D&D 5E Are Wizards really all that?

[DND_Reborn]

The DM vs Wizard war news at eleven.

Oh! I better set my DVR since I'll need to be asleep by 11.

 

[Neonchameleon]

yup... worst case for the wizard is to be exactly equal to the fighter... that is the issue

Objection:

1. This only applies in an anti-magic field
   • A first level wizard knows three cantrips. If we assume that they have a ranged cantrip like Firebolt and a melee cantrip like Shocking Grasp or Sword Burst that still leaves them one left over for something like Minor Illusion, Mage Hand, or Message. All of which are decent exploration and social abilities
   • Almost all wizards, not having had to waste money on armour, have a familiar whose eyes they can see through. Again better than nothing
   • Rituals don't use spell slots and can be pretty useful.
2. Even without magic wizard's stat spread is better for combat than a strength based fighter. Strength only has one skill based off it and constitution has none - and there's very little the fighter can lift that two other party members combined can't (while jumping, swimming, and climbing get redundant). Meanwhile the wizard has Arcana, Investigation, and History - three very useful skills based on their primary stat. And then there's the strength based fighter's disadvantage on stealth if they want to do their job. Again, even if you take away wizard cantrips and go for pure skills the fighter is behind the wizard.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Objection:

1. This only applies in an anti-magic field
   • A first level wizard knows three cantrips. If we assume that they have a ranged cantrip like Firebolt and a melee cantrip like Shocking Grasp or Sword Burst that still leaves them one left over for something like Minor Illusion, Mage Hand, or Message. All of which are decent exploration and social abilities
   • Almost all wizards, not having had to waste money on armour, have a familiar whose eyes they can see through. Again better than nothing
   • Rituals don't use spell slots and can be pretty useful.
2. Even without magic wizard's stat spread is better for combat than a strength based fighter. Strength only has one skill based off it and constitution has none - and there's very little the fighter can lift that two other party members combined can't (while jumping, swimming, and climbing get redundant). Meanwhile the wizard has Arcana, Investigation, and History - three very useful skills based on their primary stat. And then there's the strength based fighter's disadvantage on stealth if they want to do their job. Again, even if you take away wizard cantrips and go for pure skills the fighter is behind the wizard.

yeah 9 out of 10 times casters are just better then non casters... at WORST case they are eqaul

 

[Vaalingrade]

The DM vs Wizard war news at eleven.

That's not fair. One's an nigh omnipotent being backed by powers beyond even the gods (the designers) and the other is the DM, who can't even get decent support for encounter guidelines.

 

[Krachek]

When I look at some description of the imbalance,
I imagine those group using short straw draw to choose who gonna be the fighter for the next campaign!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

When I look at some description of the imbalance,
I imagine those group using short straw draw to choose who gonna be the fighter for the next campaign!

we just don't have straight fighters... we sometimes use it for multi class but in general our melee combatants are all half or full casters (or pact magic)

 

[ECMO3]

When I look at some description of the imbalance,
I imagine those group using short straw draw to choose who gonna be the fighter for the next campaign!

The great thing about 5E is no one has to be the fighter ... or the rogue .... or the cleric ..... or even the wizard.

4 wizards works as a party just fine. Maybe a little weak at low levels if the builds are not coordinated (4 blasters who dumped Charisma and Wisdom for example), but usually even that will be fixed by level 4 - either through spells and feats or through a TPK.

 

[Maxperson]

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.

What are you talking about? This is not an answer to what I said, which is that you don't have enough slots to do everything you've claimed you are casting in your less than an hour of adventuring time. As for nimble escape, I never said it was a spell. I said it cannot help you do more damage unless you are casting a spell which lets you hide so that you can attack with advantage. Without such a spell, you are seen and cannot hide from the person you are attacking.

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

No it can't. You cannot hide, as in you get no roll to hide at all, nimble escape or not. Period. You are seen. Nimble escape only lets you hide as a bonus action. It does not invalidate the hiding rules.

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

You are not invisible. You have disguise self up. "If I cast disguise self and spend 15 minutes clearing 3 rooms and having 3 fights and then we short rest, the spell is still active for most of that rest."

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.

You don't have enough slots to do all of that for all of the encounters, plus cast spells in 6-8 combats. You have 12 slots + whatever you get back(1-4 slots, depending how you do it) from 1 short rest.

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.

