D&D 5E Are Wizards really all that?

[Yaarel]

I'm saying that if it didn't exist, the stories we tell wouldn't change much. The benefit is artificial.

That doesn't mean it can't add a dimension to the game we wouldn't otherwise have, just that if a group doesn't have it they won't be missing anything outside of a few rare edge cases. It can add flavor to the game if the DM wants, but there are plenty of ways to add flavor, plenty of stories to tell without it.

I don't have a problem with the spell. It can be useful. I just get tired of "wizards rule because they can cast teleport". The game is just as fun and enjoyable without it, the stories just as engaging.

Teleportation doesn't elevate the value of wizards that much because the end result is that you don't really miss it much if you don't have it.

I guess Teleportation Circle can become important for influencing the narrative at higher tiers.

But it has little or nothing to do with the char-op mechanics at higher tiers.

 

[ECMO3]

Who cares if he's a friggin' Wizard? Who decided Wizard had to be the most powerful class all the time? This is just imposing your favorite archetype on other people. Typical Wizard player behavior "Wizard HAVE to be the strongest class, they're Wizards!"

Well to start with the name of the company is WIZARDS of the coast. I think that has something to do with it, but every edition has had a most powerful class and I think Wizard fits thematically much more than any other except perhaps warlock.

I can make any BS if I want about Fighters too. They're the best at fighting because they worked HARD and they're not cowards who cheat with Magic. Their strength is pure and overwhelming, and their iron will means they can accomplish anything they set themselves to with their own two hands. Boom, then throw in some Wuxia moves and the Fighter's the best class now.

Sure and I think that is how 1E was designed.

Again, that's not what's in the book. Is the book lying? And if it is lying how is that not a problem? The 5e book never says the Wizard is the most powerful class, how is that the default 'social contract' up front?

I don't think the PHB ever says or suggests all classes are equal and I for one have never assumed they were. When I first started playing D&D (1980) I assumed spell casters were the most powerful, I was obviously wrong back then, but I don't think there is any reason to believe all classes are equal.

lol no. You will not find a single other person on this board who will agree that Rangers are 'pretty powerful'.

Cosnidering all three phases of the game and with Tashs's new rules Rangers are mechanically more powerful than Barbarians, Paladins of Fighters. Old stereotypes die hard and there are lot on this board who look to the PHB Ranger which was underpowered compared to these classes.

Rangers are a class who gets extra attack and has nearly as many spells a day as a full caster while also having more skills, expertise, class abilities, d10 hit dice and top notch subclass abilities (on the better subclasses).

 

[Minigiant]

First off I don't buy the hypothesis here, because I have played in A LOT of parties with more than one guy good at social checks and more than one guy good at exploration and more than one front liner and I have NEVER experienced what you describe for the reasons you describe. EVERY time I have seen this happen, it is because of the players not because of the defined classes/roles. If I am a face and I am getting overshadowed by someone else doing all the social checks it is NEVER in my experience because that other character was built to be a "face" or because he was a good "face". It is because the PLAYER is stealing the spotlight and that happens with an 8 Charisma Barbarian with no social skills as much as it does with a 20 charisma bard with expertise.

Not my experience.

My experience, especially with 4e and 5e with all it's Cha classes, is that the DM calsfora Cha check and your party has 2-3 people with 18 Charisma.

So who gets to roll? The Paladin, Warlock, or Bard? They all have 18 Cha but there's only 1 check this session.

 

[Mort]

IME it tends to be the PLAYER with the best presence, not the CHARACTER with the best charisma.

Yes, if the DM isn't distinguishing then that often happens, even though IMO it shouldn't.

I tend to try to filter what the players say (when talking directly to NPCs and the like) through their character's charisma.

Two people can say the EXACT same thing but the results be very different and the difference is generally charisma. It's also why I'll have players roll a check for a social interaction more than some DMs. Because who says something and how they say it is often more important than what was actually said.

 

[Mort]

Not my experience.

My experience, especially with 4e and 5e with all it's Cha classes, is that the DM calsfora Cha check and your party has 2-3 people with 18 Charisma.

So who gets to roll? The Paladin, Warlock, or Bard? They all have 18 Cha but there's only 1 check this session.

