D&D 5E Are Wizards really all that?

[Gammadoodler]

And hermit with the secret of the universe. And noble with the places to stay. A lot of backgrounds are written that way, which is fine. Fiat is what makes the game go. It's not a bad thing. It's the single best tool in the game. Can it be abused like any other tool? Yes. That doesn't make it a bad thing, though. It just makes the rare DM that does it bad.

Well yeah. But in either case, they're backgrounds not class features. They're class neutral.

 

[Maxperson]

Well yeah. But in either case, they're backgrounds not class features. They're class neutral.

I agree. I was just going with the examples in the other post, which apparently both don't mean squat. I mean, the wizard finding or not finding spells in the library has no impact since they have multiple other sources of new spells, and the soldier background isn't for the fighter.

 

[ECMO3]

You throw around a whole lot of spell in a whole lot of situations whenever an objection comes up. You simply do not have the slots to do everything you claim is being done.

It only has to be more than 1 time in 20 attacks to overcome the 1 point advantage in dex/strength the fighter has. Giving myself advantage in 5 attacks a day will mean I hit more than him ..... and nimble escape is not a spell.

Oh, and how does nimble escape, which has nothing to do with attacking, allow you to hit more often?

Because bonus action hide can make you unseen and give you advantage on your next attack which sunbstantially increases your chance to hit with an attack/

Are you expecting to hide a lot with invisibility that you didn't cast because disguise self is still one per the below claim? Or is disguise self not on any longer because you are going invisible in combat? Or do you expect to hide from someone that can see you?

If you are invisible you don't need to hide to have advantage on the attack.

I don't understand the question vis-a-vis disguise self and invisibility. Disguise self is not concentration and can be active at the same time as invisibility.

Finally the spells you have give you options that offer multiple ways to tackle a situation. There is a guard post ahead, I cna cast invisibility and sneak by them or I can cast disguise self and try to bluff my way past them, or I can cast disguise self and minor illusion to really fool them into thinking something is going on, or I can try to just sneak past like the Rogue would try. With spells you can try any of those, which one is the "right" answer depends on the situation.

The rogue is moving slower, because you know, he's actually exploring. He's examining locks and floors looking for traps. He's looking behind things and for secret doors. He's not just running through the dungeon at full speed not seeing much like you want to do with the eye.

Examining locks, looking for traps are actions. A Rogue can move and do those at the same time. This is RAW, you are houseruling it if you are saying he can't move and take an action on the same turn.

Heck it states in the rules that a Thief or Arcane Trickster can open locks as a bonus action while both moving and taking another action like attacking or dashing.

It takes longer than 6 seconds to examine a 30 foot stretch of wall. Even a 6 second search of a 10 foot section isn't sufficient. You need to describe how you are searching and it takes time to go over a large section like that.

No it doesn't. RAW search is an action, it is PART of a 6-second turn.

Sure if you make so called "realistic" homebrew it will slow the game down, but that is not RAW. RAW search is an action - 6 seconds!

"In most cases, you need to describe where you are looking in order for the D M to determine you r chance of success. For example, a key is hidden beneath a set of folded clothes in the top d rawer of a bureau. I f you tell the DM that you pace around the room, looking at the walls and furniture for clues, you have no chance of finding the key, regardless of your Wisdom (Perception) check result. You would have to specify
that you were opening the drawers or searching the bureau in order to have any chance of success."

Sure if there is not a 1-inch gap (if there is then it can go uin those drawers or under those close. But if there is nothing there you walk in and do that while your eye moves on to a different area. Your eye is scouting the area.

Now I do agree here that you need to describe what you are doing like opening drawers etc, but as long as those are in close proximity it is 6 seconds to do it.

You are throwing up a bunch of strawman arguements here that are not really relevant to the brroader question. I think it is far more likely that there will be you know monsters in the room and the Rogue won't even be able to look around at all without a high risk of being caught

That sort of description and searching would be several minutes in length. And that's just for one 30 foot section. You have 4 to do.

RAW 6 seconds, while you are also taking a bounus action and moving. Search is even listed as an action in combat.

What if your Rogue wants to search for a secret door during combat? Are you going to tell him he can't do that because in my game it takes a minute to search?

Correct. Yet you keep saying you cast it and that casting it makes you a better rogue than the rogue. Which is it?

