Anyone can do all those things too.
That's irrelevant, however. What another character can or cannot do does not change what a fighter can do. The fighter can do those things. It's not like allowing a cleric the same possibilities precluded the fighter from those options.
But wizards can also do AoE when bookcases are not around, fly after the gryphon dies, sneak right past a guards face.
- Not everyone is a wizard, for starters. That's looking at a high utility class as the standard. What most classes accomplish is the norm, not the extremes.
- I did qualify that it's an environmental and/or prep factor. It's not like there was anything misleading there. I simply ask questions. Coating the ground with oil or pitch to light with a flaming arrow can do the same thing.
- Fly sucks compared to the griffon mount. Griffons aren't dispelled like magic, don't break on failed concentration, don't spend a spell slot, have a reasonable amount of hit points for a mount, and the range on a bow is greater than the vast majority of spells. If a person does find the mount is dying (I didn't find that) then take the mounted combatant feat so that the griffon has evasion and the fighter can take the attacks instead of the griffon. There are plenty of advantages for a griffon over the fly spell.
- The wizard isn't guaranteed to sneak right past the guard's face because he still needs to roll the check. The fighter can bribe the guard or intimidate him with "you didn't see me. If you let anyone know I was here I will....." and get passed the guard with a check too. Disguise and intimidation are both methods to bypass guards in plain sight. So would climbing a sheer wall farther away from the guard's line of sight. There's often multiple approaches to the same goal.
There's no denying that they have more utility than fighters.
Which is why I pointed out there are obviously things magic can do that a fighter cannot. That's not a point of contention. People seem to ignore the options and utility fighters do have as if it doesn't exist. My point is the gap isn't a big as a lot of people seem to think.
Wild sorcerer's ability to twin-haste, or subtle suggestion is plenty powerful. Plus free random effects, most of which are beneficial.
Twinning haste is limited duration and resources still. It exists but it largely accomplishes the same thing faster. Useful in a fight and can be useful out of a fight for the movement benefits. Generally, extra attack > the extra attack from haste because that's the most common use for the bonus action. Fighters get multiples of those.
Both of the spells listed take away concentration. Suggestion requires that the target can hear and understand the caster so the subtle part can be impacted. What it basically does and convinces someone to do something after a failed save. A stronger social benefit on a limited basis isn't necessarily better than social skills on a regular basis from someone who uses them frequently or bribes people to do things with gold. It's true that a wizard can do the same but that just means the wizard is using a mundane approach and magic for combat or when it matters. That's the norm for sorcerers, warlocks, and bards.
Suggestion also doesn't cover groups. I gave an example earlier of using social skills on two different groups on the same turn but using action surge. The best a sorcerer can do is two individuals using twin and a wizard can target one individual. That require mass suggestion and becomes even more limited in how often it can be used.
I don't dispute that there are advantages to using suggestion as per your example. What's missing is the advantages to not using suggestion as opposed to mundane options.
1) The AoE damage is largely insignificant, likely takes the fighters action (would love to see a bookcase out damage a full round of fighter attacks) and is entirely dependent on DM fiat. The gunpowder thing is hilarious too, yeah I suppose if we give the fighter a super-secret clubhouse where he builds equalizing weapons that only he can use somehow then yeah, maybe that works. And maybe it highlights that there might be a problem when you have to go to that extent.
The point of the book case is multiple targets of low hit points and generally at lower levels and has nothing to do with DM fiat. I provided the the DMG page for reference on that type of damage. DM fiat would be ignoring it.
Gun powder may or may not be an option. Asking for it isn't a problem. Either the other existing options continue to exist (no loss in asking) or the option becomes available. That is a DM decision based on campaign and why the hermit secret gives legitimacy to controlling access for some. Calling it a hilarious super secret clubhouse discredits your answer given that all characters with the hermit background have their secrets and we play in a world with alchemy labs.
Artisans, crafters, armorers, alchemists, etc all have their tools of the trade and some of them guard their secrets just as fervently as any wizard guarding his lab or spell book.
2) A wizard also has a griffon mount, and now can fly *and* be invisible, or use whatever other utility magic they want. Having a mount that the wizard can also get is not a point for the fighter class.
Not really. The wizard can have a griffon for a mount (and I think it's a good idea) but it's not a competition. The wizard who turns invisible still makes a stealth check. Now so does the griffon if the wizard knows how to get it to try to be quiet. The griffon has a +2 bonus with no proficiency, the wizard may or may not have proficiency, the invisibility spell is now costing a higher level slot, and the utility magic still doesn't completely replace skills as demonstrated by the stealth check that continues to be requires of invisibility.
The wizard flying on a griffon doesn't prevent the fighter from flying on a griffon. It means they are both flying. As point out above, the fighter has better range with his or her weapons than the wizard does with his or her spells for the most part.
