D&D 5E Are Wizards really all that?

[Oofta]

I'll be honest, we just have completely different game experiences then. Every game I've played in for the last 30 years, the caster players have been the overall drivers of the narrative once they start getting a fair amount of utility spells. Warriors contribute, but they don't drive the car.

In my games they contribute in different ways. If you think wizards are doing all the important stuff, perhaps it's because of selection bias. Or maybe we just play different games, mine tend to be very RP heavy and the decisions the players make are what matter the most.

 

[Asisreo]

I find Wizards are too often compared to fictional characters way out of their leagues, even for level 20. Like, setting apart how doctor strange pre-endgame could obliterate a level 20 wizard easily, their magic systems are inherently different anyways.

It gives wizards a perception of being more powerful than they really are.

Meteor swarm sounds super powerful, but if you break it down, a bandit captain has a decent chance of surviving the attack point-blank. Which makes it feel less "meteoric."

Meanwhile, that same bandit captain could get turned to salami in 6 seconds by a fighter swinging his sword.

 

[Krachek]

If that ever happens, I'll let you know. Hasn't yet in decades of play.

Meanwhile that encounter that could have been a TPK except the fighter could take the hits second wind and action surge does happen. Or the rogue critting on a sneak attack. Or ... well a bunch of turning points, including a wizard pulling the metaphorical rabbit out their hat.

But the miracle teleport save? Nope.

I have seen it once, wall of force, teleportation circle.
But more usual is martial characters that steal the show in the first two rounds of combat making an avalanche of damage.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I find Wizards are too often compared to fictional characters way out of their leagues, even for level 20. Like, setting apart how doctor strange pre-endgame could obliterate a level 20 wizard easily, their magic systems are inherently different anyways.

It gives wizards a perception of being more powerful than they really are.

Meteor swarm sounds super powerful, but if you break it down, a bandit captain has a decent chance of surviving the attack point-blank. Which makes it feel less "meteoric."

Meanwhile, that same bandit captain could get turned to salami in 6 seconds by a fighter swinging his sword.

You seem like you're working with some skewed facts. No one is claiming that Meteor Swarm is the top end of a wizard's single target damage. It's an AoE spell. Comparing the fighter's single target damage to an AoE is like claiming that missile strikes have a lower chance of killing a specific target than sniper bullets, so therefore missiles are clearly less dangerous than bullets from a sniper rifle.

The wizard has a myriad of options for dealing with the bandit captain. Just for starters, cast forcecage on him and then kill him (or not) at your leisure. Unlike with the fighter, if the bandit survives the opening salvo, they can't so much as hit back.

 

[TwoSix]

In my games they contribute in different ways. If you think wizards are doing all the important stuff, perhaps it's because of selection bias. Or maybe we just play different games, mine tend to be very RP heavy and the decisions the players make are what matter the most.

If you play in a game that' RP heavy and player decisions matter, I don't see how motivated caster players CAN'T drive the narrative. It's just inherent in their capabilities. The more sandbox a game is, the more casters control the narrative.

The only games I remember where it hasn't happened is ones where the players have earned some sort of major story boon or powerful magic item which had strong abilities around narrative impact. I'm totally a fan of diegetic character growth like that (in fact I prefer it), but it's totally orthogonal to the capabilities granted by classes in a class system.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I don't think the PHB ever says or suggests all classes are equal and I for one have never assumed they were.

they are all presented in the same way in basic alphabetical order with the same pomp. All of them are an equivalent opportunity cost, with the same Proficiency bonus progression and XP progression and they all have 20 levels. You'd have to be reaching REALLY far to, as a newbie coming to this game for the first time, think "Oh there must be more powerful classes". WE know which ones are more powerful because WE are obsessed nerds who argue about numbers on the internet, but a casual first timer? He's not gonna know the Ranger is badly designed and the Monk is a MAD nightmare and the Wizard spells are busted just as a glance.

And the book sure as hell isn't saying that some are more powerful. Nothing in the presentation hints at this discrepency being a dsign goal (though we know the team is filled with bloody Wizard fans with a bias) If what you're saying is true, that the Wizard is meant to be more powerful then any other option is a trap and a waste of ink. That's a dumb design.