That is not what I said. I did not say casting it makes me better than the Rogue, I said having at as an option, in addition to being able to pick a lock with thieves tools makes me better than the Rogue. And it does.

I play more Rogues than any other class and they regularly fail to pick locks. Maybe if that happens they are screwed and they just don't get it open because it is too dangerous. Maybe they wait and clear the dungeon and cast it, maybe it is ok

Having those options makes him better, being rarely used is still being used.

This is patently false. The rogue has already opened them and the useful treasure is with the party and perhaps helping with future encounters.

I play more Rogues than anythign else and they REGULARLY fail lock picking checks. Even if you have a Rogue with expertise he is going to fail lock pick checks and most of the time he makes them he would have made them with regular proficiency (i.e. what the Wizard has)

Further, there's no guarantee that you guys aren't running your rears off to get out alive. If you follow your plan, you could lose everything in those chests, where you wouldn't with a rogue, because the treasure is running out with the party if the rogue is in the party.

Sure. And there is no garuntee the Rogue manages to pick the lock in the first place, and if he does most of the time the wizard would have as well.

He can't fail. Like literally he can't. He has +5 for dex and +6 for proficiency and expertise. Since he gets re-rolls, he auto opens any lock with a DC of 31 or lower, except DCs cap at 30.

How many locks have a DC between 28 and 30, because if there are unlimited tries those are the only locks that matter and only when you can't use knock.

Usually if you fail to pick the lock on a door the monsters on the other side will know you tried to pick it and if we have time to reroll over and over talking about rerolls the Rogue automatically opens a lock with a DC of 30 and the wizard autromatically opens one with a DC of 27. That means iff you can roll over and over again the only time this matters is if the DC is 28, 29 or 30, and once the wizard hits 12th level it won't matter at all.

Seriously Dungeon of a mad mage is a level 5-20 adventure. In that entire thing how many locks are there with a DC of 28-30 where you have an infinite time to open, because if we get unlimited rerolls these are the only locks the Rogue is better at.

Also I wil point out that in your houserules above it takes more than a turn to open a lock, so if you are making him spend 10 minutes on an attempt then this is a lot of time to keep rerolling.

You don't have spells. You've described in this conversation casting dozens of spells daily to exceed the rogue. Every time I come up with an objection it's, "Well he has half a dozen 2nd level slots to open the chests on the way out." and "He casts lots of shield spells" and "He casts disguise and charm monster multiple times each for social stuff" and on and on and on.

No I haven't. I never said he has a dozen spell slots to opena chest on the way out. You said that. He has one or two for when he can't get the chest open (perhaps it can't be picked at all).

I actually have an example in play for this - Tomb of Annihilation has a series of chests that can't be picked. You can solve a puzzle to open them, or you can open them with knock.

And by the way I have up to 16 slots a day, not just 12.

You.............don't.................have......................enough.....................slots.'

I ...... HAVE ........ MORE ..........SLOTS ...... THEN..... I......NEED .... TO ..... BEAT ..... THE .... ROGUE.

I have used real examples from published adventures to illustrate my point. Why don't you give me some examples to support yours?

And if a giant purple people eater comes and eats a sloth, that isn't RAW, either. I mean, you're talking stuff I never said or suggested here. And unless the DM is trying to hand things to you on a silver platter and deliberately make the wizard super strong, you aren't having all 6-8 encounters in that short of a time period.

If you are playing by RAW and using the rules-based time it takes to do things you will have less than an hour between short rests unless you have long distances to travel

There is no getting around that.

Again I gave examples , reallyover the top examples that would take less than an hour to complete. Give me an example of what you have to spend time doing, other than overland travel and rest, such that you could not get in your 8 encounters in an hour of adventuring.

And you therefore did not cast invisibility during a fight in order to "Actually probably more often considering things like invisibility" and you didn't cast darkness during combat in order to, "Actually probably more often considering things like...darkness."

That was for disguise self specifically, which lasts an hour and is not concentration. Invisibility though too would be active well into a short rest if you did not attack or cast a spell after casting it last.

Not if you are actually exploring, rather than running through the dungeon at top speed. And if you actually spend time opening locks. And if you have to heal after a fight. And, and, and...

I am going through the dungeoun at my walking speed, and making actions using the timing afforded in the rules.

Healing too is typically an action through either a potion or spell, occiasionally up to a minute. So if someone casts one of those long 1-minute casting time healing spells, well then you spend 31 minutes adventuring that day instead of 30.

