D&D 5E (2024) The Great Wizard Extinction.

[Chaltab]

What level though? 5E i assume as well.

2E wizard leaves you're in trouble.

He left at 10th level. The party leveled up twice more without him.

They briefly got a second wizard but then that guy got Disintegrated due to a lucky high roll on the damage.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

I agree with Zard that Wizards are a dying class that I almost never see anyone play, but also agree with all the counter-arguments above that Wizards are extremely powerful. The only subclass I ever see is Bladesinger, which is a completely different theme than the standard Wizard. Some issues I see with the class:

The Wizard theme (other than Bladesinger) just isn't cool. Sorcerers are bursting with innate magical energy that they struggle to control! Warlocks make a pact with a higher power! Wizards read books and study alot... yeah no thanks I do enough of that in real life.

Ritual spells (and just generally having access to many spells) ought to be powerful but I just never see them actually work in practice. Any time the table has a challenge in front of them and a spellcaster has an idea to overcome that challenge but it takes 10 in-game minutes, you almost always see some other player come up with an alternate solution that doesn't require "waiting". With creative players and a supportive DM, skillchecks can usually replace whatever the Ritual spells were attempting to achieve

Wizards are much more powerful at high levels than low levels, and most parties never reach those levels where Wizards (and other spellcasters) start breaking the game. They're definitely still good at low levels but not nearly as good as they would be if parties actually played high levels.

 

[touc]

I blame the CR system and module writing for the decline (as I've observed at my game table since 2014) in folks who play the wizard. In AD&D days, when battles could look like this:

The wizard and their fireballs were a must. But the power curve looked like this.

Skipping ahead, hit points skyrocketed, damage didn't, and the wizard took a nosedive, which was honestly needed. Then, I thought 5E did a solid with "bounded accuracy" to allow low-level monsters, in large enough numbers or with special tactics, to pose a realistic threat to PCs. Lots of low hit point enemies who can bring some pain (not an option in 3E), bring in that fireball and clean them out. The "glass cannon" or "blaster caster" could be a player option instead of the "control" guy.

But as I've seen in module writing, I don't see too many encounters where as the party scales, low level monsters are used in large numbers. Instead, it's X number at X value for X challenge, resulting in high power, low volume encounters. And I get part of that is time management (if the DM is rolling 20 attacks, that's tedious). Even so, clever DMs can find a way (pre-rolled randomized sheet of attacks, using the mob template from A5E). And that's my two cents.

 

[Chaltab]

Wizards being a dying class just doesn't match with my experience. As I said my previous Spelljammer campaign as a DM had two of them, my Dark Sun campaign had one (a Preserver). The 1-to-10 Waterdeep campaign I was in also had a Wizard. And the campaign I did session 0 for today, has a Diviner Wizard.

It's certainly not the most common class but it still gets play.

 

[Seramus]

I think too many people on these forums and others look at the power the class instead of the roleplaying you can do with all these nasty wizards. And they are still one of the strongest classes. Not like it turned into a 2014 monk all of a sudden.

I always wonder why party synergy is so rarely discussed. Individual characters can't stack buffs like older editions, but multiple people can still stack buffs on one person, and the result is often outrageously strong in some cases. Of course, you can never count on what another player might be playing, but you would think party synergy would get a lot more discussion than it does.

I mean, I can't be the only one who sits and talks with other players about neat combos our characters could pull off at the table (when I get to be a player).

 

[Amphytrion]

Spellbooks are wrapped in flavor, but long-time players seem bored with flavor that is more than 20 years old.

I don’t think that is a sustainable argument because most players aren’t long term players at all. The overwhelming majority of players came into contact with spellbooks in 5th edition, at the same time they discovered all other core class features.

Imagine a DM invites his friend who’s never played D&D before for a one-shot. If the friend chooses to play a bard, he’ll probably make use of bardic inspiration. A druid, wildshape. A cleric, channel divinity. If the friend chooses wizard, though, the spellbook is unlikely to come up at all during that game night. The player may leave without even knowing how it works.

But the feeling of playing the class and it’s subclasses just seems ….lackluster to me.

I think this is a common feeling among players.

The Wizard theme (other than Bladesinger) just isn't cool. Sorcerers are bursting with innate magical energy that they struggle to control! Warlocks make a pact with a higher power! Wizards read books and study alot... yeah no thanks I do enough of that in real life.

I think the theme can be very flavorful and the fantasy is still very popular. I do get players (especially new players) who do want to be Merlin, or Gandalf, or Dumbledore. That special combination of age-old wisdom, a sharp mind, and prudent power. This is thoroughly beloved archetype.

I don’t think the class does a good job supporting that fantasy. No one thinks Merlin and thinks about him hunting down spell scrolls.

Ritual spells (and just generally having access to many spells) ought to be powerful but I just never see them actually work in practice. Any time the table has a challenge in front of them and a spellcaster has an idea to overcome that challenge but it takes 10 in-game minutes, you almost always see some other player come up with an alternate solution that doesn't require "waiting". With creative players and a supportive DM, skillchecks can usually replace whatever the Ritual spells were attempting to achieve

Wizards are much more powerful at high levels than low levels, and most parties never reach those levels where Wizards (and other spellcasters) start breaking the game. They're definitely still good at low levels but not nearly as good as they would be if parties actually played high levels.