3) Cool. Right up until one of the slew of monsters with darkvision spots you. Better hope you’re a dex fighter too, else you really like that disadvantage for heavy armor.
Darkvision doesn't give any bonus to perception. It's also "darkvision" and not "xray vision". In order to hide, there needs to be a place to hide. That means behind bushes, crouching behind thrones, climbing up into a little alcove, climbing a tree, even hiding behind another party member as a possibility. Hiding does not require darkness just because a person can also hide in the darkness.
Heavy armor can be taken off for the times a person wants to be stealthy and DEX definitely helps. Fortunately, it's easy to build a DEX fighter for those who want to be stealthy.
4) Partially related o DM fiat on the wizard’s side this time, Charm person is useful in and out of combat. In combat is basically is a kill spell, it forces the enemy to regard you as “a friendly acquaintance” which, in my experience, means they stop trying to kill you.
Charm person doesn't kill anyone. It prevents the charmed person from attacking the spell caster (not anyone else), treats the spell caster as friendly, and gives the spell caster advantage on some checks. The save is even made with advantage if it's being done in combat the charm is automatically broken if the spell caster or any of his or her companions does anything harmful to the target.
It's even restricted in target by charm immunity and creature type. Intimidation or persuasion can be done to a vampire or ogre. Charm person cannot.
5) Yeah, I can’t think of any campaigns where time is a factor and getting home quickly is important. While teleport is definitely a shadow of its former imbalanced self, its appeal is undeniable. Most importantly, the fighter receives nothing that aids in travel, so like it or not it’s still a point for the wizard.
I don't find it appealing. Teleportation is a cool concept but unless fleeing home or traveling to a known circle is suddenly vital the application is isn't much. There are several other high level spells on which I would rather spend those slots.
Fighters are good at forced marching. Animal handling allows for pushing mounts further and CON save proficiency helps in making forced march saves. It's not much but it's there. Riding the griffon aids in travel more than either of those options.
6) Stuns lead to death, from the wizard himself if nothing else. The difference is that when the wizard stuns someone in the first round and they get blown up, the party doesn’t take any damage from the stunned target. Unless you spend 2-3 feats on being a tank, a fighter can kind-of lock down 1 target at best, sacrificing his damage to do so.
Death leads to death. I'd take a high damage fighter kill over stunning and then eventually killing. How often does a wizard stun anyone, for that matter? Monk thing.
The important part of the stun is the incapacity and that can be done with poison. Poisons can cause unconscious, paralysis, incapacity, blindness, veracity, the poisoned condition (naturally), and excessive damage. It can be expensive and requires access to the poisons somehow (typically criminal / spy background, crafting or harvesting one's own) but it's definitely an option. The fact that this is per attack favors fighters. Attacking the same target with 3 arrows that are dipped in drow poison might be a low DC but the target requires rolling 3 saves. It's the same DC as low level spell casters so not so bad if a person considers it good enough for the spells listed a person would also need to consider it good enough. Action surging and attack 6 targets with poisoned arrows means multiple targets but the success ratio isn't impressive. Likely to get 2 or 3 out of 6 possible.
7) This one baffles me, when wizards can do this in superior fashion with repositioning tools and spells, and even if they couldn’t, I fail to see how “turning it into a chase” helps at all, like how is this a mark in the fighter’s favor?
It's an option. Not an advantage. I was pointing out that a fighter can do what was mentioned. Not that a wizard cannot also do that. It is an advantage for a champion or bard because extended chases include CON checks to avoid levels of exhaustion. It could be considered a benefit of extra ASI's as well because WIS, DEX, and CON are the relevant ability scores to the typical chase encounter.
My argument isn't that wizards don't have more options and can have better options. The example I would use is alter self. Fighters can possibly have a background or use a disguise kit but underwater adaptation isn't something a fighter adds outside of going genasi.
My argument is that fighters still have options. Every character has options. The fact that some have more or better options doesn't take away from the fact fighters do have out of combat options available to them.
The fighter’s lack of utility is in no way overstated compared to the wizard, especially with the changes to skills over the years. Most of the community seems fine with this, especially since fighter damage is more competitive in this edition than in prior years, but make no mistake that the wizard will have monumentally more options over the course of a campaign.
Why compare to the wizard? Comparing to high end draws a false conclusion. Comparison to the average is how a person determines if something is above or below average. Fighters aren't lacking in utility. Wizards just happen to be a higher utility class in a class based system.
Trying to keep on topic: I tend to go for a 14 CON as well, maybe at least a 12 on an odd build. The hit points don't matter much at lower levels but the save bonus is nice and the hit points add up to quite a bit at higher levels.
