D&D 5E Are quadratic spellcasters still a problem?

[GX.Sigma]

At levels 1-4
Caster: 4.5 (+effect, +easier to hit/affect, no equipment/ammunition requirement, a minor whatever ability)
Archer: 4.5 (+stat, +magic and/or feat bonus, +this is their main schtick)

Hm?

Assuming a 16 in prime requisite at level 1 with no feats:

Ray of Frost: Save vs. 14; 1d8 damage.
Heavy Crossbow: +4 vs. AC; 1d10 + 3 damage.

Assuming the enemy has a 16 dex and AC 13:

Ray of Frost: 14 vs. +3 (50%); 1d8 damage (4.5)
Heavy Crossbow: +4 vs. 13 (55%); 1d10 + 3 damage (8.5)

Expected value:

Ray of Frost: 2.25
Heavy Crossbow: 4.675

Note that this is even more pronounced with higher ability scores, and that there is a feat for increasing all weapon damage (and no such feat for cantrip damage).

 

[keterys]

Well, I think you're better off assuming a +1 Dex and AC 13, but that's roughly in line with what I've seen yes, backing up my "about twice as effective" comment.

By or around 4th the archer generally picks up a couple damage over the wizard, from the stat bump (17 -> 18) and a +1 weapon, also picking up +2 accuracy compared to the wizard's +1.

 

[cmbarona]

I think part of the problem comparing "Wizard" with "Archer" is that "Archer" is not a class. A Rogue has Sneak Attack, a Fighter has Expertise, A Ranger has Deadly Strike, etc. I think different people may be comparing different classes' stats. Maybe different bows, too, I don't know. I don't really see a problem with things the way they are now, which is that Cantrips are slightly worse, at least strictly damage-wise, than a comparable weapon in the hands of a well-trained martial class. And those martial classes have benefits too, like a Ranger's extra attacks or d6 (depending on Favored Enemy), or a Rogue's sneak attack scaling.

FWIW from the Wizard we've been playing with, I agree that certain spells are problematic, some much more so than others, but none of these spells are the Cantrips. Our Wizard usually just defaults to Ray of Frost when there is nothing better available, which there usually is, by far.

 

[keterys]

Oh, I agree. Cantrips should absolutely be worse than a martial character with a bow. And they are. By a lot. Maybe even too much, depending on your goal.

Hence, when someone suggests they are too good, and they already feel pretty ineffective, it raised some red flags.

 

[Sadrik]

Hm?

Assuming a 16 in prime requisite at level 1 with no feats:

Ray of Frost: Save vs. 14; 1d8 damage.
Heavy Crossbow: +4 vs. AC; 1d10 + 3 damage.

Assuming the enemy has a 16 dex and AC 13:

Ray of Frost: 14 vs. +3 (50%); 1d8 damage (4.5)
Heavy Crossbow: +4 vs. 13 (55%); 1d10 + 3 damage (8.5)

Expected value:

Ray of Frost: 2.25
Heavy Crossbow: 4.675

Note that this is even more pronounced with higher ability scores, and that there is a feat for increasing all weapon damage (and no such feat for cantrip damage).

I suppose if you consider all of your opponents to wear no armor, so that their AC and DEX save are equal you do come out ahead. However the reality is that most monsters have a better armor class than DEX save and in many cases by a large margin.

Also as you level up, the wizard gets a bonus on his DC while no one adds to the DEX save making things even more lopsided for the Wizard to hit over the archer.

I like keterys was also assuming a longbow you are assuming a heavy crossbow.

So good start, try again?

 

[keterys]

Eh, not really assuming too much on the archer side of things. There are even benefits to going two-weapon on it, at low level.

I ran the numbers on the elf wizard in my group using a bow himself, with his 14 Dex and racial proficiency, but only because I was curious why I was having to make saves to avoid taking 2 damage and what was up with that A dedicated archer would be a different story altogether.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I suppose if you consider all of your opponents to wear no armor, so that their AC and DEX save are equal you do come out ahead. However the reality is that most monsters have a better armor class than DEX save and in many cases by a large margin.

