D&D 5E Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e

[Joshua Gilliam]

Thanks for the great guide. I was looking at the XgtE Pyrotechnics which is now the most recent version and it appears that the synergy between pyrotechnics and flaming sphere is limited. Pyrotechnics states that the source flame must be non-magical, so would you need to spend a round lighting something on fire to use pyrotechnics?

 

[TomFinn]

Hi Treantmonk, love the guide. Just about to finish playing a campaign with a Svirfneblin Portent Wizard- really enjoyed it.

You recently updated the Levitate spell to blue, and said that casting it at higher levels means you can target multiple enemies- I don't see that in the spell description?

Without that, is it still blue give the Con save factor?

 

[BlivetWidget]

You recently updated the Levitate spell to blue, and said that casting it at higher levels means you can target multiple enemies- I don't see that in the spell description?

It is not in the spell description. I suspect someone conflated Levitate with Fly.

 

[ScuroNotte]

For Otiluke's Freezing Sphere, I understand the low rating you gave due to the poor damage and Con save. But don't you think that its huge area of affect (60 feet radius sphere) makes it deserve a higher rating?

 

[jgsugden]

For Otiluke's Freezing Sphere, I understand the low rating you gave due to the poor damage and Con save. But don't you think that its huge area of affect (60 feet radius sphere) makes it deserve a higher rating?

How often do you encounter battles where you want to drop 120 wide areas of damage? Very rarely, but when you do it is the bomb. However, as you only need it rarely, it can't get too high of a grade. Outside of naval battle wizards and war wizards, it is unlikely to be worth preparing.

 

[Eck]

Something I stumbled across just now that I don't think has been mentioned is Polearm Master and War Caster synergy. When wielding a quarterstaff you can make an opportunity attack on an opponent that enters your reach. And War Caster allows you to use a single target spell vs. an enemy that provokes an attack of opportunity. There's something to be said for being able to cast an "action" spell with a reaction is pretty cool, but it might not be worth a feat selection.

Still, it would be pretty funny to levitate a jerk that was charging you.

- Eck

 

[jgsugden]

Something I stumbled across just now that I don't think has been mentioned is Polearm Master and War Caster synergy. When wielding a quarterstaff you can make an opportunity attack on an opponent that enters your reach. And War Caster allows you to use a single target spell vs. an enemy that provokes an attack of opportunity. There's something to be said for being able to cast an "action" spell with a reaction is pretty cool, but it might not be worth a feat selection.

Still, it would be pretty funny to levitate a jerk that was charging you.

- Eck

It is a pretty hefty investment (2 feats), but useful if you do not have a regular way to 'use up' your reaction effectively. That investment is palatable when you consider the independent utility of war caster. I considered it once, but realized that there were a lot of OAs being generated for the benefit of my wizard without PAM... it would not have added that many additional spells.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Hey all, been gone for awhile (health got real and scary for a bit, so I was spending less time having fun). Going to be spending the next couple of days catching up on posts from the past few months. Also, I've (finally) updated my wizard guide with the Xanathar's spells. Better late than never.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Thank you.

Yes, if that is indeed what it says, it is in error.

A spellcaster with two levels of Fighter can indeed cast two Fireballs in the same turn, using Action Surge.

But perhaps it's talking about casting spells as bonus actions? Even with Action Surge you're restricted to cantrips if you Quickened a spell, for instance.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

My original understanding was that as long as neither spell used a bonus action, neither needed to be a cantrip. Then Jeremy Crawford posted this:
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/862417942645850112
and this
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/657260788122386432
Which both seemed to imply the opposite. However, reading again, they are still following the "if you cast a spell with a bonus action" limitation.

I will update my guide right now. Done.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Hey Treantmonk,

what do you think about the new spell identification mechanics? I‘ve read somewhere, they are intendet to be optional. They still change the mechanics of casting counterspell if implemented and they seem like RAI to me. I think this makes counterspell slightly worse and the level 10 Abjurer feature much better.

What do you think?

I think it changes little in actual gameplay regardless of how the official rules discuss the identification of the spell. I figure it comes down to two actual scenarios that occur:

1) DM: The enemy wizard casts a fireball! Roll your dex saves.
Handsome and witty wizard: I cast counterspell
DM: You brilliant bastard. The fireball fizzles before it manifests.

DM: The enemy wizard casts something. You're not sure what it was
Handsome and witty wizard: I use my reaction to identify the spell
DM: You brilliant bastard. He cast a major illusion, on a side note, a dragon just showed up that would have been more intimidating if you didn't know that.