If a 20th level cleric used every single slot he had to cast a level-appropriate healing spell I still don't think you could get to 10 minutes of time spent healing.

The only other healing you do is part of a short rest and adds no time at all (outside the time for the rest)

And you keep claiming that it's RAW, but while I keep quoting rules that back me up, you haven't offered up one bit of RAW to support your claims that YOU follow RAW, but I don't.

Search is an action and listed on page 193. Opening a lock is either an interatcing with an object (page 190), use an object action (page 193) or a bonus action for Thieves (97) or Arcane Tricksters (98).

No. This is not RAW, or even common sense. It's utter nonsense that places all monsters right next to you and in unlocked rooms and with no strategy, and with a DM who gives you cakewalk rulings, and...

Name a published adventure with a dungeon where this is NOT the case.

Please show me just ONE published dungeon where it would take more than 20 minutes to complete the first 2-3 encounters (which is the time it would take before your

Here are examples of WOTC adventures that correlate to the times I have laid out:

Ghosts of Saltmarsh Sahagin Lair
Ghosts of Saltmarsh Lizardman Lair
Princes of the Appocoplypse Temple of Elemental Flame
Princes of the Appocolypse Temple of Black Earth

Most of the actual published dungeons that do not fall within that actually have fewer than 6 encounters in them total.

No you didn't. You simply made a baseless claim and tried to call it RAW. In any case, even if it were under an hour, then you have less than 1 hour to cast a dozen or more concentration spells that you are claiming all last an entire 10 minutes or hour. You are not following RAW no matter which way you play it.

No 1 spell - disguise self - that is not concentration. If you are going to use your Arcane Eye then you use it, explore the entire dungeon (sans any doors you can't go through), that takes about 5 minutes, maybe less, then drop concentration on that, cast invisibility sneak where you want to sneak. Decide which 2-3 encounters you are going to do now, do those encounters then take a short rest. 3 spells, all cast in probably 10 minutes and disguise self is still active.

Cast disguise self and invisiblity then do the next 2-3 enocunters, get both your second level slots back with arcane recovery.

Cast disguise self and invisibility do your last 2-3 encounters.

So I have cast 7 spells and I have 9 slots left at the end of that (1 1st, 2 2nd, 3 3rd, 1 4th). Probably I cast some of those in combat, or maybe for social interactions or god forbid i might have even used knock, so I don't have all those spells left, but the situation I described does not require "dozens of spells"

And you've been killed by a dozen traps that you never searched for or disarmed, all of which take a lot of time to do.

Earlier you said the Arcane Eye set them all off. Also sho said I was not searching for traps, and with my intelligence my investigation is even better than the Rogues.

Oh, I suppose your DM let's you do that, AND search through all the beds, dressers, closets, sarcophagi, piles of refuse, etc. AND look for secret doors, all in 6 seconds while jogging 60 feet and simultaneously chewing bubblegum.

The only problem here is the beds, dressers, closets, sacrophgi, piles of refuse etc. I can only do one of those at a time because it requires an interact with an object in addition to the search action. So to search ALL of that stuff would be 30 seconds. Can you provide a single example from a published adventure that has that volume of stuff all within 60 feet?

Also chewing gum would also be interact with an object, so if I wanted to do that while chewing gum that is another 6 seconds, but I would not do that. I might smoke a pipe depending on the character.

It is like this - you are in a bedroom with a bed, dresser and desk. I search the bed, dresser and desk and I unlock the desk drawer. The time that takes:

12 seconds for an arcane trickser with mage hand precast (18 seconds if I have to cast it)
18 seconds for a thief or inquisitive
24 seconds for anyone else

Add in the 4 rounds of combat to clear the room and you are in and out in a minute and moving on to the next encounter. If the next encounter is 60 feet away that is 12 more seconds.

Yep. It is definitely part of encounters not all happening in that mythical hour of encounters you mention. It's an adventuring DAY for a reason. If you were correct and it was RAW for it to take an hour, they would have called it the adventuring hour. They didn't.

Either you stick to 6-8 encounters or you don't. If you stick to that and you give me 8 encounters while I am in camp, doing downtime or resting then I am not encountering those things in the hour or so I am actively adventuring.

And if you choose to spend more slots on exploring and sneaking, you will be less and less effective in combat.

Sure, so I go from being the most powerful character on the battlefield to being just above average.