Actions ONLY happen in combat man. They are a combat specific thing. Further, even if you are in combat, RAW allows me to say, "You automatically fail, because you are attempting to do the impossible." As it's clearly impossible to search an entire room and everything in it while walking. It's not a house rule to employ RAW and not even a rogue can do what you are claiming.

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

Where? I only see it in combat.

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.

Um, no. Show me any folded clothes piled on top of one another that has a 1 inch gap in-between the folded clothing. For that matter, show me any normal dresser with a drawer that has a 1 inch gap. Your eye cannot ever be as good as a rogue. Ever. The rogue can do things your eye cannot.

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

It gives you a roll if what you are attempting is possible, which the DM by RAW determines. If you attempt something so foolish as to try and search an entire room and everything in it as a 6 second action, no DM I have ever played with will allow it to happen as it's impossible.

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?

He can search a small section of the wall in 6 seconds, sure. Not a full 10x10 section, though.

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.

The option to TPK the party does not make you better than the rogue.

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

Rarely being used =/= better than the rogue.

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)

You should have a high dex and expertise. With retries you can't fail once you hit 5th level. Before that you only fail DC 30 locks, which you shouldn't be encountering at those levels. Your DM is gimping you hard.

As for the second claim the wizard with his 14 dex and proficiency can't even open a DC 25 lock until level 5, which is when the rogue can open every lock. Prior to level 5 the best the wizard can do is DC 20. The rogue gets DC 25. The wizard cannot achieve that 30 until level nothing. He can't ever hit 30. Even at level 20 the wizard with his +6 proficiency and +2 for dex falls 2 short of something that the rogue could do in his sleep at level 5.

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.

LOL So you've given up on level 8 and skipped straight to level 17 in order to beat the 5th level rogue I see. That's when your wizard has +8.

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.

How does the wizard open a DC 27 with +5? He has a 14 dex and simple proficiency which is +3.

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.

It's not a house rule. I'm going to do something you refuse to do(because the rules don't actually back you up) and quote RAW.

DMG page 237

"Sometimes a character fails an ability check and wants to try again. In some cases, a character is free to do so; the only real cost is the time it takes. With enough attempts and enough time, a character should eventually succeed at the task. To speed things up, assume that a character spending ten times the normal amount of time needed to complete a task automatically succeeds at that task. However, no amount of repeating the check allows a character to turn an impossible task into a successful one."

The bolded portion is the RAW that says 10 rounds, like I said.

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).

A dozen spell slots to open the chests on the way out? So now he cast zero spells that weren't cantrips in 6-8 combats, no disguise selfs, no charm monsters, no invisibility, no anything with a slot for the entire adventuring day?

First you are using dozens of slots to do everything better than the rogue, and now you are using no slots while still doing everything better than the rogue, so that you can cast knock on a dozen chests. Never mind that you literally can't do that, even if you didn't spend a single slot during the day. Knock is 2nd level and you only have 8 slots of level 2 or higher. Even with the short rest the best you could do is 10 chests.

Remember, you can't rely on having a long rest to replenish all of your slots. You might be running out the door after getting in over your heads with an encounter. Or you might only have had 7 encounters for the day and have one at night. Or...

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

IF you make the short rest slots all 1st level, which means some of those higher level spells you keep using in multiples go away.

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

No.....................you.......................don't. You keep saying that, but reality disagrees with you. I

f you use only 1 spell per combat, you've used 6-8 slots before you get to anything else, and there's no way you are using only one spell per combat. More likely there are going to be a few where you cast two or three. More likely you've used up 8-12 slots on combat alone, depending on the number of encounters. That leaves you 1-4 slots for all the knocks, charm monster in social situations, arcane eyes, disguise selfs, and more that you keep casting.

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

I have. Like above. That's a real adventuring day in which the wizard gets into combat. He uses a bunch of slots to fight with, on both offense and defense.

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.

Other than the reality of adventuring in a dungeon where searching corridors and rooms thoroughly, takes a lot longer than 6 seconds by RAW. Nothing in RAW even comes close to suggesting that 6 seconds is enough time to search a whole room and everything in it.

RAW does support you failing to do it, though. Page 237 of the DMG allows the DM to declare impossible attempts like that............impossible and you don't get to even roll.

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

1) You don't get actions under the rules unless you are in combat. Outside of combat you describe what you are doing, and the DM calls for a roll if it's possible or denies you if it isn't.

