D&D 5E Overrated Wizard Spells

[BigBadDM]

Let's list out (1) wizard spell you think is over-rated (and provide reasoning).
I'll start.


Mage Armor

That +3 Armor looks nice, till then you realize it's not. It's the auto pick of many Wizards out there, but let me tell you why it's wrong.

First the dreaded spell slot tax:
Giving up a 1st level spell slot actually isn't so bad. But honestly I would rather have that slot to cast my 1st level Wall of Stone (aka Silent Image) or try to make them LOL around a bit (Tasha's H.). All-in-all losing a 1st level spell lost is not that bad, but you know what is:

the vital prepared spell tax:
Us wizards know how it goes; do I memorize this, do I memorize that. We always seem to be just one short (even with that godly 20 INT) from having our cake. That dreaded Mage Armor again. I'm paying a spell-prepared slot of just (count them out loud with me), ONE casting per day. Unless some stupid caster casts dispel magic on you... Let that sink in again... One prepared spell resource for only ONE casting. Still not convinced, okay it's because:

you are a dumb wizard:
You know you are out there getting hit by swords. For some reason you don't know how to stand back on most fights. You are that guy the cleric is always wasting spells on. Unless you are a PC party of two, the only time you should see a sword is when it hits your SHIELD spell when that NPC lunatic charges behind the line of your sword toting brothers. Or you could have been invisible or levitating--na instead you limited your choices when memorizing a +3 AC one off.

Conclusion -- it's a trap. don't take it.

***The terse technical breakdown
(Shield vs Mage Armor):
AC : +5 vs +3 --->uh, 5 is better
spell slot tax: 0-4 vs 1 --->variable is better than fixed
prepared tax: 1 vs 1 ---> but shield I can cast up to 4 times vs 1 time for MA

---Why not both, argument?
Cause if you really want to pay a 2 spell tax for something that shouldn't happen, you'd be the dumb wizard.



In all silliness though - what are your overrated spells and why do you think so

 

[Gladius Legis]

you are a dumb wizard:
You know you are out there getting hit by swords. For some reason you don't know how to stand back on most fights. You are that guy the cleric is always wasting spells on. Unless you are a PC party of two, the only time you should see a sword is when it hits your SHIELD spell when that NPC lunatic charges behind the line of your sword toting brothers. Or you could have been invisible or levitating--na instead you limited your choices when memorizing a +3 AC one off.

Conclusion -- it's a trap. don't take it.

You do know ranged weapons are a thing, yes? Or enemies with much faster speed than your likely 30 feet?

***The terse technical breakdown
(Shield vs Mage Armor):
AC : +5 vs +3 --->uh, 5 is better

+5 for 1 round vs. +3 for 8 hours.

spell slot tax: 0-4 vs 1 --->variable is better than fixed
prepared tax: 1 vs 1 ---> but shield I can cast up to 4 times vs 1 time for MA

On the other hand, MA makes it so that you don't need to cast Shield nearly as often.

---Why not both, argument?
Cause if you really want to pay a 2 spell tax for something that shouldn't happen, you'd be the dumb wizard.

There aren't so many good uses for your 1st-level slot that you'll want to prepare an additional spell in the place of one of MA or Shield.

 

[Garthanos]

You do know ranged weapons are a thing, yes? Or enemies with much faster speed than your likely 30 feet?

And stopping more than one enemy at a time seems tough for most fighter types.

 

[BigBadDM]

You do know ranged weapons are a thing, yes? Or enemies with much faster speed than your likely 30 feet?

Ah, if only you had a prepared slot for blindness--if he can't see you, he can't hit you. Or if you are in the air (levitating) or misty step. Or just use 'Shield' -- methinks your wizard gets hit a lot...

***Really though this thread isn't about what you think on my 'assumption' it is to think what you think is an overrated wizard spell.

 

[BigBadDM]

And stopping more than one enemy at a time seems tough for most fighter types.

isn't that what Web is for? or did you run out of prepared slots learning Mage Armor? -- methinks your wizard gets hit a lot...

 

[Garthanos]

isn't that what Web is for? or did you run out of prepared slots learning Mage Armor? -- methinks your wizard gets hit a lot...

Webbing up your ally shame on you... context -->" when that NPC lunatic charges behind the line of your sword toting brothers." -- > Its a mild pet peeve I have about those sword toting brothers and reaction being a rather severely limiting thing.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Ah, if only you had a prepared slot for blindness--if he can't see you, he can't hit you.

Blindness is only on 1 enemy (with a 2nd-level slot). Other enemies I don't cast Blindness on will still have an easier time hitting me with ranged weapons.

Or if you are in the air (levitating) or misty step.

You can still be hit by ranged weapons.

Or just use 'Shield' -- methinks your wizard gets hit a lot...

Nope, and Mage Armor helps that.

 

[Garthanos]

Banishment... no wait... splitting up the fight into 2 easier ones... sorry not over estimated

 

[Gladius Legis]

Banishment... no wait... splitting up the fight into 2 easier ones... sorry not over estimated

It may be slightly overrated, but that's because it does nothing on a successful save (an "all-or-nothing" spell). The effect on a failed save is glorious, though, no argument there. I consider Hold Person/Monster "overrated" for the same reason.

 

[Ashrym]

Mountain Dwarf or multi-classing makes the armor spell less attractive. I'd pay the spell slot tax on it, tbh, because of the duration if I didn't have an armor option. I agree it's over-rated but I'd still do it. ;-)

Charm Person is over-rated. The only real benefit is the shift in attitude towards friendly. Not being attacked by charmed person (charm condition) is redundant given the attitude shift and the advantage on check can be granted in a number of ways, including the help action.

The attitude shift is irrelevant simply by requesting favors or influencing NPC's already friendly (which can be cultivated over time easily enough), and is still going to be limited by risk factor and reasonable requests.

And stopping more than one enemy at a time seems tough for most fighter types.

My fighters block choke points if those are available. They'll also possibly resort to lighting fires or throwing ball bearings / caltrops down. A lot of monsters struggle with the saves against those because of the lack of proficiency bonuses. It costs actions, though, so many would rather just hit things for numbers porn. ;-P