And then you wake up from your pipe dream and understand that you don't get to dictate the encounter times.

No the rules dictate it.

Give me an example of a published dungeon that would take longer than I mention.

Or he can ditch that False Dichotomy and spread the encounters out over the adventuring day by following RAW and not allowing you to search everything in the room, look for traps and search for secret doors in 6 seconds with one roll.

As long as he sticks to RAW it will not take hours of adventuring.

I have asked you repeatedly to give me examples of dungeons where I would have to spend hours going through 2-3 encounters. You have nto provided a single one.

You're spending hours and hours looking over the rooms if you want to have any chance of finding the traps, secret doors and loot, and it will usually be more than 6 seconds to open a lock

Picking a lock is using theives tools. That is an action, unless you are a thief or Arcane Trickster where it is a bonus action. Opening a lock is actually an object interaction (PHB page 193)

Your group would TPK fast with your tactics if you were in my game.

Yeah because you make up house rules and nerf spells like Arcane Eye

No you don't. This isn't combat and those rules only apply to combat.

So it takes longer to open a lock out of combat then in combat? That makes no sense.

Nawp! Not by RAW he can't.

First off, since this isn't combat and the rogue is moving quickly,

30 feet in 6 seconds is not "moving quickly"

so he using passive perception and at a -5 penalty according to the travel pace rules.

Those rules are designed for overland travel and I will point out that that same section also lists 300 feet per minute (30 feet per turn) and 3 miles per hour as "normal" place. So it would stand to reason if you cite this that I could make perception checks without penalty while also moving 30 feet per turn.

Second, he cannot search in the way you are trying to use it. Outside of combat the DM is well within his rights and RAW to tell the rogue that jogging down the passage isn't going to allow him a detailed search, and then ask him to roll a saving throw because he just set off a trap he missed with his perception penalty.

Who is jogging? I am using the bonus action dash, that is part of the Rogues abilities. I can do that and also search and if it needs to be in combat I can declare I am in combat with the walls so I can do it.

Even if the rogue were in combat and he searched, it would not be an entire section of wall or an entire room, it would be one small thing like searching inside the bag on the floor, because he only has 6 seconds and has to remain aware of the combat

Yes it would. 6 seconds is all he needs

RAW doesn't support your claim to be able to search entire rooms for everything under the sun in 6 seconds while jogging.

Search action - 6 seconds, while also moving, doing an interact with an object and a bonus action.

Second, the eye doesn't trigger traps. It triggers trap and then is destroyed as it has physicality, but not enough to provide even a single hit point. Third, why do you assume the traps don't reset?

Nothing suggests the eye can be destroyed .... but it is better to destroy the eye than the Rogue.

If a spell can be affected by damage it says so - for example Bigby's Hand or mirror image.

You could rule that blindness could affect it, but even that is ambiguous.

What if I try to destroy the black tentacles the wizard cast? That is an object. It does not say it is indestructable. So it has 1 hp, I just attack it once and and kill it. Wow it is a weak 4th level spell, why would anyone ever try to get out of it the normal way.

Maybe this would work for hypnotic pattern or fireball too. I ready an action and once the spell is cast I attack and destroy his fireball once he casts it.

That makes no sense and it makes no sense for Arcane Eye either. It is a strawman you are throwing up because you know you are wrong.

Unless it's a crappy door, it's not going to have a 1 inch gap.

I actually agree on this and pointed out as much in my 2nd post.

So not much in a typical dungeon.

Again, go look at the pbulished dungeons. This vaires, but usually most of the dungeon layout is available. Further as I mentioned earlier, it is dangerous for a scouting rogue to open doors.

You don't know it's clear, because you didn't search for traps.

Well you did look for traps eariler, but you can also search while you walk in at full speedl

Unless you get exceedingly lucky, it's not "can," but "will" drain the time.

You move on finish exploring what you can and then start exploring with your party.

He can also listen at them to see what he hears, unlike the eye. Because he's a better explorer than the eye. As such, he's FAR more likely to open the door without alerting anything(if anything is on the other side) and proceed forward than the eye that just sits there and stares at the door wishing it could do those things.

Yes and it will not be uncommon to hear nothing and then open the door on a room full of monsters.

I play lots of Rogues (more than Wizards) and I scout a lot with those Rogues but I don't open a lot of blind doors by myself and you will not last if you do unless you have some kind of magic to aid you.

