D&D 5E [GUIDE] Arrive on Time - A General Guide to Wizardry

NADRIGOL

Explorer
I kind of wanted to touch base about Hypnotic Pattern -- It gets rave reviews as an excellent CC option, and it is a good one, but it seems very swingy to me. If everyone in the encounter fails it's ridiculously strong, and you can basically just pick your targets and strike like mad. If one or more foes passes, however, the enemies will just use their actions to shake their allies awake. A 3rd level spell slot for one turn of CC seems kind of rough to me.

Just was wondering if I was missing anything or if you guys have any advice!

Wasting actions seems worthwhile regardless. And if less than half of them save, it would take more than one round to wake everyone up. The positioning of who saves and who doesn't also presents opportunities for additional CC to keep enemies charmed, OA's on enemies running to their allies, and anything you can use the charmed enemies as bait for. Given the number of rounds a typical combat sequence may last, even one round of charmed enemies is not insubstantial.

While a wall spell that can split enemies into subgroups may be more powerful, this spell could present similar opportunities, and has a chance to be far more powerful (at the expense of possibly being far worse).

Just my thoughts... I've actually used the spell before in game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I kind of wanted to touch base about Hypnotic Pattern -- It gets rave reviews as an excellent CC option, and it is a good one, but it seems very swingy to me. If everyone in the encounter fails it's ridiculously strong, and you can basically just pick your targets and strike like mad. If one or more foes passes, however, the enemies will just use their actions to shake their allies awake. A 3rd level spell slot for one turn of CC seems kind of rough to me.

Just was wondering if I was missing anything or if you guys have any advice!

It depends upon a number of factors, but the one you highlight here is: how much does your DM metagame combat? As a DM, I do not metagame to the extent of mentally choosing the waking sequence so that monster #1 not only realizes that he can wake his buddies up, but also knows which monster comes next in initiative order and wakes him so they can all chain-wake each other in optimal order.

(Also, I use a Speed Factor initiative system so even if I wanted to metagame this way it would be difficult.)

So the thing you might be missing is: your DM's apparent style is not universal. And even with his style, you're still costing them a round of combat, and PCs can get opportunity attacks and/or interdict enemies with grapple/etc. to prevent them from waking each other. Hypnotic Pattern is still an excellent spell, with the one major weakness of not working against targets immune to charm, which means sometimes you waste the spell on something like a ghoul that turns out to be immune.
 

famousringo

First Post
Wasting actions seems worthwhile regardless. And if less than half of them save, it would take more than one round to wake everyone up. The positioning of who saves and who doesn't also presents opportunities for additional CC to keep enemies charmed, OA's on enemies running to their allies, and anything you can use the charmed enemies as bait for. Given the number of rounds a typical combat sequence may last, even one round of charmed enemies is not insubstantial.

While a wall spell that can split enemies into subgroups may be more powerful, this spell could present similar opportunities, and has a chance to be far more powerful (at the expense of possibly being far worse).

Just my thoughts... I've actually used the spell before in game.

Yeah, if you hit half of an enemy force with Hypnotic Pattern, and the bad guys take their turn immediately after and wake everybody up, you've basically traded your turn for the turn of the entire enemy team. That's a good deal.

I'd spend a 3rd level slot for a 1 round Time Stop that lets my allies act.
 

jgsugden

Legend
I've revisited the guide recently and have a few more comments.

When we evaluate the color of spells, the efficacy is only one consideration. The 2nd most powerful spell in the game might sound like something that should be gold to us - but it might actually deserve to be red. Why? Let's say both were 9th level spells (of which we only get to cast one) and we'd always elect to use the most powerful over the second most powerful. Why prepare the second 9th level spell when we'll never use it? Why bother selecting to learn it? This is an argument as to why the presence of a gold 9th level spell (wish) makes every other 9th level spell green at best - maybe purple.

So, when we apply color to a spell, I think we need to consider:
* Whether it needs to be prepared while adventuring to be useful (rituals, simulacrum, clone, etc... do not);
* In what situations we would prepare it
** Are there levels where utility phases out - like sleep phases out,
** Would we work it in or out based upon situational benefits - wall of force is great unless you're fighting underwater where people can swim around it, and
** Would we always prepare it - like shield?;
* How often will I use slots on it when prepared; and
* How powerful it is.