2) you are not moving at walking speed. You described moving 30 feet twice, which is moving quickly under the rules and gives you a perception penalty of 5. Normal speed is 30 and if you exceed that you are into the penalty.

Per page 182 of the PHB under Travel Pace. Note that once again I am, unlike you, actually quoting RAW to back me up.

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)

The bold is the important part. You can't assume that you have a cleric to make your wizard better, so healing is done via hit dice and maybe a few potions. You will need an hour after each combat if you want to heal.

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).

It's none of those. It's a description of what your character is doing and then a ruling and narration by the DM. Unless you are in combat and then those rules come into play.

Actions, bonus actions, object interactions, etc. are for combat. Outside of combat they don't exist. You simple do what you do.

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

Probably all of them, since you are taking a lot of time to do your exploration, healing, social interaction, etc.

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.

Not if run correctly by a DM that knows what he is doing. If you have a DM that's going to let you search entire rooms and everything in them in 6 seconds, then sure. The DM is screwing up badly if he does that, though.

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

Less, because dungeons have lots of doors, so you aren't going to be exploring much. So you've wasted your Arcane Eye exploring a few corridors and maybe a few rooms without doors. Then you let it go and are down one 4th level spell for the day with next to nothing to show for it.

cast invisibility sneak where you want to sneak.

To the first door most likely.

Decide which 2-3 encounters you are going to do now, do those encounters then take a short rest.

You MIGHT know about 1 encounter. 2 if you got incredibly lucky. 3 is out of the question since you failed to explore the vast majority of the dungeon with your Arcane Eye.

3 spells, all cast in probably 10 minutes and disguise self is still active.

And perhaps 1 fight, with very little of the dungeon explored.

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

Ahh, so now you are getting 2 2nd level slots back. Earlier it was 4 1st level spells so you could have 16 slots. And before that it was an extra 4th level spell for Charm Monster or Arcane Eye. In addition to casting dozens of spells, you've now gotten back 12 spell levels at level 8 from your Arcane Recovery. That's pretty good!

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

You keep acting like a day is 20 minutes. It isn't. It's 24 hours. You're also casting invisibility that somehow lasts for 4-6 enounters, not 6-8, which means you've done literally nothing offensive in any of them. Or else it would break the instant you do it in the first encounter. You get advantage from invisibility twice. Once in each of 2 of the 6-8 encounters. Not a whole heck of a lot of extra DPR, especially when you had a good chance of hitting without it.

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"

Noooooo! You don't have 9 slots left. You have 7. You got back 2 2nd level slots making it 14 total, not 16. And you've not accounted for the shield spells you will need to cast because you're in the front line in 6-8 fights. And you've not accounted for any charm monster. Or darkness.

Earlier you said the Arcane Eye set them all off.

I said you maybe set one off. If it did, then the eye is gone since it is not per RAW indestructible and it is in fact physical, which means that you have explored less than the little of the dungeon you might have explored. The small eye has no hit points, so it can't take damage and survive. And before you call this a house rule, it isn't. The spell is silent on what happens, so the DM has to make an on the spot ruling

Also sho said I was not searching for traps, and with my intelligence my investigation is even better than the Rogues.

Too bad investigation doesn't find traps. At best, if there are clues around, you can deduce a trap's existence, but you won't know what it is or where it is. Perception is for finding traps.

This will be the third time I am quoting RAW where you haven't ever actually quoted any to back up your claims.

Page 120-121 of the DMG

"A character actively looking for a trap can attempt a Wisdom (Perception) check against the trap's DC. You can also compare the DC to detect the trap with each character's passive Wisdom (Perception) score to determine whether anyone in the party notices the trap in passing."

And before you say, "But, but, the search action mentions investigation!" Yes, in some circumstances a search might be deductive and use investigation. Traps, though, use perception per RAW.

What's more, if you can assume a 14 dex for the wizard, I can assume a 14 int for the rogue(smart rogues are a thing lots of people do), so even if the wizard has a 20 int, his +7 is barely going to beat a 1st level rogue's +6 with expertise and be less than the 8th level rogue's +8.

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.

Object interactions are for small things, not going through a bed thoroughly. You can draw a sword, get out a potion, etc. The examples are clearly quick little interactions. Searching a bed does not use the object interaction rules. It uses the perception(wis) rules for searching.

Also, and this is yet more RAW that destroys your position. From the Time rules on page 181 of the PHB.