In this exact example, the Rogue without magic is likely dead if he opens a door deep into a dungeon full of guards and there are a number of unheard monsters in it. The Arcane Eye can't open it at all, but a Wizard has a much greater chance of surviving such a calamity because of the magic at his disposal.

Except you've been using 4th levels slots exploring. More than one, since it's not possible to go an hour under your all 6-8 encounters happen in 10 minutes theory of things and you've been casting darkness, invisibility, disguise self and more, which got rid of the first eye, and the second eye, and...

Ho many times am I going to have to say this - you use the Arcane Eye BEFORE you go in.

I will say this - you can completely explore and clear any published dungeon in an hour searching every single room, not counting short rests. If there were not 6-8 encounters then maybe you get them in camp when you are not exploring, sneaking or adventuring and in that case you did not use many spells because you did not find any monsters in the dungeon.

I say again, give me an example of a published dungeon where this is not possible.

Heck, even under my longer exploration reality, you're still losing that eye before the duration is up since your go to is a bunch of concentration spells whenever I suggest commonly encountered things in the dungeons.

Well disguise self is not concentration, but you absolutely lose the eye before an hour. The eye is up for about 10 minutes, gets the layout of the entire dungeon (including areas you intend to go after your 1st and 2nd short rest) then you drop concentration, cast disguise self and head in. You cast invisibility then if necessary.

If invisibility is not necessary then you keep the eye around (maybe waiting at one of those closed doors) until you need to cast something with concentration.

Why? You could be in a 10th level dungeon and the 1 guy you can talk to is the kobold servant or something. It CAN be significant, or it might not. I will grant that IF the monster fails the save it will often be significant, but it's also highly limited since you've cast probably two eyes at this point and are out of your 2 4th level slots plus now a 4th level slot for the charm monster that you got from your short rest.

Unless you get attacked and lose concentration, I don't think you ever need to cast AE more than once. The amount of ground it can cover in an hour is IMMENSE.

Even if you are exploring an entire ruined city (like Omu in Tomb of Anihilation for example) you can usually get in every single building in an hour. That is several days worth of encounters that you are serveiling in one hour.

Which is an infinite number of failures if the MONSTERS in the DUNGEON are hostile towards you.

Then it is infinite failures for a Rogue too. All I need is 1 that is not to be better positioned.

Nothing there says simultaneously. Yes the wizard can look up. Then he can have the eye look down. Then right. Then left. That's all directions. It's just by RAW sequential, not simultaneous. It can't be simultaneous, because it doesn't say so. The W is for written in case you've forgotten. If it doesn't (W)rite simultaneous, it isn't simultaneous by RAW.

It says "every direction" not "any direction" there is a difference there. Seeing in every direction is not the same as seeing on one direction at a time.

No you don't see everything around you. You are not guaranteed to see hidden things like traps and creatures. You are not guaranteed to see what is inside a sack, or even the sack if it's behind a chair, and so on. You only see basic stuff like, "There are four walls, a floor, a bed, a table and 3 chairs." If you want more detail, you need to take time to examine things.

If your argument is true, that tactic is auto fail since the PC is simultaneously looking in every direction, so if he looks down the hallway at the sound, he's still looking up, down, left, right and behind him, seeing you.

Minor Illusion can be cast from out of sight. The idea would be to get the guards to move in the direction of the sound (or alternatively flee depending on the sound you make).

If they don't move then it would fall under one of those DM-ruled "certain circumstances" mentioned above. Most DMs I play with would make this auto fail if I was not obscured though.

That's why your argument fails so badly. It's patently clear that there is no such thing as simultaneous sight in all directions in RAW.

Then please explain why attackers are not "unseen" and get advantage in combat simply by positioning?

Moreover how do you decide which direction everyone is looking when there are no facing rules?

Finally PHB page 177 - "In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature it usually sees you"

Note it says "all around" above, meaning in every direction simultaneously. Further how could it "see" you if it can only see in one direction and finally if it can "see" you and the fighter is on the other side if it then it would not be able to "see" the fighter and would be at disadvantage to attack him.

Or minutes, depending on how long it takes you to open the door. And you didn't actually thoroughly search the area, so you set off any traps that aren't triggered by motion.

