D&D 4E [4e] Wizard as good as a Fighter in Standard Melee

[LotusBlossom]

Just checking to see if this is correct, because it seems a little strange to me.

In 4e, take a wizard and fighter using the same melee weapon (staff, dagger, etc) in which both are proficient, and happen to have the same strength (i.e. the fighter didn't really go out to max his STR and the wizard wanted to be kind-of tough and upped his STR higher than a normal wizard). Now, if both were to attack an opponent with a standard melee attack (no feats), then is it true that they would both have the same chance to-hit? Even when they are level 10, 20, 30 (assuming they upped their strength equally over the levels)?

If true, then it seems the fighter is only a good fighter because of his feats and such. Beyond those extras, he not really much better at fighting than any other class even though he's supposed to have been trained and been working on fighting all his adventuring career, while the wizard may have never even touched a melee weapon before the above combat.

I've been looking over several different RPG systems the past few days, and just happened to notice this (if I'm correct, I've never played 4e but I have the core books). This certainly doesn't happen in most other systems.

 

[ValhallaGH]

If all your stated assumptions were true (and it's an amazingly bizarre situation, as indicated by the number of ifs in your post) then yes, the two characters would have a similar attack bonus. Fighters do have a class feature that gives them a +1 to attacks with either one-handed or two-handed weapons (chosen at first level).

A 4E Fighter is a good fighter because he 1) can take a ton of damage, far more than any wizard, 2) has a lot of neat tricks to use that make him as good (or better) at fighting as a Wizard is at magicing, 3) is freely proficient with all simple and martial weapons, 4) can use every shield and almost every armor for free, 5) is better with his chosen type of weapons (see above) than any other class.

while the wizard may have never even touched a melee weapon before the above combat.

How the @(&#$ is this character allowed to be proficient!? Is the DM high out of his mind? Really, where the heck was the DM oversight on this one?

The Wizard in your example has devoted himself to melee combat to a degree only seen amongst fighters, rangers, paladins and barbarians. He's not quite as devoted as those classes (different class features, which makes a huge difference in 4E) but he's still heavily invested into it.

I've been looking over several different RPG systems the past few days, and just happened to notice this .... This certainly doesn't happen in most other systems.

Actually, it's pretty common in everything except earlier versions of D&D. And it does happen in most of the source literature.

Most fantasy novels, especially Sword & Sorcery, have everyone using weapons, and using them skillfully. (In fact, the exceptions I'm aware of are all based [directly or indirectly] upon D&D games.) Different levels of talent come into play, and the guys that use them all the time are better than the guys that don't, but that's not a major issue. By 4E logic, these are simply a difference in ability scores, and possibly proficiency. The difference between a 12 Strength and a 16 Strength may not seem like a lot, but it is (10% bonus on attacks).

Personally, I find the way 4E does things to give a greater sense of heroism to the characters. A high level wizard can actually beat a low level fighter in a melee, allowing the guy with years of combat experience (or months of extremely intense experience) to overcome the guy with basic combat training. This enhances my sense of enjoyment and reinforces my ability to immerse myself and enjoy the game and story.
I think everyone can agree that enhancing enjoyment and immersion are good things in our hobby.

 

[Rotogar]

Yes... but that is a LOT of IFs. And you would have to ask why the fighter isn't using all his cool fighter powers or his cool weapon proficiencies or his aweseom fighter feats. I have never, ever under any circumstances, seen the fighter forgo all those cool things that make him a fighter. Any more than I have ever seen a wizard forgo all his mystical powers to swing a dagger.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Belongs in 4e rules...

 

[Minigiant]

Yes that's a lot of if's.

The reason for a lot of complain about the past versions of the fighter aand weapons combat was that it was just some numbers. A high accuracy, damage, HP and AC. Anyone could get those.

In 4E, the powers and proficiencies make weapons combat. Getting thses are a bit harder or more costly if you don't get them free.

 

[LotusBlossom]

Yes that's a lot of if's.

The reason for a lot of complain about the past versions of the fighter aand weapons combat was that it was just some numbers. A high accuracy, damage, HP and AC. Anyone could get those.

In 4E, the powers and proficiencies make weapons combat. Getting thses are a bit harder or more costly if you don't get them free.

I agree with your second statement, but not the first in which anyone can get these -- see below. Also, I was thinking about this more in terms of how the game was designed. Since I'm looking to design YetAnotherRPGSystem, I've been looking over many that are out there and this struck me as a not so small departure from the previous DND systems (I've never played 3e so I don't know if it does the same thing as 4e).

