I enjoy filling my nights playing my wizard with fun thinsg like "Ok another Magic Missle to the face" (so to speak) and doing things like Dimension Dooring to appear right next to a pair of enemies who are bloodied, then hitting them w/Thunderwave, killing them both. One of the women in my group watches a bunch of anime and she pointed out taht since they were shadowhounds, the blast dissipated them into wispy shadows before they vanished. It was a fun fight, turns out I got finishing blows on 4 of the 6 monsters too heh
Apparently Wizards are perfectly balanced :)
- Thread starter amysrevenge
- Start date
I have to agree with this point. No one is disputing that rogue's are the king of hitting...because they are. But I find reflex defenses are almost always a couple points lower than AC, meaning my wizard is hitting as often as a paladin or ranger in most cases.
I'm currently playing a wizard, which I've played from 1st to 3rd. I will say I agree that wizard's don't have to move a lot. Sure we have to run away from teh big scary once in a while, but their is no incentive for me to move around the board like there are other classes. But I find my powers are comparable to any other class. Wizards definately shine at killing minions, but have other control powers to wreck havoc on the board. And the other key of a wizard is taking the time to enjoy rituals. Wizards are the kings of rituals.
So far, I've found the big problem with my wizard is that he has a tendency to clash with the front line. The front line wants to be in the action of course, I mean who doesn't? But by being there, it reduces the effect of my slowing and immobilizing abilities.
I said this "alot of monsters have defenses equal to their AC". Not all monsters.
This I have found to be so. It isn't just reflex defense, but all their various defenses lke Fortitude which Thunderwave attacks.
How does he not gain an advantage when Rogue's to hit modifier is 3 to 4 higher against either Reflex or AC?
I would call that a rather substantial advantage, especially when striking creatures that do have a low reflex defense.
I can indeed when other players have powers that allow them add their weapon proficiency bonus when attacking defenses other than AC.
It is of no advantage to a wizard to attack Reflex defense if the reflex defense is so high that the weapon proficiency bonus of a melee offsets any advantage he has against reflex or any other defense.
A rogue has a better chance of hitting Reflex defense than a wizard by an enormous amount. A wizard has no advantage striking other defenses given that he receives no weapon proficiency.
That is what I was referring to. Given the high defenses of lower level creatures in relation to their A.C., the wizard receives no advantage from attacking other defenses.
While other characters (especially the rogue) receive a proficiency bonus which very much grants them a much better chance to hit than a wizard when AC is not 2 to 3 points higher than their other defenses.
The rogue specifically benefits from being able to strike a low reflex defense far more than the wizard because of his weapon proficiency bonus.
I hope that spells it out better for you. I assumed you would do this figuring in your head and naturally understand the perceived contradictory statements since you should know that a rogue receives a weapon proficiency bonus against Reflex defense as well as AC, which gives him an advantage over the wizard.
re
That statement is completely untrue. Proof:
Let's say a creature has a Reflex defense of 16 and an A.C. of 18 with prime stats of 20 and lvl 1.
Wizard chance to hit +5 needs 11 or better against Reflex.
Rogue with rapier chance to hit +8 needs 8 or better against reflex and 10 or better against A.C.
Either way the rogue has the advantage, and an even greater advantage against Reflex defense.
Let's toss in some other classes:
Fighter with Greatsword chance to hit +9 needs 9 or better versus A.C.
Wizard still needs 11 or better against Relfex defense.
Paladin with greatsword +8 to hit needs 10 or better versus A.C.
It wasn't was said in the original post. The original post stated that the wizard received no advantage (not a handicap) for attacking another defense because alot of low level monsters have A.C. and defenses that are equal to (wizard is handicapped when this occurs) or close to each other.
Then I stated the rogue can attack reflex defense which is a great advtange to them...because...they get a proficiency bonus. So that even when they attack reflex defense, they do it much better than the wizard.
The wizard gains no real advantage by attacking another defense due to having no proficiency bonus, while many other classes receive their proficiency bonus even when attacking a different defense. And if the A.C. of the creature is not at least 2 or 3 higher than their other defenses, then the proficiency bonus offsets any advantage the wizard has...yet still grants the rogue a great advantage striking a lower reflex defense because he will get his proficiency bonus against even the slightly lower reflex defense that gives no advantage to the wizard.
The wizard has about the same chance to hit as a melee because of the proficiency bonus, and thus gains no advantage attacking other defenses. It is a handicap when the defenses he can attack are equal to or within 1 or 2 points of A.C.
Since we've been fighting alot of skirmishers and artillery lately, we've been running into creatures with pretty good reflex defenses. The wizard isn't hitting as easy as the other players, especially the rogue who hits quite well against Reflex or A.C. due to his proficiency bonus.