Opening a door in an object interaction and part of a turn along with an action, bonus, movement. If you have to also unlock the door that is an action and object interaction which are completed in 6 seconds (unless you fail your check). If you are a thief or an Arcane Archer with your mage hand out you could try again to unlock it in that same 6 seconds.

You don't need facing rules in the way 3e had them in order to know that a PC is facing forward, left, right, etc. The facing rules were there to determine flanking, which by the way is a rule you can put into the game, since miniatures show facing very easily and which enemies you could attack, which is also an optional rule.

Flanking has nothing to do with facing and to be flanked you have to be adjacent. If flanking was facing having an archer at range on one side and a fighter on the other would cause advantage and it doesn't.

There is actually a facing optional rule in 5,E but I never played at any table that used it and it has nothing to do with flanking. Also the optional facing rule only applies to creatures, it does NOT apply to objects.

Just because you aren't using facing to determine enemies to attack or flanking, does not mean that you simultaneously see in all direction. RAW does not support the latter claim.

Well if you are not facing a specific direction then how do you determine which direction you can see in? Either you have facing or you don't.

If you need an explanation, a round is 6 seconds. It is assumed you are look in every direction during that 6 seconds. Hence you are looking "everywhere" during that round. 6 seconds is more than enough time to look entirely around you.

No. It just means the game doesn't feel the need to have rules for flanking and such. Not that there is simultaneous vision which multiple rules describe as not being present. Again, the hiding situation you described above with the noise distraction would be impossible if you were correct, because you could fail to see behind you while focusing on a sound in front of you. Simultaneous is simultaneous.

It is usually impossible at most tables unless the enemies move out of sight or the DM dictates that this is an specific ircumstance that overides this.

I don't see anything in the rogue class that says that if you wear armor heavier than light you have disadvantage. Why would the mountain dwarf be affected that way?

If you wear armor you are not proficient you have disadvantage. A Mountain Dwarf Rogue is not proficient in heavy armor unless he has a feat or a multiclass (and if we want to go down that road I could substantially buff that Wizard).

So the biggest problems with your claims are 1) you are using literally dozens of slots daily to do everything at all times, handling all the situations encountered in a dungeon and 6-8 encounters and you simply don't have that many slots, and 2) you keep making claims of RAW without backing it up with quotes like I do.

Nope, about 5 slots not counting combat.

 

[James Gasik]

Feh, AC is meaningless. Just be a Tortle Wizard. It's not like ability bonuses matter anymore.

 

[DND_Reborn]

There really doesn't seem to be a limit to the character count for posts... I can't wait to see the response.

 

[Garthanos]

There really doesn't seem to be a limit to the character count for posts... I can't wait to see the response.

This isn't exactly Twitter well I'll be.

 

[Gammadoodler]

There really doesn't seem to be a limit to the character count for posts... I can't wait to see the response.

Need to start running some comps vs posts in the halflings threads.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Except there is no valid beast for the moon druid that gets them either a +8 in regular strength checks

no fighter has better then +5 str so... I don't get this

or a +11 in athletics. Even if they did, sometimes a strength check needs something with opposable thumbs.

so turn into an ape or something... it's not that hard to find animals to turn into

And the D&D animal kingdom is surprisingly bad at dexterity in general.

not with a PC mind behind it... at least not in my experience

The topic was that a wizard might not have an optimal spell in a specific adventure.

right, and I aam 100% behind using the "Not optimal" but not "Oh let me cast darkness and screw all my melee allies"

Whether the fighter gets a choice or not is irrelevant to the discussion.

no it isn't.... when you say that a down side is the wizard has a limited number of spells, then YES tthe number of choices the other class gets matters.

I think it would be a tactically sound decision to cast darkness on an enemy depending on your party composition.

unless you have a warlock that can see through magical darkness I don't agree... the fact that YOU yourself said it screws your allies makes me question how 'tactically sound' you really find it

It's not picking a spell at random, it's using a legitimate strategy.

not a good one... a legitimist strategy if you don't have a swiss army win button prepped is to fall back on weapons or cantrips, not throwing debuffs that hit your allies.

I have seen wizards clerics and druids caught without the right spells prepped. I have seen warlocks sorcerers and bards caught without the right spell known (I would throw the half casters in too but you get the idea) I have never seen one turn around and cast a spell that makes the fight harder. I see them fall back on a damage spell or cantrip, a buff on a party member or a weapon attack.

