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

[Aridon]

Tasha's Hideous Laughter is my go to first level "attack" spell. Wizard's ability to do damage is underwhelming IMHO, so I focus on controlling the battlefield by disabling enemies. Oddly, this spell compares well with the 6th level Otto’s Irresistible Dance.

 

[Krachek]

A level 8 wizard in all edition (except 4) cast a 8d6 fireball.
In first edition a troll have 33 hit points.
3.5 63 hit points.
5ed 84 hit points.
As edition improve Wizard is less a troll killer.

 

[Krachek]

On the other side the first edition fighter was attacking on 3/2, with crappy stat.
The 3.5 fighter use +8/+3 and 5 feats.
The 5ed fighter, two attacks at full bonus, 3 feats or ASI, superiority dice.
He get more troll killer at each edition.

 

[Mort]

A level 8 wizard in all edition (except 4) cast a 8d6 fireball.
In first edition a troll have 33 hit points.
3.5 63 hit points.
5ed 84 hit points.
As edition improve Wizard is less a troll killer.

8th level isn't really low level anymore but ok.

The wizard has options to deal with the troll without direct damage:

Tasha's hideous laughter - about 75% (wis save) chance to incapacitate the troll with a 1st level spell.

Suggestion: trolls are stupid, this has a 75% (wis save again) or so chance of avoiding combat or otherwise "winning" the encounter.

And these are 2nd and 1st level spells, much more in line with a low level wizard.

 

[Sacrosanct]

A level 8 wizard in all edition (except 4) cast a 8d6 fireball.
In first edition a troll have 33 hit points.
3.5 63 hit points.
5ed 84 hit points.
As edition improve Wizard is less a troll killer.

You can't compare the editions in this way as if they are apples to apples. For example, in 1e, you had a decent chance as a MU of failing to even learn the spell. And saving throws were based on monster HD, not on a save DC from the caster, so even a 20th level MU in 1e wouldn't have a better chance of the monster failing its saving throw over a 5th level MU. And the XP needed to be 8th level in 1e puts you as an 11th level MU in 5e---the progressed slower than other classes compared to 5e when everyone is the same. And god forbid if the MU ever got attacked in 1e, because they would be dead in a hurry. An 8th level MU in 1e has an average of 20 hit points. Also, all you need to interrupt a 1e caster is a handful of pebbles thrown at them. And trolls regen every round in 1e, where they don't if they suffer a certain damage type in that round in 5e. I'm sure there are other factors, but those are just off the top of my head.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Besides, everyone knows wizards don't suck. They blow. They literally have spells for that

 

[TwoSix]

Besides, everyone knows wizards don't suck. They blow. They literally have spells for that

"It's the wizard! She's gone from suck to blow!"

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yes and no. For some new players, it's this type of strategy and learned complexity that draws them in.

That's me, in any game. I almost never choose the simple "new player" option, in any game.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

The claim that 5e wizards with at will cantrips, ritual spells, two spell slots, same to-hit progression as a fighter, and no roll to learn new spells suck compared to 1e magic users with one spell slot, no effective cantrips, no ritual spells, sucky hit progression, and a chance to not get to know a particular spell is a pretty unusual one.

 

[jgsugden]

In terms of power relative to enemies and allies, the early edition Wizards were more powerful than modern ones, especially at levels 5 and above.

In 5E, they do not suck. They are faily balanced, but if you embrace their creative controller aspects, they can be very strong.