"In a dungeon environment, the adventurers' movement happens on a scale of minutes. It takes them about a minute to creep down a long hallway, another minute to check for traps on the door at the end of the hall, and a good ten minutes to search the chamber beyond for anything interesting or valuable."

10 minutes for a party of 4 to search a chamber. 1 minute to go down a long hallway. 1 minute to check for traps on a single door. Never mind if you are search each 10 feet of the corridor for traps. If you are, that long hallway took hours to go down.

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

Or else the 10 minutes per RAW, because you are trying to use the wrong rules.

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.

Holy hell. Do you even read to understand, or just read to respond? Because nobody said or implied anything at any time that could even remotely mean 8 encounters while you are in camp resting.

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

Only if you use up those slots in battle. Which means you are casting darkness multiple times, shield multiple times, charm monster at least once, etc. leaving you almost no slots for exploration or social.

No the rules dictate it.

Quote me the rule that says, "The PCs get to dictate the encounters," because your spells so far fail to allow it. You get maybe 1, IF there is a room without a door and IF monsters are in that room. Otherwise you don't know of any encounters via the eye.

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

I quoted the RAW. Out of combat the RAW is to assume 10 tries to get through the lock. If you don't like it, house rule it away.

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.

No. Those rules are for travel pace. Nothing there says overland and in fact gives distances in feet, as well as miles, because dungeons use feet. So anything moving 40 or more feet in 6 seconds gets a -5 penalty to passive perception.

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.

Base move = walking speed. It's irrelevant how you are moving an extra 30, if you do you are basically jogging.

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

That's wrong. The physicality of the eye sensor suggests that it can be destroyed. Why? Because nothing in the spell says it is immune to damage, so it isn't.

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

No. That's just an example of there not being an oversight. It's a fact that the sensor is physical since a less than 1 inch opening stops it and amorphous things aren't stopped by that. It's a fact that the spell does not make the sensor immune to damage. It is a fact that the spell does not list hit points, but it does say the sensor is small. That means that it can take damage and doesn't have many hit points.

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

Correct. It's not uncommon. Just as it's not uncommon to hear monsters. Thick wooden or iron doors are not the easiest to hear through, and it depends on what the monsters are and what they are doing.

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.

Sure, and you aren't opening ANY doors with an arcane eye.

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.

This is wrong. The rogue can move faster, has more hit points(unless you're spending yet MORE slots on the hit point spell), has uncanny dodge, and cunning action if he needs to get the hell out of dodge. The wizard has, "I get hit hard by stuff." Unless he wastes slots on a shield spell.

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.

If the dungeon has even 6 rooms, it takes a full hour to search those rooms. And if you're search the corridors for traps while you go, it takes hours and hours and hours to search those. All of this is per RAW as I quoted above.

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.

You've used up your slots casting two disguise selfs and two invisibilities to get advantage on 2 rounds of combat. 4 2nd level spells means that you've used up a 3rd or higher slot, or half of the Arcane Recovery slots already(in addition to the 4 level 1 slots recovered). You don't have any more for "invisibility then if necessary" unless you are using higher slots, which eats into charm monster and your 3rd level spells like suggestion.

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.

Look. Are you casting invisibility for the first 6 fights or not? You keep using up concentration spells for everything, then backtracking and using other ones. You can't cast them all.

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.

Again, look at blindsight. It explicitly says every direction. Without that explicit language, it is not every direction at once.

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).

Not to any area you can't see. So if you are out of sight, the sound is going to be near you as you can't see past the group. Oh, wait. You're probably invisible now, despite arcane eye being up for an hour since "I don't think you ever need to cast AE more than once."

Do you have a house rule that allows you to have two concentration spells up at once? You seem to be making this error a lot.

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.

You do realize that in combat you are looking left, right, etc. while fighting and moving around in your square. You are not always facing one direction, so it's like that ever few seconds you can glance about you, keeping creatures who are not hidden/invisible from being able to get the drop on you. At no point, though, are you looking in all directions simultaneously.

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.

Flanking is entirely about facing. You get the bonus, because you cannot face both directions at once, so both flankers have an advantage against you due to you having to split your attention and direction to both and doing it imperfectly.

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.

Because you don't have to play it with flanking. Flanking is all about facing, facing is NOT all about flanking.

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).

My bad. I've never played one and thought it was heavy armor. Medium armor then. It's still better than light or no armor.

Nope, about 5 slots not counting combat.