Yes, cantrips are more likely to "hit" much of the time because a creature is more likely to fail a Dex save than to have a lower AC. However, cantrips also can't crit, and because they don't make attack rolls, they don't benefit from many of the situations that grant ranged attackers advantage on their attack rolls (there is no equivalent rule for giving a defender disadvantage on his saves in most cases). Cantrips also don't add an ability bonus to their damage. That more than evens things out. That said, I would prefer that cantrips go back to attacking AC and having an ability bonus to damage just like weapon attacks. I think it is more fun for the player and all around more fair for everyone that way. I'm just pointing out that the current setup doesn't give cantrips the kind of advantage that people think it does.

Also as you level up, the wizard gets a bonus on his DC while no one adds to the DEX save making things even more lopsided for the Wizard to hit over the archer.

No it doesn't. An increase in Int that adds to the save DC is effectively the same exact thing as an increase to Dex that adds to attack rolls.

 

[Kraydak]

Worse, as noted above, the extra dice from deadly strike/cantrip outweighs the +stat that fighters get.

And all of this is ignoring the fact that cantrips doing 50% of fighter damage is massively unbalanced-overpowered.

Remember, you aren't doing a strict fighter vs. wizards DPR comparison. That'd be silly. No, you are doing party vs party comparisons, such as:
Melee Fighter, Ranged Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Rogue VS Melee Fighter, Cleric, Wizard X 2, Rogue comparison.

Now, assume that the non-Fighters do 50% of Fighter DPR. Well, the 1st party does 3.5 Fighter DPR while the second only does 3 Fighter DPR. IE it does 1/6 more DPR at the cost of 1/3 of the spell power. Now, if the Wizards are doing 50% of Fighter DPR *only* when taking combat heavy spell loadouts, well, you could maybe (just maybe) make a balance case. In that scenario, the Wizards *aren't* providing all that much utility. But remember, this means that you can start to think about balance when a combat-loadout Wizards, using his non-cantrip spells, is only doing 50% of the Fighter damage. Cantrips at the 50% level (and right now, they are only there at VERY low level, otherwise they are much higher) is simply absurdly high.

 

[Falling Icicle]

And all of this is ignoring the fact that cantrips doing 50% of fighter damage is massively unbalanced-overpowered.

No it isn't. If they were any weaker than that, they wouldn't be worth using at all. Cantrips need to be a respectable use of a character's turn, not only so that wizards don't totally suck once they're out of daily spells, but also so that they can use them instead of their daily spells, conserving their bigger guns for later while still making a somewhat meaningful contribution to the fight.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I suppose if you consider all of your opponents to wear no armor, so that their AC and DEX save are equal you do come out ahead. However the reality is that most monsters have a better armor class than DEX save and in many cases by a large margin.

Fair enough.

Also as you level up, the wizard gets a bonus on his DC while no one adds to the DEX save making things even more lopsided for the Wizard to hit over the archer.

The Wizard gets a bonus on his save DC, the Fighter gets a bonus on his attack roll. What's the difference?

I like keterys was also assuming a longbow you are assuming a heavy crossbow.

There is no reason for a level 1 Fighter to use a longbow over a heavy crossbow (unless your target is between 100 and 120 feet from you).

So good start, try again?

Sure.

The average AC and Dex bonus for level 1 monsters in the bestiary are 12.4 and +0.8, respectively.

Ray of Frost: 14 vs. +0.8 (66%); 1d8 damage (4.5).
Heavy Crossbow:+4 vs. 12.4 (58%); 1d10 + 3 damage (8.5)

EV:
Ray of Frost = 2.97
Heavy Crossbow = 4.93

The Fighter's basic heavy crossbow attack deals, on average, 66% more damage than the Wizard's ray of frost. The Fighter can also spend feats to improve weapon damage. Then again, the Wizard can spend a feat to maximize meteor swarm damage, so this comparison is a bit silly.