To me, any spell that I'm always going to have prepared once I learn it and will cast using multiple spell slots over an adventuring day; or that I've often use without having to regularly prepare are gold - even if they're not amazeballs (technical term) in power levels. Other spells might also be gold based upon a totality of circumstances. This assessment would upgrade a lot of rituals to gold.

There are 40 light blue and gold non-ritual spells on your list. A few of those spells (contingency, clone, simulacrum) are not ones we prepare daily, but most are. A 20th level wizard with a 22 Int and Spell Mastery included has 28 spells they can prepare. Opportunity cost says that a lot of those sky blues and golds are not going to make your often prepared list - we'd be able to prepare only about 2/3 of the available ones at any given time. Some of those are spells we'll conditionally prepare, but they're awesome at the levels we'd prepare them or in the situations we'd use them. So, if we say that we're cycling between these spells that number of sky blue and gold make sense... but only if every other spell is purple or lower. The more dark blue and green options we have - which by definition are the minimum tiers where we'd consider them as a selected option - the less sky blue and gold we can have if they need to be prepared during adventuring to be useful.

To me, based upon the description of the categories, this is how I'd rank spells:

Gold: Rituals I will use often, spells I will cast while not adventuring that are very useful (clone, simulacrum, etc..), and spells I need to prepare on adventures that I will always prepare once available, although they may get 'phased out' after a while. There should be very, very few of these if they require preparation while adventuring to use them.
Sky Blue: Rituals I will use once or twice a level, spell that I will cast while not adventuring that are fairly useful, and spells I need to prepare on adventures that many character builds will prepare most of the time. Based upon the limited number of preparable spells, there is really only enough room for 4 or 5 sky blue or gold spells that require active preparation to be useful in level 1, 2 or 3 per level for levels 2 to 5 and no more than 6 total for levels 6 to 9. Across 9 levels - excluding rituals and spells we don't need to prepare while adventuring for them to be useful, there should be no more than about 20 spells that are sky blue or gold. Having more violates the definition of the colors.
Blue: Rituals and spells I do not need to prepare while adventuring that are of limited use fit here. So do spells that certain builds will love, but others would rarely, if ever, prepare; spells that phase out quickly; spells that have alternatives that provide similar benefits at a lower level; etc... There should be a handful of these spells at each level - but not if we have a gold option at a higher level spell.
Green: Any other ritual or spell that I do not need to prepare while adventuring should fit here unless totally useless. Spells with conditional use or a very short useful life cycle that must be prepared go here as well. This is the highest tier where any number of spells could fit.
Purple: Totally useless non-adventuring spells and rituals fit here (basically, a seemingly useless ritual is better than a seemingly useless non-ritual). So do prepared spells that have very narrow bands of use.
Red: Junk.

Also, a discussion of non-wizard spells available via dip into another class would be good in a multi-class area. A one level dip into cleric gets you first level cleric spells - and that means access to cure wounds that you can cast using high level slots. That deserves mention. First level spells that ramp up well can be very worthwhile - and having the capability to use up a huge number of slots to heal the party up is sometimes worth it.
 

NADRIGOL

Explorer
Really liked this post... It's something I've been thinking about a lot as I write my Bladesinger guide. Here are a couple thoughts I had reading it.

Your ratings gleam most of their weighting from a "how many spells can I prepare" and "what will I prepare most often" frame of mind. I think this is the most relevant based on the Wizard playstyle, but I can see how a "How many spells are in my spellbook", "How many spells can I copy from scroll drops etc..." frame of mind could also be valuable (and I would put forward that this is how the guides spells are currently rated).

Along the previous points implications... I think a problem encountered rating spells is that a lot of the currently sky blue spells are at least slightly situational. Therefore there are arguments to be made that all ~40 of them would spend equal time on your prepared list based on hunches regarding the upcoming adventure. I think where these two frames of mind can be reconciled is by giving out a few more gold ratings to the spells that always make the list... but the sky blue ratings are harder to judge... because of my next point.