Just in this thread alone you are down to 7 slots and that was with Arcane Recovery used on 2 2nd level slots, and you haven't cast shield, darkness, that initiative spell which was probably cast due to it's duration and aid in combat, so 6 slots left, 4 of which are 1st level, no actual combat spells cast.

At this point I am not going to list specific dungeons, because they are not relevant. I have quoted the rules and page numbers. If you don't start posting actual rules and page numbers in your next post, I'm just going to ignore it and accept that you have failed.

What you have to overcome is RAW which says it takes 1 minute to go down a long passage without taking any time searching it, 10 minutes to search a room, finding traps is perception and not investigation, travel times apply to dungeons, and the DM decides if something is impossible, which by RAW searching a room or passage in 6 seconds is.

Do you have RAW that contradicts any or all of that RAW, or are you just going to grasp at more published dungeons and declare RAW without backing it up?

 

[Asisreo]

I mean since we're talking about lift/drag, and at level 20 it seems, the moon Druid can pull off a +7 Strength check, or a +13 in athletics. Also being able to lift or drag many times what the fighter could due to becoming a larger creature.

I don't remember who brought it up, but apparently lifting can be interpreted as a ceiling rather than a floor and you still need a regular strength check. I disagree, but apparently it bears to mind.

However, I will say that the topic is wizards, not druids. I originally brought them up to compare to the wizard. Because this thread isn't about the fighter or the druid and certainly not comparing the two. It's about the wizard. Both the classes are comparing to the wizard.

But being large or bigger isn't always a boon. Case-in-point, what's the druid to do in a 5ft wide hallway with a DC 25 Strength door?

f you don't get any abilities to choose from, you will never be able to choose an optimal ability for any situation.

But you can choose an optimal strategy based on your available stats and equipment.

I think in a thread like this, where emotions can get high, using such an edge-case scenario to try to illustrate a "typical situation" may not work as expected, even if you do regard it as a legitimate strategy.

There's no need to bring high emotions to this thread. This topic isn't worth being heated over at all. But here's my question:

You're fighting a creature you've never encountered. It's large and engulfed in flames, yet a physical visage can be seen through.

Your first turn as a wizard, what do you do? I'd wonder what you'd think the best course of action, given limited real context, would be? You even get the benefit of a theoretically infinitely large prepared spell list.

What would the "preferred gameplan" of a character that focused upon Con over their primary ability score, and how would it differ between fighter and spellcaster?

The preferred gameplan of a fighter with high con is probably the same as the preferred gameplan as a typical fighter, to be a beefy target and survive the frontlines.

The preferred gameplan of a wizard isn't to be seated in situations where they take a lot of damage. It's to have a wide variety of spells. Don't forget, the intelligence modifier also determines how many spells you can prepare. The lower the modifier, the weaker your spells and the less you can prepare.

So a +0 int +5 con wizard at level 8 gets only 8 spells to prepare, almost half of what they could have prepared at +5 int. And a +5 int, +3 con wizard can't have more than AC 16 because their dex is low.

 

[Asisreo]

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

Remarkable Athlete adds a +3 to strength, dexterity, and constitution checks. At +5 modifier, that's +8, with no skill proficiency.

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 an equalizing tactic. It's actually very good against creatures that tend to easily get advantage via pact tactics like wolves. You pop darkness on them and suddenly their advantage doesn't really matter. Even if the fighter is blind, it's not disadvantageous because the enemies are also blind.

However, it is disadvantageous against creatures with the ability to see through it anyways because suddenly they get free advantage. But you likely wouldn't know which is which by hearing a creature's description.

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.

Wizards in 5e don't have light armor proficiency natively. They'd need Mage Armor for even decent AC without shield.

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

You can get 20 AC a few other ways. You can be a dex fighter with studded leather and a shield and take defense fighting style.

You can be strength-based with +2 dex and half-plate, shield, and defensive style for 20 AC.

But if your DM is adamant about only allowing starter equipment for some reason, the fighter may just have to deal with 19 AC for the entirety of the game.

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

Obviously cantrips like eldritch blast are an exception, but a fighter outdamages eldritch blast handily, even with agonizing blast and without feats.

But this thread is about the wizard. If you want to argue warlocks are all that, then that's another thread.



And I find it interesting how, somehow, once the wizard starts to underperform, it seems like other spellcasting classes bunch themselves into the conversation. It feels like the single-class fighter has to out-compete all 8 spellcasting classes at once. Even when it should only be about the wizard.