It should be very apparent to any player or DM that has run the game that a proficiency bonus increases the chance to hit enough to offset the advantage of higher A.C. a great deal of the time thus giving the wizard no advantage striking against other defenses.
Then what are you arguing?
Reflex defense can be more advantageous to strike for the rogue while at the same time being no more advantageous to strike for the wizard. That is a a completey true statement.
The rogue has the advantage targeting A.C. or Reflex defense. It doesn't matter which.
If Reflex defense is equal to A.C., he hits easier than the wizard.
If Reflex defense is lower than A.C., he still hits easier than the wizard.
If you compare the wizard to other classes, A.C. must be at least 2 to 3 points higher than a given defense (I did include all the defenses, not just reflex), then the wizard receives no advantage to strking those defenses.
So I'm not getting how you two can't see that the wizard receives no advantage striking other defenses due to no weapon proficiency bonus.
And tje wizard is at a disadvantage (handicap) in comparison to the rogue and any character that can apply his proficiency bonus when striking a defense other than A.C.
That was my point in the first post. The wizard receives no advantage for striking other defenses, and is often at a disadvantage because A.C. and defenses are similar on many of the low level creatures we have fought. On top of that he doesn't gain combat advantage for ranged attacks that many melee characters take the time to set up.
So there are a variety of reasons why the wizard is at a disadvantage in combat depending on the type of creatures we are fighting. You could even include that the choice of weapon also grants an advantage to melees, because so few melees choose weapons that do less than d8 or d10 which is higher than the wizards standard attack. And when he doesn't have minions to slay, the wizard's standard attack is weaker than most other characters.
So my original statement stands. The wizard gains gains no advantage from attacking other defenses a great deal of the time. There are occasions when he does, but they have been rare for us.
I also say the rogue gains an advantage over the wizard attacking either reflex or A.C. It doesn't matter which, he will always be able to choose more advantageous defense.
That means that a lower reflex defense benefits a rogue far more than it benefits a wizard no matter how you look at it. I didn't see why this was such a problem to understand.
That statement is completely untrue. Proof:
Let's say a creature has a Reflex defense of 16 and an A.C. of 18 with prime stats of 20 and lvl 1.
Wizard chance to hit +5 needs 11 or better against Reflex.
Rogue with rapier chance to hit +8 needs 8 or better against reflex and 10 or better against A.C.
Either way the rogue has the advantage, and an even greater advantage against Reflex defense.
Let's toss in some other classes:
Fighter with Greatsword chance to hit +9 needs 9 or better versus A.C.
Wizard still needs 11 or better against Relfex defense.
Paladin with greatsword +8 to hit needs 10 or better versus A.C.
This was the question posed not what you stated.
It wasn't was said in the original post. The original post stated that the wizard received no advantage (not a handicap) for attacking another defense because alot of low level monsters have A.C. and defenses that are equal to (wizard is handicapped when this occurs) or close to each other.
Then I stated the rogue can attack reflex defense which is a great advtange to them...because...they get a proficiency bonus. So that even when they attack reflex defense, they do it much better than the wizard.
The wizard gains no real advantage by attacking another defense due to having no proficiency bonus, while many other classes receive their proficiency bonus even when attacking a different defense. And if the A.C. of the creature is not at least 2 or 3 higher than their other defenses, then the proficiency bonus offsets any advantage the wizard has...yet still grants the rogue a great advantage striking a lower reflex defense because he will get his proficiency bonus against even the slightly lower reflex defense that gives no advantage to the wizard.
The wizard has about the same chance to hit as a melee because of the proficiency bonus, and thus gains no advantage attacking other defenses. It is a handicap when the defenses he can attack are equal to or within 1 or 2 points of A.C.
Since we've been fighting alot of skirmishers and artillery lately, we've been running into creatures with pretty good reflex defenses. The wizard isn't hitting as easy as the other players, especially the rogue who hits quite well against Reflex or A.C. due to his proficiency bonus.
It should be very apparent to any player or DM that has run the game that a proficiency bonus increases the chance to hit enough to offset the advantage of higher A.C. a great deal of the time thus giving the wizard no advantage striking against other defenses.
Then what are you arguing?
Reflex defense can be more advantageous to strike for the rogue while at the same time being no more advantageous to strike for the wizard. That is a a completey true statement.
The rogue has the advantage targeting A.C. or Reflex defense. It doesn't matter which.
If Reflex defense is equal to A.C., he hits easier than the wizard.
If Reflex defense is lower than A.C., he still hits easier than the wizard.
If you compare the wizard to other classes, A.C. must be at least 2 to 3 points higher than a given defense (I did include all the defenses, not just reflex), then the wizard receives no advantage to strking those defenses.
So I'm not getting how you two can't see that the wizard receives no advantage striking other defenses due to no weapon proficiency bonus.