I generally agree with all of this.

 

[bedir than]

I don’t think that is a sustainable argument because most players aren’t long term players at all. The overwhelming majority of players came into contact with spellbooks in 5th edition, at the same time they discovered all other core class features.

Almost every player at my table, measuring in the dozens, is new to D&D via 5e. They play Wizards. They do not think they lack flavor or viability like the people here are insisting is true.
They do use the spell book and talk about wanting to find more spells. Fetch quests for books have been plenty of B and C plots.

So when I say EN World's optimizers are bored with the flavor I think that's because this thread has shown that EN World optimizers are bored with flavor that never comes up when I talk to people across generations who are picking up the game in 5e

 

[Zardnaar]

Almost every player at my table, measuring in the dozens, is new to D&D via 5e. They play Wizards. They do not think they lack flavor or viability like the people here are insisting is true.
They do use the spell book and talk about wanting to find more spells. Fetch quests for books have been plenty of B and C plots.

So when I say EN World's optimizers are bored with the flavor I think that's because this thread has shown that EN World optimizers are bored with flavor that never comes up when I talk to people across generations who are picking up the game in 5e

Not bored haven't seen enough in play to get bored.
. Theres not really a big sign saying to excel with them actively add a heap of rituals to spell book and hope you're in the right campaign.

Its a very ENwoekd assumption. Elsewhere online its more at level ABC theses spells do XYZ. Even then bard says hi.

In a way its lije tgevokd 3.x Class 5 PrC2/PrC3/PrC5 but its theory craft level 15.

 

[touc]

Zardnaar, your keyboard exploded!

Anecdotally, the last time I had a D&D player wizard was @5 years ago. The player, newish to D&D, came to me and wanted to play a "blaster caster." He envisioned rows of enemies melting before his character (and yeah, pretty all the "optimization" and "which class is OP" is all about combat). He was disappointed when he threw his highest level damage spell and everything was still standing, or when he did the math and it was more economical to throw cantrips. He felt like he was being corralled into playing a "control" or "supporting" character. He felt he was the lowest damage dealer in the party during combats (and I felt he was too).

I don't have a perfect solution, but my thoughts are (1) as a DM nudge my encounters so that from time to time a wizard gets to shine, whatever their specialization and (2) consider a power bump unique to them. I bought Matt Colville's Strongholds and Followers, which had unique bases for each class, and the wizard had a few cool ideas that I thought maybe didn't need to require a base. My modifications that I haven't implemented but would consider:

• Boost your specialty spells by +1 level if you make a DC 10 + spell level Con check. Fail, gain +1 exhaustion. Some similarities to a Dragonlance feat that let you boost spells but be stunned in return.
• Wizards can modify a spell with random (or chosen) feature to make it unique (using a table from the supplement). You can only do this when you advance your proficiency bonus. For example, a necrotic damage spell could be modified so that in addition, 1d4 ghouls appear within 30' under your control and last for your INT modifier rounds. It'd be the DM call if this costs gold, time, needs to be randomly rolled or picked, and if a spell could be abandoned if the result wasn't desired (presumably restarting a timer to try again).
• If you cast a damage spell in a higher slot, it always does +X extra damage (e.g. maximum, or the average, or something better than rolling a 1).

 

[Zardnaar]

Zardnaar, your keyboard exploded!

Anecdotally, the last time I had a D&D player wizard was @5 years ago. The player, newish to D&D, came to me and wanted to play a "blaster caster." He envisioned rows of enemies melting before his character (and yeah, pretty all the "optimization" and "which class is OP" is all about combat). He was disappointed when he threw his highest level damage spell and everything was still standing, or when he did the math and it was more economical to throw cantrips. He felt like he was being corralled into playing a "control" or "supporting" character. He felt he was the lowest damage dealer in the party during combats (and I felt he was too).

I don't have a perfect solution, but my thoughts are (1) as a DM nudge my encounters so that from time to time a wizard gets to shine, whatever their specialization and (2) consider a power bump unique to them. I bought Matt Colville's Strongholds and Followers, which had unique bases for each class, and the wizard had a few cool ideas that I thought maybe didn't need to require a base. My modifications that I haven't implemented but would consider:

• Boost your specialty spells by +1 level if you make a DC 10 + spell level Con check. Fail, gain +1 exhaustion. Some similarities to a Dragonlance feat that let you boost spells but be stunned in return.
• Wizards can modify a spell with random (or chosen) feature to make it unique (using a table from the supplement). You can only do this when you advance your proficiency bonus. For example, a necrotic damage spell could be modified so that in addition, 1d4 ghouls appear within 30' under your control and last for your INT modifier rounds. It'd be the DM call if this costs gold, time, needs to be randomly rolled or picked, and if a spell could be abandoned if the result wasn't desired (presumably restarting a timer to try again).
• If you cast a damage spell in a higher slot, it always does +X extra damage (e.g. maximum, or the average, or something better than rolling a 1).

Heh if you want to play a blaster you're a bit of an idiot.

The wizards not even the best at it. Dragon Sorcerer and Fiendpact Warlock (or MC).

Light cleric honorable mention as well.