I agree that they don't say so. At the same time, there are many points where that position is implied. They require the same XP to level. Appropriate challenge (regardless of how well it works) is calculated by comparing opponent CRs to the party levels (with not ratios for different classes, denoting advantage to one or the other). Adventure modules are rated based on level. The very concept of tiers of play is that the gameplay style substantially changes as the party hits new levels (again, not barbarians and rogues hit new levels and full casters hit new-levels-minus-X). Thus I cannot say that all classes being equal was a design assumption, but I agree with Undrave that, if it weren't, well then fundamental components of the design make little sense (so, perhaps it would be best to say, 'if that wasn't a design assumption, perhaps it should have been').

As someone who is always suspicious of that guy on the internet who thinks that the people running their favorite thing (be it a game or fiction IP) are idiots, jerks, or deliberately screwing over fan-interest X (and that they would do a better job), I am much more willing to believe that the 5e devs miss-playtested a few higher-level spells and misjudged the playstyle the fans would prefer (/their willingness to use the optional rules to address the situation if they preferred otherwise), and overall missed a few minor beats than I am to believe that they are either 1) deliberately favoring casters but declining to say so, or 2) designed a system where they knowingly made different classes have different power levels, but left fundamental components of the game architecture based on making comparisons to the party level, class-neutrally.

 

[Oofta]

If you play in a game that' RP heavy and player decisions matter, I don't see how motivated caster players CAN'T drive the narrative. It's just inherent in their capabilities. The more sandbox a game is, the more casters control the narrative.

The only games I remember where it hasn't happened is ones where the players have earned some sort of major story boon or powerful magic item which had strong abilities around narrative impact. I'm totally a fan of diegetic character growth like that (in fact I prefer it), but it's totally orthogonal to the capabilities granted by classes in a class system.

We play very different games. Magic is rarely the sole deciding factor.

That, and I acknowledge that while the QB may throw the touchdown pass, they can't do it if they get sacked first.

EDIT: the whole point of a RP heavy game is that what the PCs say and do is just as important, if not more important, than how they accomplish their goals. Oh, and fighters contribute just as much to achieving the goals.

 

[TwoSix]

We play very different games. Magic is rarely the sole deciding factor.

That, and I acknowledge that while the QB may throw the touchdown pass, they can't do it if they get sacked first.

Most non-combat narratives require very little cooperation. Everyone tags along because we all know "don't split the party", and everyone might participate in discussion and come up with strategy, but that's something a character with 0 class features can do. Spells and magical abilities are the unique deployable resources for non-combat portions of the game. (Expertise is nice to increase odds, but isn't really a unique resource.)

 

[Oofta]

Most non-combat narratives require very little cooperation. Everyone tags along because we all know "don't split the party", and everyone might participate in discussion and come up with strategy, but that's something a character with 0 class features can do. Spells and magical abilities are the unique deployable resources for non-combat portions of the game. (Expertise is nice to increase odds, but isn't really a unique resource.)

Again, we play very different games. In an RP heavy game if the spotlight isn't being shared that's either player preference or, IMHO, poor DMing.

Spells rarely make a huge difference, I probably see Pass Without Trace more than anything but that's a druid thing. It also just increases the odds of success of one tactic, doesn't guarantee anything.

I play cooperative games, not one where everyone is scrambling to outdo each other.

 

[Mort]

Again, we play very different games. In an RP heavy game if the spotlight isn't being shared that's either player preference or, IMHO, poor DMing.

Spells rarely make a huge difference, I probably see Pass Without Trace more than anything but that's a druid thing. It also just increases the odds of success of one tactic, doesn't guarantee anything.

I play cooperative games, not one where everyone is scrambling to outdo each other.

Ok, so, outside of combat, what does the fighter class bring to the table? More specifically, how does the fighter class aid the player in any situation outside of combat?

In a RP heavy game, the players drive the narrative. The caster classes (especially the wizard with their huge versatility) have some clear tools to aid the player in driving the narrative. What does the fighter class provide in that direction?