And tje wizard is at a disadvantage (handicap) in comparison to the rogue and any character that can apply his proficiency bonus when striking a defense other than A.C.
That was my point in the first post. The wizard receives no advantage for striking other defenses, and is often at a disadvantage because A.C. and defenses are similar on many of the low level creatures we have fought. On top of that he doesn't gain combat advantage for ranged attacks that many melee characters take the time to set up.
So there are a variety of reasons why the wizard is at a disadvantage in combat depending on the type of creatures we are fighting. You could even include that the choice of weapon also grants an advantage to melees, because so few melees choose weapons that do less than d8 or d10 which is higher than the wizards standard attack. And when he doesn't have minions to slay, the wizard's standard attack is weaker than most other characters.
So my original statement stands. The wizard gains gains no advantage from attacking other defenses a great deal of the time. There are occasions when he does, but they have been rare for us.
I also say the rogue gains an advantage over the wizard attacking either reflex or A.C. It doesn't matter which, he will always be able to choose more advantageous defense.
That means that a lower reflex defense benefits a rogue far more than it benefits a wizard no matter how you look at it. I didn't see why this was such a problem to understand.
Last edited:
Goumindong
First Post
You've got to hit your slow and immob effects before the enemy gets to you.
E.G. Here are two good tactics
1. Go first and immobilize/slow/diffiuclt terrain all but one of the enemy and then let your friends surround that guy and beat on him
2. Delay until just after the first enemy has charged(and you should have your friends ready actions to intercept him if they can instead of charging themselves). Then nuke all the guys behind him with the immobilize/diffiuclt terrain/slows. Now you just had one enemy charge head long into your front line with the rest of his support unable to reach him.
If you've got a lot of AoE terrain modification. Keep up the difficult terrain/slows/immobilizes each time letting one more guy out so your friends can surround him and beat him down.
If you don't then either start using damaging attacks OR ready thunderwave in response to their movement. They move, their move ends, you thunderwave them away from the group(or your friends away from them) and then they lose their attack
If you will hit your friends and do more damage than you would prevent, then either use a single target attack to do damage. OR(and this is especially good if you are out of dailies/encounters and are just stuck using at wills which aren't all that great in that situation) Get into flanking and aid another. A wizard should have a dagger. So that is +3 to attack. At level 1 when flanking an 8 strength wizard has a 70% chance(+4 to attack) to give +2 to a friendly when flanking. (65% for a staff wizard) +5%/2levels.
Even if not flanking and just surrounding a guy you can give another +2 to attack for your rogue or fighter with high probability. Nothing says loving like the rogue setting up for an encounter power with the cleric giving him a +2 power bonus, the fighter flanking with him, and the wizard aiding his attack for +6 total(on top of his +4 for a dagger,+5 for dex, +1 for level and +1 for a magic item at level 2 for +16 to attack)
Actually, it doesn't matter that much at low levels.
The average first level creature AC is 1.5 higher than the average first level creature Reflex defense.
The average first level creature AC is 3.8 higher than the average first level creature Will defense (so, if the DM allows Illusory Ambush, the Wizard has a better advantage than the Rogue's +3 for weapon proficiency on average, at least against first level creatures).
But, let's compare damage for an apples to apples comparison of Reflex and Reflex at first level (instead of an AC vs. Reflex comparison):
Dex 18 Rogue vs. Reflex At Will Piercing Strike Short Sword (Dagger is +1 more to hit, but does 1 less damage) compared to Int 18 Wizard vs. Reflex At Will Cloud of Daggers. Rogue is +3 to hit. Wizard does 100% Wis damage.
If Wizard has 50% chance to hit, he does .45 * 7.5 + .05 * 10 + Wis damage = 3.875 + Wis average damage.
Rogue will have 65% chance to hit and he does .6 * 7.5 + .05 * 10 = 4.925 average damage.
A Wizard with Wisdom 14 averages more damage than the Rogue in this scenario.
It is only when the Rogue has combat advantage and can Sneak Attack that he really has a damage advantage.
Rogue will then have 75% chance to hit and he does .7 * 14.5 + .05 * 24 = 11.35 average damage.
But, the Wizard can make up a lot of that by being able to target two or more opponents with Scorching Burst. Two targets = 7.75 average damage. Three targets = 11.625 average damage. More than 3 targets, the Wizard rules.
Plus, the low level Wizard can often target all 3 of the non-AC defenses whereas the low level Rogue can typically only target one. If he can figure out which defense is the lowest, the Wizard can often make up some of the Rogue's +3 to hit advantage versus Reflex.
And in order for the Rogue to gain the +3, he has to use a melee weapon so the Wizard has range advantage (i.e. the potential for cover). If the Rogue uses a crossbow, he is only +2 to hit, but +1 more damage (which results in slightly less damage on average).