The point is that a legitimate strategy may not work as expected and, if it doesn't, then the resources used to commit to the strategy is wasted.

again you went out of your way to not just pick a spell that wont help but one that debuffs allies. It is a deadly mistake, but then again the fighter could choose to shout and jump up and down for a round... it doesn't seem like a fair thing to bring into the comparison.

2hp more, per level, on classes that prioritize a spellcasting ability modifier on top of their AC and HP ability scores.

fighters almost all take str or dex as there first highest stat. wizards (any caster really) take there casting stat as there highest most times... Con is equally important to both.

My last wizard (a few years ago) had more hp then the fighter/rogue/ranger. My warlock (way more resent) had the 2nd highest HP and the Highest AC in the party.

A fighter can easily get 20+ AC and +5 con while sacrificing nothing to their preferred gameplan, then they can increase other ability scores as desired.

I'm sorry but WHAT!?!?! a 20 AC AND a 20 COn... and I assume a 20 str or dex... maybe both!?!?

if the fighter has 2 20's in stats, then the wizard should have a 20 and an 18. (in this neither has feats so no -5+10 for you)


a fighter that starts with 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8. I will put the 15 in str and the 14 in con and 13 in wis and 12 and 10 in int and cha and an 8 in dex... give him half plate armor and a shield (17) to start but will get the full plate (20) over 5 or 6 levels... take a fighting style as defensive will get you to 21 (if you have a weapon or shield ready so not if surprised) now you get +2/+1 and that will bring you to start to
17 str 8 dex 14 Con 10 Int 14 wis 12 Cha AC 17
at level 4 you get +2 so 19 str 8 dex 14 Con 10 Int 14 wis 12 Cha
at level 6 you get +1/+1 so 20 str 8 dex 15 Con 10 Int 14 wis 12 Cha
at level 8 you get +2 so 20 str 8 dex 17 Con 10 Int 14 wis 12 Cha
at 12th you get a +2 so 20 str 8 dex 19 Con 10 Int 14 wis 12 Cha
at 14th level you can take a half feat for +1 20 str 8 dex 19 Con 10 Int 14 wis 12 Cha

the wizard will start with 10 str 14 dex 14 Con 17 Int 12 wis 8 Cha
at level 4 they get +2 10 str 14 dex 14 Con 19 Int 12 wis 8 Cha
at level 8 +1/+1 for 10 str 14 dex 15 Con 20 Int 12 wis 8 Cha
at level 12 +2 for 10 str 14 dex 17 Con 20 Int 12 wis 8 Cha
so sorry the wizard DOES only have a 17 in con (or 16 and a half feat)

of course now lets do the AC of the Wizard, do they have light armor for studded leather or are they useing mage armor? 15 AC seems much lower then that 17 or 21 max... but again any non suprise round that can boost to a 20... or more.

A spellcaster barely gets +5 to their spellcasting score and +5 to either AC or HP scores. And for each point invested the AC or HP before +5 spellcasting is a point not invested in their primary gameplan.

do you think fighters roll con attack rolls? I had to take it up to 14th level before this was noticable (and by then the wizard is rocking 7th level spells)

You've misinterpreted my statement. There are no need for options because those are built-in.

max is 20 IF you have full plate (that no one starts with so DM required)

At the start of combat, a fighter will always have their max AC and HP stats. A wizard must use their reactions, actions, or pre-buff time to gain those benefits.

the only prebuffs I hear about are 8hour or permenent ones... that isn't much of an ask.

It's simple. Spells don't normally require player-facing ability checks or saving throws.

wait... what?!?! have you ever seen eldritch blast used?

But a fighter will have higher physical ability scores on average

on average more physical, but not str per say, it is as likely they go dex sense it is the better stat.

and will always be using attack rolls or ability checks in combat.

bladesingers, war clerics, sword or valor bards, and hex blades make attack rolls all the time, so do some % of spells have attack rolls (especially cantrips)

And almost always use ability checks out of combat.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In fairness its the soldier background, not a fighter thing. And the benefit is for friendly military organizations that recognize your rank (assuming that rank is notable in any way) rather than generic soldier-y folks.

That and the sage background are both well into "we'll see what the dm gives us territory"

My warlock had the soldier background, and all the best cantrips

 

[Garthanos]

So let's be clear. You can answer no every single time to the library question and the wizard hasn't been nerfed in the slightest, by fiat or anything else.

The DM vs Wizard war news at eleven.