Easy, 1 rolls, 1 assists to provide advantage (he's certainly trained after all) and the third yells "guidance.." because of course he does.

 

[ECMO3]

Shield isn't that useful unless you have mage armor on and have a dex bonus.

Shield at high levels is not that useful with mage armor even.

For shield to be really useful you want a combination of mage armor and another AC boosting spell (blur, PEG, Haste) or you want to use it with heavy armor (which wizards can get relatively easily playing a Mountain Dwarf).

That does take either a multiclass and race or a race and feat, but in those cases the shield spell is superb.

 

[Maxperson]

You’re right that the Wizard having the “I Win” button ready doesn’t happen 100% of the time… but it sure as hell happens more often with the Wizard than with the Fighter. That’s the big thing. The Martial types never get an “I win” button, and even if the Wizard doesn’t have the perfect spell, his less than perfect spell choice (or just their skill selection) can still make a solid impact in whatever situation they’re in. There’s a LOT of things a clever player can do with Prestidigitation and Mage Hands, for exemple.

Fighters need more out of combat stuff for sure. That much I fully believe in.

As for "I win buttons," the wizard needs them. Without them all he has are spells that don't do much, and then do less or nothing when saved against. If you looked at the post in response to Frogreaver earlier, most of the 9th level wizard's slots are used up on defensive spells to stay alive and a few attack spells. Little was left over for much in the way of utility. The "I win" buttons happen on occasion when the spells happen to match up right AND the save is missed. That makes up for all the rounds the wizard loses to creatures making their save.

Call it ‘doing it the hard way’. It’s always possible to weight the pros and cons of using Knock. It’s an option you have available to you. What if the monsters were already aware of your existence and had sounded the alarm? Better to have a clear escape route than let them box you in. Maybe once past that door you’ll have a clear line of sight to dimension door away or something, or you have your own allies waiting outside.

Right. It's useful occasionally. Like charm and friends, knock does have it's uses, but just not on anything resembling a regular basis. This is as it should be. The wizard doesn't take over a role and do it better than another class, but it does shine by filling in gaps in the party. A spell here like knock in a hurry, or a spiderclimb to rescue the dwarf wrapped in a spider's web in the middle of the ceiling, etc. That's the wizard's role.

 

[Krachek]

Not my experience.

My experience, especially with 4e and 5e with all it's Cha classes, is that the DM calsfora Cha check and your party has 2-3 people with 18 Charisma.

So who gets to roll? The Paladin, Warlock, or Bard? They all have 18 Cha but there's only 1 check this session.

Like in the kindergarten, the one who cry the louder get the roll!

 

[Fanaelialae]

I'm saying that if it didn't exist, the stories we tell wouldn't change much. The benefit is artificial.

That doesn't mean it can't add a dimension to the game we wouldn't otherwise have, just that if a group doesn't have it they won't be missing anything outside of a few rare edge cases. It can add flavor to the game if the DM wants, but there are plenty of ways to add flavor, plenty of stories to tell without it.

I don't have a problem with the spell. It can be useful. I just get tired of "wizards rule because they can cast teleport". The game is just as fun and enjoyable without it, the stories just as engaging.

Teleportation doesn't elevate the value of wizards that much because the end result is that you don't really miss it much if you don't have it.

You could make that same argument for basically any wizard spell.

You wouldn't miss fireball that much if it never existed (you'd still have Lightning Bolt and Cone of Cold after all). Doesn't stop it from being one of the best spells available for what it does.

You wouldn't miss Forecage if it were gone (you'd still have good control spells like Wall of Force). Also doesn't stop it from being one of the best spells available for what it does.

If 90% of the wizard spell list never existed, the wizard would still be perfectly playable. That doesn't mean it wouldn't impact the overall efficacy of the class, particularly when contrasted against other classes. The benefit isn't artificial. It's simply that each spell, even the best spells, taken individually are only a tiny portion of the wizard's overall effectiveness.

 

[ECMO3]

9 times out of 10 they will have a lower dex. Many rogues will similarly have a 14 intelligence, which when combined with the expertise they likely have, still makes them as good or better at the int traps than the wizard.