As recently discussed on this thread, ratings fluctuate depending on the tradition, build, and playstyle of the particular Wizard (which is a class with many possibilities). Your definition of ratings for spells, being very "prepared list" dependent, is therefore also very build dependent. Therefore I think that while certain aspects of your rating system could probably be incorporated into this guide, I think the current system is very appropriate for a "general guide to wizardry".

All that being said, I think I'm going to borrow some of your rating ideas for the Bladesinger guide I'm writing. I think it will work well since, to my previous point, I'm writing a build specific guide. I'm in the middle of my multiclassing section, and to this guide's author's credit... rating multiclass spells is a horrific undertaking. It requires a lot of study, and reading of other guides, and outside-the-box (pure class X is the box!) thinking. In my current version I'm only bothering to point out spells that have potential to synergize well with the build, not even considering rating the whole spell list. Perhaps a middle ground will be to point out said spells, and rate them in the context of that particular multiclass build considering the existing Wizard spell ratings (Because who cares about the red-blue spells anyways).
 
Last edited:

Ovarwa

Explorer
Hi, Interesting. A lot of this boils down to judging the value of a wizard's spell by 2 criteria: How important is it to have this spell in your spellbook? How important is it to have this spell prepared, if it is in your spellbook? Other casting classes only have one criteria (clerics/druids/paladins because all of their spells are in their spellbook, and everyone else because the spells they have access to are always prepared.) Anyway, Ken
 

Ovarwa

Explorer
I guess there is a third criterion:

How important is it to choose a spell as one of your guaranteed spells known rather than hope that you will be able to find it later?
 

Yunru

Banned
Banned
What's the best way for me to imitate a maho shojo?
I'm thinking bladesinger, because Blade Song could very easily be refluffed into a Barrier Jacket.
 

Matau99

Explorer
Could you add your thoughts on That Old Black Magic's spells and Modern Magic's technomancer? TOBM seems very good with Conjuration, especially Conjure Lesser Demon--like Conjure Minor Elementals but more. 32 units each with 30 extra HP would be amazing.
 

Polarthief

First Post
Regarding a dip in Cleric, what is everyone's thoughts about the Arcana domain?

I currently have a character level 2, and he's a Cleric 1/Wizard 1. I've been questioning if the expertise from Knowledge is worth it over Arcana, but here's a quick rundown of what you get from both:

Knowledge
- +2 Languages (easily overcome by Comprehend Languages)
- Proficiency+Expertise in Arcana (obvious pick because why the hell wouldn't you) and 1 more: Nature, Religion, or History
- Domain Spells: Command (pretty good), Identify (meh)

Thoughts: The expertise in Arcana and one more knowledge skill is very nice, but that's pretty much all you get from this, assuming you go with only 1 level in dipping Cleric.

Arcana
- Arcana Proficiency (not as good as Expertise in it and 1 more skill)
- +2 Wizard cantrips as Cleric cantrips (pick ones like Mage Hand, Prestidigitation, Control Flames, etc that don't use an attack roll, saving throw, or any of your abilities in any way. This is amazing for utility and gives you a whopping 8 cantrips [3 Cleric, 2 Wizard as Cleric, 3 Wizard] at Level 2! [9 if you run a race that gives free cantrips such as High/Drow Elf, Genasi, etc])
- Domain Spells: Detect Magic (always prepared so you can cast it whenever, saving you a Wizard spell learned), Magic Missile (not the best Level 1 spell ever, but it's nice to have!) [Note: While both spells are considered Cleric spells, neither uses abilities or rolls a d20, so there's no penalty to them being Cleric spells instead of Wizard ones).

Thoughts: The spells are very good (not amazing but significantly more useful than Command and Identify), more cantrips are never a bad thing, and you still get the free proficiency in Arcana!

I mean, that's just my two cents, but I'm curious if anyone else thinks about Arcana vs Knowledge regarding players who run Cleric 1/Wizard X. The expertise in Arcana and one other Knowledge skill is the only thing that keeps me questioning the two, but I love having extra cantrips and (more useful) spells so much.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top