D&D 5E What is REALLY wrong with the Wizard? (+)

[ECMO3]

Yeah, you're probably right. At the same time, if folks are designing their "perfect" 4-5 person party, they probably start by deciding whether it will be a Peace, Twilight, or Life domain cleric and then build around that.

Maybe. I am not really a fan of any of those personally. Twilight is front loaded and probably OP for tier 1 and early tier 2, but by the time you are 8th level or so there are better options, including better Clerics I think.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Because as the game stand, I think anyone would be hard pressed to say what, exactly, the limits of magical effects are.

There's literally a spell that lets a Wizard do whatever they want, castable once per day, with a small risk of something bad happening maybe. I think the ship has sailed on the notion of magic having limits.

Instead of reining in spellcasting at a normal power level, we see in 1D&D that they instead spread it everywhere to replace ''mundane'' features. Magic is now all-encompassing and limit-less.

Sucks for those who prefer more restricted magic.

I wonder, is there a work of fiction where magic is as wide, common for beginning protagonists and powerful as presented in D&D 5e? Even the FR ones dont have spellcasting doing half the thing my wizard character is doing at the table!

 

[James Gasik]

There's literally a spell that lets a Wizard do whatever they want, castable once per day, with a small risk of something bad happening maybe. I think the ship has sailed on the notion of magic having limits.

Instead of reining in spellcasting at a normal power level, we see in 1D&D that they instead spread it everywhere to replace ''mundane'' features. Magic is now all-encompassing and limit-less.

Sucks for those who prefer more restricted magic.

I wonder, is there a work of fiction where magic is as wide, common for beginning protagonists and powerful as presented in D&D 5e? Even the FR ones dont have spellcasting doing half the thing my wizard character is doing at the table!

Harry Potter? There sure doesn't seem to be anything spells can't do, there are a lot of them, children can pull them off, and it's not like they seem to run off spell slots, mana, or uses per diem.

 

[Stoutstien]

I have to admit there have been times when playing my Druid in a party with no other full casters (or just a Sorcerer with an eccentric spell selection, which is to say, a Sorcerer lol), I've felt a bit like the host in the Crystal Maze, and you know, the players decide to spend a crystal to get out of a situation, so I just use my stupid Druid powers to solve it (usually in a way I came up with a few minutes before). My brother was the same way with a Wizard in 2E and 3E.

That's not great. It is more a full caster problem than a Wizard problem.

Wizards are the most full caster full caster though, y'know? They're the only full caster where their massive spell list is their entire class identity.

Aye. The explicit function of spells within a system that is primarily supported by a least some risk is core problem. Could probably trim out the really problem options but because they are someone obsessed with adding more spells with every book they released they'll be right back like kudzu.

Im short they have too many "I win" buttons.

 

[Stoutstien]

I think we crunched out best 5E party is all cleric.

After running an all single class party for every class cleric, warlocks, and artificer are tied for first in this type of game.

 

[Krachek]

It’s a wonder to see complaint about magic solving problems in a fantasy universe. I don’t think rules changes will solve this issue.

I can imagine lowering the hit points of classes using magic can help.

Another scaling and tunable feature is a global % chance of magic failure. You set it at 25% for any spell, ability, item, or other use of magic. you adjust it at need. You should not go over 110%.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Harry Potter? There sure doesn't seem to be anything spells can't do, there are a lot of them, children can pull them off, and it's not like they seem to run off spell slots, mana, or uses per diem.

Right.

They do seem to lack variety, though. They quickly go from magic missile to power word: death

 

[DND_Reborn]

I would disagree with this. Enchantment, Divination, War Magic and at high levels Necromancy all have significant abilities outside of spells.

Sorry for being unclear: I was referring to the core class, Wizard.

The fundamental problem with wizards is lack of focus

Do you think this is part of the issue with too large of a spell list or more of a separate issue? I feel it could be a separate issue, which I'll add to the OP if you concur?

So I'm not saying that resilient sphere is too powerful. Again, it's effect is orthogonal to how the game is normally played. But maybe we should be going back to the drawing board, and deciding what magic can, or cannot do.

Because as the game stand, I think anyone would be hard pressed to say what, exactly, the limits of magical effects are.

Excellent post!

I think we crunched out best 5E party is all cleric.

Hmm.... I would have thought all bard, personally, but I can see cleric done well, too.

Instead of reining in spellcasting at a normal power level, we see in 1D&D that they instead spread it everywhere to replace ''mundane'' features. Magic is now all-encompassing and limit-less.

Sucks for those who prefer more restricted magic.

I haven't been following it since I dropped it early on, but I can see this is the direction WotC is going, which for me is certainly a reason why I will avoid it. IMO there is way too much magic in 5E already.

