D&D General Chris just said why I hate wizard/fighter dynamic

[Faolyn]

You were the one that brought up meteor storm as broken. I was just pointing out that it's been exceptionally rare that for us it mattered. When I say high level fighters seem to worked just fine for us I'm speaking as player and DM.

So my examples have been 3 campaigns working on a 4th. It hasn't been hypothetical for me. So I have no idea what you're talking about.

Where did I say it was broken? No. Why are you putting words in my mouth?

@Minigiant mentioned that a 20th-level wizard gets 1 9th-level spell/long rest, versus a fighter getting four attacks plus two action surges/long rest, with the implication that fighters progress faster than wizards because they get so many attacks. I asked how long it would take for a fighter to do similar damage that a wizard could do in one round.

 

[Maxperson]

To be entirely fair here, a wizard with a 9th-level spell slot can cast meteor swarm and inflict 40d6 damage to as many creatures who can fit in a 40-foot-radius sphere once per day, with a single action. How long would it take a fighter to do the same thing, even with a tricked-out weapon?

Usually when that happens those creatures are so low in CR that it's overkill anyway. If you have that many challenging creatures, it's a TPK no matter what the wizard does. More often that not, a like CR creature to a 17+ level wizard has resistance or immunity to magic or fire, and/or is legendary and can auto save. Meteor Swarm is really not all that good of a spell, especially since you can easily hit party members.

 

[Maxperson]

Where did I say it was broken? No. Why are you putting words in my mouth?

@Minigiant mentioned that a 20th-level wizard gets 1 9th-level spell/long rest, versus a fighter getting four attacks plus two action surges/long rest,

2 action surges per short rest, which under the right circumstances is 12-16 action surges per long rest. There's no limit to the number of short rests and all you need is an hour in-between each of those 6-8 fights.

 

[Minigiant]

Where did I say it was broken? No. Why are you putting words in my mouth?

@Minigiant mentioned that a 20th-level wizard gets 1 9th-level spell/long rest, versus a fighter getting four attacks plus two action surges/long rest, with the implication that fighters progress faster than wizards because they get so many attacks. I asked how long it would take for a fighter to do similar damage that a wizard could do in one round.

I didn't say that.

I said that following the guidelines of encounters suggested by WOTC, a fighter has about as many Action Surges a day as a full spellcaster has spells 6th level or higher.

However the extra action of the fighter doesn't progress in combat power over 20 levels as magic grows in supernaturnalness as they grow in spell level. A wizard gets more magicky and a rogue gets more tricky than a fighter gets violent. it's only tolerated due to niche protection.

The fighter is still the best warrior. However if it grew like magic does,the fighter would have far more impactful Action Surge and Second Wind.

 

[Maxperson]

I didn't say that.

I said that following the guidelines of encounters suggested by WOTC, a fighter has about as many Action Surges a day as a full spellcaster has spells 6th level or higher.

Depending on how the encounters and small rests play out, the fighter can get 2 action surges compared to the wizard's 6 spells, or 16 action surges compared to the wizard's 6 spells. Most likely the fighter is going to have 8-10. DMs don't usually hurl encounter after encounter after encounter without time for at least a short rest.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The fighter is still the best warrior. However if it grew like magic does,the fighter would have far more impactful Action Surge and Second Wind.

Yeah, I agree it should be a bit better, and the idea of getting 12 attacks on an action surge round at level 20 seems reasonable. But then I have to wonder about other classes? I mean Ranger's (which suck in general due to poor design) get Foe Slayer. Whoopie...

Second Wind is also another issue. Why does it never get more uses? It would seem like Second Wind and Action Surge could both be 1 use for each tier, making the fighter more effective, powerful, and closer to full casters.

Instead of Indomitable being multiple uses, sometimes the save DC is so high rerolling isn't likely to help really, I think it should be 1 use but an auto-20 (which should hopefully make most saves). Or maybe even a kin to Legendary Resistance, but you have to use it before you roll.

 

[Oofta]

Where did I say it was broken? No. Why are you putting words in my mouth?

@Minigiant mentioned that a 20th-level wizard gets 1 9th-level spell/long rest, versus a fighter getting four attacks plus two action surges/long rest, with the implication that fighters progress faster than wizards because they get so many attacks. I asked how long it would take for a fighter to do similar damage that a wizard could do in one round.

Sorry if I misunderstood. As far as how long? Well, how many turns does the wizard have to rely on lower power spells or cantrips? Who's being targeted by the meteor storm? A group of standard orcs or an army of frost giants? In the rare case that meteor storm is useful (it may be more useful in different campaigns), how often is it just overkill? A 20th level fighter could probably hold off a small army of orcs if at a choke point, wouldn't last long in an open field against the frost giants if they're allowed to attack from range.

So I don't know how to make a valid comparison. I also don't see the point that @Minigiant was trying to make. People seem to be so obsessed with big boom spells like this but the major turning points in my campaigns rarely turn on things like this. It's the decisions made by the players, the alliances forged, the enemies made over time. It's the fighter holding off the BBEG so that the rogue can disarm the doomsday device. It's not about being flashy, it's about contributing to a shared story as part of a team.

 

[Aldarc]

Sorry if I misunderstood. As far as how long? Well, how many turns does the wizard have to rely on lower power spells or cantrips? Who's being targeted by the meteor storm? A group of standard orcs or an army of frost giants? In the rare case that meteor storm is useful (it may be more useful in different campaigns), how often is it just overkill? A 20th level fighter could probably hold off a small army of orcs if at a choke point, wouldn't last long in an open field against the frost giants if they're allowed to attack from range.

So I don't know how to make a valid comparison. I also don't see the point that @Minigiant was trying to make. People seem to be so obsessed with big boom spells like this but the major turning points in my campaigns rarely turn on things like this. It's the decisions made by the players, the alliances forged, the enemies made over time. It's the fighter holding off the BBEG so that the rogue can disarm the doomsday device. It's not about being flashy, it's about contributing to a shared story as part of a team.

I suspect the pushback comes from the contrasting degrees to which the different classes have the mechanical tools to reliably empower those team contributions and affect change in the campgain through their mechanical agency, particularly given as the non-mechanical contributions (e.g., "the friendships made along the way," etc.) are often irreproducible between campaigns, tables, and groups.

 

[Oofta]

I suspect the pushback comes from the contrasting degrees to which the different classes have the mechanical tools to reliably empower those team contributions and affect change in the campgain through their mechanical agency, particularly given as the non-mechanical contributions (e.g., "the friendships made along the way," etc.) are often irreproducible between campaigns, tables, and groups.

It's a rabbit and the hare comparison typically only done by analyzing maximum DPR under ideal conditions, typically a wizard being able to go nova and being able to target multiple enemies that are not resistant or immune to their damage.

And round and round it goes.

 

[Fanaelialae]

It's a rabbit and the hare comparison typically only done by analyzing maximum DPR under ideal conditions, typically a wizard being able to go nova and being able to target multiple enemies that are not resistant or immune to their damage.

And round and round it goes.

I don't think you're getting it. What @Aldarc said has absolutely nothing to do with DPR. It literally has to do with almost everything else in the game, except DPR.