Much like everyone else.

Your point is well made, but it is my contention that the King does not dirty his hands most of the time. That's what he has Dukes, Barons, Knights and others for (i.e. the other PCs). He just walks around watching how well his subjects (i.e. the rest of the party) are doing, throwing out his 16 points of damage Firebolt on already wounded foes and then suddenly, he decides to act and show everyone else why he is King.

Disintegrate! BA BOOM.

"Ok, time to waltz around some more. Ho hum. I wonder what goodies we have for lunch." the King, err, Wizard says as he checks his robes for signs of dirt.

alla Treantmonk's Guide