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

[Valetudo]

There are a couple INT subclasses for nonINT classes if they want to be a smart fighter or rogue. Plus isn't the new psion, we are getting another INT caster.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I don't think there should be only one class that prioritizes Intelligence, really. What if you don't want to play a spellcaster, let alone a Wizard? Should you get penalized for Int checks because of that? Because it's not like putting a 16 in Int benefits other classes, unless they chose an Int-based spellcasting subclass?

This is an easily overlooked benefit of the wizard. Intelligence is a great skills-stat and Investigation is IME the second most important skill in the game (only behind Perception) while Arcana is a good candidate for third. And 2024 wizards both have their primary stat supporting them (when no one else's does) and have an Expertise on one of them.

 

[TwoSix]

Pretty much all the other caster classes are more interesting for Tier 1 and Tier 2.

Wizards start to pay off at 10, and really pay off at 14 when they get their routinely excellent subclass abilities. The number of level 6+ spells that are "once in a while" spells (super useful to cast once in a while, but you don't want regularly) is when their spellbook mechanic really starts to pay off.

Our table doesn't see a ton of wizards either, but they pay off in spades once the games gets to Tier 3. My 14th level bladesinger, for example, is an absolute powerhouse and I haven't even started to abuse simulacrum yet.

 

[Mistwell]

I am playing a low level wizard right now. Took a single level dip in Ranger for armor, which did not reduce my spell slot progression (just spell level progression). Uses true strike with a melee or ranged weapon for decent damage and a weapon mastery one each (from Ranger). Mirror image and Shield, along with half plate and a shield, make him nearly unhittable at these levels. Bonus action Minor Image with both visual and sound gives him cover/concealment every round too. Web is great at these levels for control.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't think there should be only one class that prioritizes Intelligence, really. What if you don't want to play a spellcaster, let alone a Wizard? Should you get penalized for Int checks because of that? Because it's not like putting a 16 in Int benefits other classes, unless they chose an Int-based spellcasting subclass?

And yes, I know the Artificer exists, but they can't even be bothered to make it a PHB class, so some groups might not even have access to it.

I would agree. The four Charisma-based casters in the base 12 classes (Bard, Paladin, Sorcerer, Warlock) is a bit of overkill, and then you have the four Wisdom-based casters (or pseudo-casters) in the Cleric, Druid, Ranger, and Monk). That leaves the Wizard, plus the Fighter and Rogue for only one of their subclasses that prioritizes Intelligence.

If we were looking for more balance amongst the caster abilities, the only one swap over to INT that I think you might be able to justify an argument for would be making Warlock an INT-based caster... under the idea that you need to be very smart to make a deal with an extra-planar entity that doesn't screw you over. But at the same time I understand why they went CHA because of the need for your personal presence to be able to withstand the influence of said entity.

But then again... with the Artificer and the Psion coming into play both being INT-based... the numbers are becoming more balanced anyway.

 

[Neonchameleon]

If we were looking for more balance amongst the caster abilities, the only one swap over to INT that I think you might be able to justify an argument for would be making Warlock an INT-based caster... under the idea that you need to be very smart to make a deal with an extra-planar entity that doesn't screw you over. But at the same time I understand why they went CHA because of the need for your personal presence to be able to withstand the influence of said entity.

I have never seen why classes can't flex anyway (especially between the dump stat choices) - warlocks I think should be Int or Cha. For that matter I'd argue for flexing sorcerers for Cha or Str.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Quite frankly a lot of parties can get themselves stymied if they always ignore Wizards, because invariably they will form themselves like @ECMO3 's group did over in their

"How can I do a Charisma-Investigation (or a Strength/Dexterity-Investigation if I can't use Charisma) to find a secret door?"​

thread when almost their entire party dumped Intelligence. What better way to potentially screw yourselves on all the various INT-based skill checks then to avoid the one class that prioritizes it?

Yeah. Noticed the same about str...
Some people tend to tell everyone how useless int and str are and then complain if it is actually needed in the game...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

There are a couple INT subclasses for nonINT classes if they want to be a smart fighter or rogue. Plus isn't the new psion, we are getting another INT caster.

Yes. Along with a lot of spells that ask for an int save.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I don't think there should be only one class that prioritizes Intelligence, really. What if you don't want to play a spellcaster, let alone a Wizard? Should you get penalized for Int checks because of that? Because it's not like putting a 16 in Int benefits other classes, unless they chose an Int-based spellcasting subclass?

And yes, I know the Artificer exists, but they can't even be bothered to make it a PHB class, so some groups might not even have access to it.

Well you would have to not be very intelligent to think crawling around a monster-infested hole was a good way to earn a living!

 

[Zardnaar]

I didn't make that equivalence. You claimed "wizard extinction" and nobody is playing them. Then cited a poll about high level play being rare - in the same poll, it said wizards are popular and therefore not extinction. Your two positions are mutually exclusive.


OK so your assumption people don't play high level is outdated?


That was when the game was relative new too. They've been putting out more high level stuff since.



I'd say a LOT more people are doing higher level than you think these days and I am surprised you have not. Regardless, even the levels you mentioned, Wizards are fantastic. 6th level and 7th level spells, they are the best.

I didn't claim no one's playing them im saying if don't see a lot of them.

I am claiming theyre not very good vs other options in levels that matter.

At hogh level theyre fine. Level 13 and 15 for 7th and 8th level spells are way to late.

How many games get to that level though? I suspect very few.