 

[Zardnaar]

Sorry for being unclear: I was referring to the core class, Wizard.


Do you think this is part of the issue with too large of a spell list or more of a separate issue? I feel it could be a separate issue, which I'll add to the OP if you concur?


Excellent post!


Hmm.... I would have thought all bard, personally, but I can see cleric done well, too.


I haven't been following it since I dropped it early on, but I can see this is the direction WotC is going, which for me is certainly a reason why I will avoid it. IMO there is way too much magic in 5E already.

Bards still struggle for damage. 5 clerics cast spiritual guardians sword and valor bards go "doh".

 

[FrozenNorth]

Consider @James Gasik's example (D&D 5E - What is REALLY wrong with the Wizard? (+)). Resilient Sphere doesn't allow the creature inside to be harmed. BUT the DM set up another way for the demon to be defeated by destroying the altar. The spell did precisely what it was meant to do: incapsulate a creature to either protect it or stop it from harming others. Without the altar addition, when the spell ended the battle would have resumed.

You are missing the forest for the trees. You claimed to want "real play experiences" where wizards dominated. You received two, then immediately argued that they didn't really show that wizards dominated.
Except, yes, sometimes the monster you come up against is a wandering monster and you don't need to kill it, just incapacitate it while you go on your way.
Here's another example of that. Critical Role, 2nd campaign. Party gets attacked by an enormous frost worm type thing as a random encounter. It is absolutely tearing up the party. One cast by polymorph (by the cleric, who got it from their domain), and the frost worm is a CR 0 bunny. Party continues on its way.
Here's yet another example. Wizard first level. Casts Find familiar as a ritual. Doesn't use a spell slot. Chooses Owl, which doesn't provoke opportunity attacks. Every turn in combat, the owl flies to an enemy, uses the Aid action (giving advantage to an attack against the monster) than flies out of range. At the cost of exactly 1 of their 6 spells learned, 0 spell slots and 0 actions, the Wizard is one of the strongest buffers at first level, able to give out advantage once a round.

Also, at that level most demons have magic resistance. So, was it also "bad roll" favoring the players?

A hypnotic pattern has a 50% chance of incapacitating the Nalfeshnee, even with magic resistance. The challenge against a CR 13 monster with magic resistance is rendered trivial with a 3rd level spell.

Where does the problem lie here then?

The wizard class? Not really, Sorcerers can cast web as well as Wizards, as can Bards via Magical Secrets and certain subclasses gain it as a class spell (Circle of Land - Underdark Druids for instance).

Is it the spell? Maybe. Was the monster Large? Should the spell include advantage for Large and larger creatures? Or should the spell be altered in some other way if it is the problem.

The usual defense against wizards not being overpowered is that their power is limited by their spell slots. As early as mid-levels, this isn't the case for days with fewer encounters. However, even in days with more encounters, the fact that many low-level spells remain extremely powerful (web, hypnotic pattern, invisibility) means that their power isn't substantially limited by their spell slots.
Sorcerers are typically much less effective than wizards for a couple of reasons. First, they draw from a much smaller spell list. Second, their much fewer spells known means choosing to learn Web as their 2nd level spell means giving up many of the other extremely useful 2nd level spells.
A 9th level sorcerer can cast 9 spells, from levels 1 through 5. That averages to 2 spells per level (technically, there are probably a couple they can cast at higher level). They can choose Web and then they need to choose 1 more from Enhance Ability, Hold Person, Invisibility, Misty Step and Suggestion. Those choices have to serve them whether the day is mostly combat, mostly non-combat, and regardless of the monsters fought. Meanwhile, a wizard can switch their loadout depending on whether they anticipate a lot of combat or not.

Was it just "bad rolls"? The monster failed the save, then failed to escape until two rounds later (if I am reading you correctly). Does this mean poor monster design, or do we fault the swingy nature of the d20 itself?

It's not "bad rolls". By level 9 or 10, a wizard's DC is easily 17, and most monsters have at least one save that is only a +0 or +1. A quick lore check (or just common sense), and the wizard can target a defense that the monster has very little chance of succeeding at.
And wizards, unlike sorcerers, can very easily choose spells that target a variety of defenses and still have room in their loadout for defense and utility spells.
A sorcerer could cast web. But an 9th level sorcerer has a total of 10 spells known, compared to a wizard who can prepare 14, plus the ritual spells he can cast from his spellbook that don't count towards the 14.

My point is (as a + thread) about identifying what is really going on when posters say Wizards are a problem, too powerful, etc.

Your first posts above was great, and I even gave one a "like" before I read the last two. But you seem to be more taking issue with my responses than with the issue.

If you are sincere about wanting to learn about others' experiences, listen, and don't try to find reasons why it isn't really a problem that the Wizard shut down the DM's big set piece because of 1 spell.