All in all, the weapon proficiency bonus on Reflex merely evens out the playing field. Sure, the low level Rogue will hit more often against non-AC defenses. That doesn't mean he will always do more damage on average until higher levels. Against AC, the weapon proficiency advantage is not an advantage at all.
amysrevenge
First Post
Yay!
Which benefits every class using a melee weapon.
You should now better than to list this new ability Illusory ambush when you know it isn't in the PHB.
Not an average scenario. I can tell you from experience that isn't how it goes the majority of the time.
The wizard doesn't hold a candle to the rogue in an average fight.
Much easier to get than the scenario you listed above.
The wizard will not always have a chance to do this kind of damage given the way melee is set up.
Only a human wizard can do this. Any other wizard is limited to two defenses.
I use sly flourish with shuriken. I do quite a bit of ranged damage too.
You're analysis is a bit too theoretical. I play a rogue with a wizard. If you were to try to outdo rogue damage with a wizard, I'd bet money the rogue will outdamage the wizard the majority of the time and make the wizard look like a joke on the main BBEGs which is to say the main encounter as in the one that looks real cool in the adventure story.
My analysis was based on actual play, not theoretical. I listed circumstances that we deal with in my campaign.
And in actual play, my rogue outshines the wizard for damage by a rather significant margin. After the minions are dead, the wizard is often reduced to magic missile or some other single target attack that pales in comparison to the rogue or ranger. And often pales even to the warlock.
The creatures move so much, especially kobolds and goblins that landing a Cloud of Daggers on them is quite difficult. So most of the wizards I've played with haven't even taken that ability.
If the average creature has a A.C. only 1.5 better than Reflex defense, than wizards are worse off than I thought. Because even your Divine Challenging paladins are doing more single target damage with a better chance to hit than a wizard.
On top of that the cleric's at will ranged attacks give a better added benefit than the wizard as well.
The 4E wizard is fairly weak at low level. He is a great minion killer, but when it comes to laying down a hard punch I'll take the rogue as number one. The ranger as number two. And the warlock as number three. The wizard is about even with the fighter, though the fighter generally hits easier than the wizard.
Warlord is one of the few classes that does less damage than the wizard with melee attacks, though he can at least allow others to do more damage.
I don't know if you're trying to talk the wizard up because you play one or are just theorizing.
I know in actual play that melees have been hitting easier than wizards, clerics, and warlocks because of the weapon proficiency bonus. The wepaon proficiency bonus often offsets the advantage of striking against a different defense, though Illusory Ambush will help that since alot of creatures do have weak will. But as you noted, Fort and ref defenses are pretty comparable to A.C.
The thing about wizards though is that their at will attacks don't have nifty added extras like the clerics or the warlocks. That is part of the reason I rate them lower than clerics and warlocks as far as useful at wills.
I'm sure you read the clerics. If he hits every so often that is fine because he is doing some damage and giving a bonus to a party member.
The warlock (infernal) cursing people gives him quite a few temporary hit points and that extra added pop when he does hit.
So the wizard has the weakest single target Damage in the game. Even their burst damage (I don't mean AoE, I mean ability to increase damage against a single target) often isn't on par with the strikers. This is by design.
Personally, I'm fine with that. Because as you stated a wizard can do an impressive amount of aggregate damage. But for those players that are used to playing a wizard that can hit hard, it may be a disappointment.
In 4E wizards are going to have to be content with doing a bit of damage spread over many targets. That means that if you look at the bad guys as nails, the wizard is doing a moderate tap to several different nails, while the strikers are bringing the hammer down hard sealing the coffin with one big smash.
Last edited:
ObsidianCrane
First Post
Your sample size is to small to be meaningful. Seriously. It is even easily refuted by anyone that has had the opposite experience. The maths of the situation on the other hand is not biased by the circumstances of anyone's personal experience.
The fact is that if you compare attacking AC to attacking Ref the Rogue has the same relative advantage (maybe slightly better % points at lower defence values) for attacking AC as it does Ref in comaparison to the Wizard. The Rogue and the Wizard are both generally slightly better off attacking the non-AC defences, than attacking AC.
Consider a Rogue with +9 (Dex 20, Dagger) and a Wizard with +5 (Int 20), if they are both attacking an AC of 20 the Rogue will hit more often than the Wizard. If they are both attacking a Ref of 15 the Rogue will hit more often than the Wizard. They are both better off attacking the Ref though.
If the Wizard was dealing more damage to a single target than the Rogue in most rounds there would be a problem btw - the game's design premises would not be working. Fortunately the Wizard only outstrips the Rogue when the Wizard can repeatedly target multiple targets in a round (and manages to hit 3 of them), which, unsuprisingly, is what is supposed to happen.
Leatherhead
Possibly a Idiot.
I don't think it will be possible to tell if the wizard is balanced or not until we get at least two more controller classes.
