D&D 5E Overrated Wizard Spells

[abirdcall]

This is why I don't like conjecturing scenarios. Cause we can go on and on about this or that and really not have a synopsis. Picking an overrated spell has less to do with scenarios than mechanics. Of course you can only concentrate on one spell - and of course somethings cause battlefield chaos. We can talk 'all day' about illusions. And Action Economy. But I'd still rather have the ability to have 4 first level spell slots than 3 due to Mage Armor. It's still a trap spell.

I think calling it a trap is a stretch.

Levels 1-4 it isn't very good, you're just giving up too much. After level 5 it gets better each level.

There is a misconception that it does something on every attack and so it is 'more worth it' than Shield. It only does something if the attack was within 3 pts of the character's AC. I think that is worth pointing out.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Doesn't make it a bad idea. But are you wasting your arcane recovery at the beginning of the day just for one slot? Most DMs I know roll for a random encounters during a short rest (same when I DM), but ymmv.

Pretty sure the idea is that Arcane Recovery is likely to recoup a 1st-level slot anyway no matter when you take your short rest.

 

[BigBadDM]

Pretty sure the idea is that Arcane Recovery is likely to recoup a 1st-level slot anyway no matter when you take your short rest.

I am dubious if that is what he meant, cause I started with I would rather cast (4) 1st lvl spells than (3) 1st lvl spells. The implication was I could have 4 spells to cast again. You are always going to be a spell slot down with MA, even with Arcane Recovery. It's just a matter when you pay the tax man that is different.

 

[Yardiff]

I am dubious if that is what he meant, cause I started with I would rather cast (4) 1st lvl spells than (3) 1st lvl spells. The implication was I could have 4 spells to cast again. You are always going to be a spell slot down with MA, even with Arcane Recovery. It's just a matter when you pay the tax man that is different.

AR at 1st and second lv gets 1 slot so not really much of an issue for 8hr spell. At least to me.

 

[5ekyu]

We can go on and on about scenarios. My point is Shield is superior, unless for some reason you are getting targeted in every combat--- well then you are doing something wrong as a wizard. People can disagree, my experience it is the most overrated spell. There is always a better spell to have on hand.

But this post was really about what you think is the most overrated wizard spell, not conjecture on game-play scenarios that can never be fully quantified based on my first opinion.

In my view shield vs mage armor is about frequency.

Mage Armor will give you an extra +3 AC for every strike against you.
How many are those? How many miss anyway if it's not up? How many hit even though up?

It's basically going to turn I attack roll on your caster in 7 from a hit to a miss. That's it.
Meanwhile every cast of Shirld, almost every in dome gsmes hut mostly every casting, turns at least one hit to a miss.

So, is your caster in a day getting attacked by more than say 10 attack rolls you care about? If so, Mage Armor us likely your best bet.

For me, I would rather have shield - also missile stoppage as a bonus.

 

[Blue]

Uh, that is a pretty big presumption. I actually play in several groups and a few AL leagues as a wizard. I rarely get hit or targeted-- and when I say rarely I should be more clear. I might get hit 1 to 3 times a combat, but it is nothing I can't shrug off. Without Shield, that number might go up to 4-6

Also as I mentioned if you are are playing with 2 other PCs (or really 3--cause I was being tongue and check) you are more likely to be wading in combat and I can see MA in that case. But in the average party size of 4 to 5, it rarely happens. But I don't really output any damage (cantrips are the only attacks I do).

You get hit 4-6 times per combat, 1-3 with unlimited Shield use. So +5 reduces the number of hits by 3. +3 will therefore, statistically over time, reduce them about about 3/5 of that, so with Mage Armor you'd get hit just slightly over 2-4 times per combat.

So, for a single spell slot, you can get hit 2-4 time with Mage Armor or 3-5 times (4-6 less one generated miss) for Shield. Mage Armor is better.

Now, assuming that you perfectly use Shield - never waste it when you need a +6 to better change to the roll, that's three Shield spells per combat. Forget the 6-8 recommended combats per day, with even half of that you'd have 3-4 combats a day. That's 9 to 12 first level spell slots per day ... which of course you don't have. At 5th level if you don't cast a SINGLE other spell you can just about get enough slots to cast Shield as you want - assuming the lower number of encounters per day. Otherwise it's 8th. And nothing else but Shield. I can see why you said you do cantrips only offensively.

So yeah, looking at efficiency Shield is inferior to Mage Armor.

If, on the other hand, we assume we'll blow ever 1st level slot but not more, then Shield is protecting against at most 4 attacks, and with Mage Armor protecting for ~2 per combat with 3-4 combats, that's 6-8 per day. So even if willing to use all 1st level slots, Mage Armor still protects more.

Really, your table experiences are very clear.

So your last point is correct - my assumption it was table variation was wrong. I really gave you the benefit of the doubt you analyzed it correctly and based my assumptions on that. Now you've cleared it up that your table experience do not support your point, so aren't skewed from normal as I assumed.

 

[Yardiff]

If your using variant human you can have a free MA a day.

 

[Yardiff]

I don't know if this spell is overrated, per se, but Witch Bolt wins the prize for "spell that looked good when I was drunk, but in the morning when I woke up..."

For a Warlock this spell is OK since its auto up slotted, as a concentration spell its pretty bad.

 

[Wiseblood]

Enlarge and Darkness and Web yeah.
I don’t think anyone Over rates these though.

 

[BigBadDM]

Really, your table experiences are very clear.

Huh, you must be conclusion man. Must conclude--seek out normalcy.

If you like Mage Armor great! I don't care for it. I still think it is overrated. But everyone is free to make their opinion about it. If a 15% chance to reduce a hit is worth a spell slot and a spell prepared... then great. I don't feel it is worth it. The math is basic, on average with Mage Armor you'll get hit 15% less often. Don't quote my numbers, I am not an accountant at the table. If that 15% is likely to kill you then get Mage Armor. If you can circumvent that 15% another way then do it.