amysrevenge
First Post
We've got two threads on the top page right now, one claiming that the wizard is the most powerful class, and one claiming that the wizard is the least powerful class. Seems to me that they might have got it just right, lol.
Apparently Wizards are perfectly balanced :)
- Thread starter amysrevenge
- Start date
Danceofmasks
First Post
Yeah, it's quite amusing.
My take on the subject is that some builds play the way they always will right off the bat, whilst others require investment in gear and higher level powers to shine.
Orb wizards is one such. Most powers that apply conditions are dailies, so until there's multiple dailies as options, the orb is going to be an empty gun much of the time.
My take on the subject is that some builds play the way they always will right off the bat, whilst others require investment in gear and higher level powers to shine.
Orb wizards is one such. Most powers that apply conditions are dailies, so until there's multiple dailies as options, the orb is going to be an empty gun much of the time.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
It's also worth noting that the person who thinks wizards are terrible also thinks that they never move around the battlefield.
Its also worth noting that in the thread where the poster thinks wizards are superior he thinks there single target damage roughly equals a strikers.
I personally think wizards have the most swing based on the GM. Things like the numbers of monsters how they are spread out and the general lay of the battlefield effect the ability of the wizard to his/her job more than any other class.
If your DM sends lots of minions, or doesn't spread monsters out much a wizard will look awesome. If solo and elites are more common and monsters usually are spread out a wizard will look inferior.
Goumindong
First Post
In the early game yes. A bit later and the wizard will still look awesome. Because the wizard is the guy who gets the most status effects.
And when you impart a status effect on a solo, its like applying 5 status effects. This is one of the reasons that so many solo monsters spend their extra defenses in fort, reflex, and will.
When you isolate an elite, its like applying 2 status effects. By level 5 you have soft isolations. At level 7 you get single target "lose a turn" encounter powers.
Thunderwave can really punish solos as well. Especially if they don't have anything ranged.
re
Well, if you are used to playing an old school wizard, the new wizard is definitely disappointing. You are a very weak damage dealer compared to rogues and rangers. It's great when you take out a few minions, but once they die you're back to dealing moderate damage to a single target.
I'm playing a rogue right now. You do insane single target damage better than anyone else when you have combat advantage, especially as a brutal scoundrel though an Artful Dodger has an easier time getting CA.
My buddy is used to playing an old school wizard. He often feels kind of useless in our battles. Once he kills the minions, he pretty much does cruddy damage from there on out. His sleep spell is good for setting up the rest of the party, but doesn't have the bang of old wizard damage spells.
Here is the biggest problem, melee weapons allow other classes to hit easier. At low level alot of monsters have defenses equal to their AC, so they are harder to hit by wizards because they have no melee bonus to hit.
On top of that the rogue often gets Piercing Strike which allows him to hit against Reflex with a melee attack. That means he hits very easy, especially if using a dagger.
I know as wizards level they will become far more useful as minions become more dangerous and plentiful. But at low level they don't provide alot of bang for the buck. I imagine you can get a bit envious watching a rogue or ranger do big damage.
Heck, another of friend of mine gets envious with his fighter. Damage dealing is always the "sexy" role in a DnD group. Everyone loves to get the kill and the strikers are the best at getting the kill against the big, bad guys. Even bow rangers do more ranged damage than a wizard, and that can be hard to take for the wizard.
It will even out at higher level, but at low level it can be frustrating. So I understand why wizard players might become unhappy. They are pretty much forced into the "controller" role, and if they don't like that role and never played it with their old wizard then they aren't going to be happy with the subtle controller role versus the big damage striker role.
Well, if you are used to playing an old school wizard, the new wizard is definitely disappointing. You are a very weak damage dealer compared to rogues and rangers. It's great when you take out a few minions, but once they die you're back to dealing moderate damage to a single target.
I'm playing a rogue right now. You do insane single target damage better than anyone else when you have combat advantage, especially as a brutal scoundrel though an Artful Dodger has an easier time getting CA.
My buddy is used to playing an old school wizard. He often feels kind of useless in our battles. Once he kills the minions, he pretty much does cruddy damage from there on out. His sleep spell is good for setting up the rest of the party, but doesn't have the bang of old wizard damage spells.
Here is the biggest problem, melee weapons allow other classes to hit easier. At low level alot of monsters have defenses equal to their AC, so they are harder to hit by wizards because they have no melee bonus to hit.
On top of that the rogue often gets Piercing Strike which allows him to hit against Reflex with a melee attack. That means he hits very easy, especially if using a dagger.
I know as wizards level they will become far more useful as minions become more dangerous and plentiful. But at low level they don't provide alot of bang for the buck. I imagine you can get a bit envious watching a rogue or ranger do big damage.
Heck, another of friend of mine gets envious with his fighter. Damage dealing is always the "sexy" role in a DnD group. Everyone loves to get the kill and the strikers are the best at getting the kill against the big, bad guys. Even bow rangers do more ranged damage than a wizard, and that can be hard to take for the wizard.
It will even out at higher level, but at low level it can be frustrating. So I understand why wizard players might become unhappy. They are pretty much forced into the "controller" role, and if they don't like that role and never played it with their old wizard then they aren't going to be happy with the subtle controller role versus the big damage striker role.
Prestidigitalis
First Post
So the wizard is handicapped because the monsters' defenses are equal to their AC, but the rogue has the advantage of easily hitting against Reflex?
I don't quite see how those two things can both be true at the same time -- no offense intended.
You don't see how that works?
Wizard with 20 intelligence attacks reflex 16 reflex defense: 11 or better to hit. (+5 from intel modifier)
Rogue with 20 dexterity attacks reflex defense 16 with dagger: 7 (8 with rapier or shortsword) or better to hit. (+5 dex modifier +3 dagger proficiency bonus +1 dagger weapon power +9 total to hit or +8 with rapier or shortsword)
The rogue also often moves into combat advantage position, something you can't do with ranged attacks further enhancing the rogue's chance to hit.
You see now? The rogue has a much better chance to hit both AC and Reflex defense because he gets a proficiency bonus to hit with this weapons.
The wizard does not.
Similar Threads