In 4e, the basic core mechanic to hit something is d20+STR+Level/2. This is the same for every class, thus it remains for additional design components to differentiate the classes.

In 1e,2e,Basic,CC,and similar, the to hit mechanic varies by class:
fighter = d20+STR+Level (or something close) down to
wizard = d20+STR+Level/3 or 4.
This mechanic, is not as simple as the first, but does provide a class distinction. It needs less additions to differentiate the classes, although only for melee combat; it still needs additions to classes to make them distinct outside of melee combat with weapons.

Thus my disagreement: At 20th level, a fighter has an auto +20, a wizard has a +5 or +6. Definitely not the same, and there is no class that gets the +20 of a fighter at 20th level. Now, other classes can use magic items, etc, but given the same equipment and STR, the fighter always has a better to hit.

 

[Wepwawet]

In 4e, the basic core mechanic to hit something is d20+STR+Level/2. This is the same for every class, thus it remains for additional design components to differentiate the classes.

No it's not.
That is only true with Basic Melee Attacks, which are a MINOR part of one's arsenal.
You only use basic melee attacks for OA, basically.

The reason why a Fighter is a lot better fighting melee, is because all his powers (exploits) are based on Strength. While all the Wizards spells are based on Intelligence. Those are the powers they use to fight. It's not just picking a pointy stick.

In your example if you put them side by side swinging a dagger, they'd be the same. But the Fighter knows a lot of awsome tricks with his sword.

 

[Lord Ernie]

The way in which 4th seperates competence with weapons (and similar attacks) is two-fold. First, proficiency. Proficiency implies the character in question has had extensive training with the weapon and knows how to wield it, and provides a +2 to a +3 bonus to attack. Note that a wizard has to choose individual weapons to be proficient with (through feats), which means he has to spend additional resources on it. A fighter is proficient with all martial weapons from the get-go.

Second, and most importantly, the powers. A fighter's powers imply combat training, a knowledge of special maneuvers which indeed take a long time to train and use correctly. These damage multiple foes at once, put a single foe at a signficant disadvantage, push them around the battlefield, or simply inflict a lot more damage. None of the wizard's powers (okay, with the exception of the Spiral Tower powers) benefit from weapon usage - they're magic spells, not trained maneuvers.

In short: a wizard in all other things equal to the fighter has spent resources to get there, won't be as tough (less HP, surges) or as good with a blade (fighters get that +1 to attack), and the only thing he can do is stand around and smack things with it. Whirl the blade around his head and hit everyone around him? No can do. Brutally smash the target in front of him? Nope. Strike the target first, and use the momentum to push him back with his shield? No, sorry.

If that is not enough differentiation for you... well, yeah, 4th is not for you.

 

[Starfox]

To be a little snippy;

If power use is not allowed, the Fighter is as almost good as the Wizard at magic. All that differs is the cantrips. Both can use rituals.

Which I guess kind of proves the OPs point; the classes are basically very similar. Most of the differences in the powers.

 

[Bagpuss]

Just checking to see if this is correct, because it seems a little strange to me.

It's a case of yes and NO.

yes: If
a) they have the same Strength - unlikely because every fighter ability keys of Strength, where as none of the Wizard one do. So one or both characters would be very poor builds.
b) they are using a weapon they are both proficient in - A fighter is proficient in military weapons some of which have a greater bonus to hit.
c) the fighter doesn't use his class feature - that gives him a bonus to hit with certain melee weapons.
e) the fighter doesn't use any of his powers even his at-will ones - he would be stupid not to and this give him an advantage in melee.

NO because:
a) In any sensible build the fighter will always be significantly stronger than the wizard. (At least +3 difference, but probably +4 or even +5).
b) The fighter will be using a heavy blade with a +3 proficiency bonus to the wizards staff of +2 (okay they could be equal if he uses a dagger)
c) The fighter gets a +1 bonus from a Class Feature.
e) The fighter would get a bonus effect or damage from his class powers.

The yes case will virtually never happen, the NO case will almost always occur.

Oh course in 3rd Ed at 1st level the same was true, the Fighter was only +1 better to hit. Since in 4th Ed the fighter gets the +1 from a class feature, it's pretty much the same. Even at higher levels the disparity in Strength (since the Fighter will have focused on improving that) and items since the fighter will have a magic melee weapon but the wizard a magic implement, will mean the difference in attack is comparable to 3rd Ed, even before you take into account feats and powers.

So yes if you look at one particular, theoretical case, that in practice is never likely to occur in play.