Sure, but that is not what we are talking about here, we are talking about 10 out of 10.

So yes, monsters for the most part. I'm talking about civilized society. That said, some places allow orcs, goblins, kobolds and/or drow to live there. Those would be protected.

There are chaotic alingments and multiple shady backgrounds including one even called criminal which are in the PHB. So even if it is illegal to charm someone in your world (and it is not in most civilizations in the most common D&D world), even in that corner case though, there are still specific character options designed for characters to have a predicliction not to follow such laws.

I don't know why you keep bringing up streaming like it means something. First, from what I saw of the first season of critical role, Mercer doesn't seem to put realism very high on his list. I'm not surprised he is ignoring the logical result of mind raping people in civilized society. Second, Mercer and others can still get things wrong. They aren't perfect.

It is a bit silly to talk about realism in a world with dragons and wizards, but even so. The point is this, most people do not play D&D like you seem to. In most D&D campaigns "mind raping" someone as you call it is legal.

I will add that there was a D&D novel set in Halruaa where one of the LEADERS of the country actually did just that and they even called it similar in the novel saying the victim was "violated" by his intrusion into her mind. But this was a "civilized" society, a city in fact and it was totally LEGAL.

]That may be "unreaslistic" in your mind, but it is a D&D novel that this occured in. It is not the only example, only the one that most accurately aligns with your description.

You can, just at appropriate times. Perhaps on the goblin you are interrogating in the ruins.

So rules and laws only apply sometimes or only to certain groups of people?

The benefit of advantage is the highest when the DC is in the middle, like a 10. At DC 15 or so it's not going to be quite as good as expertise plus decent charisma. At 20-30 the expertise and charisma is going to blow advantage out of the water.

This depends entirely on the DC, the level, the ability score and whether or not the person has proficiency.

Proficeincy with a decent (14) ability score will usually beat expertise and a good ability score in tier 1 and tier 2 where most gameplay occurs. Not on all checks and not at all levels or cases, but usually.

I provided it above. There's no case where at a DC of like 10 the rogue is better. But if the DC is 10 you're wasting time by even casting the spell.

What abotu if it is impossible if he is not charmed. For example a stranger probably can't be convinced to loan me some money or comp me a meal, a stranger who is guarding the castle probably can't be convinced to let you in, a "friendly acquintance" might be able to be convinced to do either.

Why do you assume he's going to realize the rogue is lying? He's guaranteed to know about the charm and report it to the authorities, but against a rogue is unlikely to know he was lied to.

He is gauranteed to know about it 8 hours later, but he is not likely to report it before that. He is also likely to find out the Rogue is lying and if he doesnt do it with the insight check, it will probably be sooner than 8 hours.

Not true. To be hidden you must be both unseen AND unheard, per RAW. If you are seen it's just flat out impossible to hide, so quiet doesn't matter.

Ok I am not sure you understand the stealth rules. You have to be completely obscured to try to hide. Invisibilty takes care of that and it is the only condition to try. The stealth roll essentially determines if you are "unheard".

Similarly the Rogue trying to hide has to be completely obscured (unseen) before he tries to hide.

I don't know why you keep assuming a completely empty room.

I am not, but you you keep assuming there is something to hide behind.

Walk behind a pillar, crouch behind a table with chairs... There are lots of possible hiding places in a crowded full room.

Potentially sure and the Rogue is limited to those arteas. The wizard can try to hide anywhere in the room.

If seen. That's just the thing. The enemy with darkvision might miss him standing out in the open because dim light = perception check at disadvantage and it's hard to see in dim light.

not according to the rules. If the enemy has darkvision he is not fully obscured and there is no possibility that the enemy misses him.

The enemy ALWAYS sees him RAW. The dim light would pose disadvantage on perception checks involving sight, but that is more or less irrelevant to hiding because to try to hide he can't be able to see you AT ALL.

Now if you have a special ability at play - say the skulker feat - then yes you could try to hide in just dim light and he would in fact have disadvantage because of the dim light condition. But without the feat or the Wood Elf ability RAW it is impossible to hide in a room against somoene with darkvision if you can't get behind something so it is impossible for him to see you.

So you're wasting slots casting more spells, or just plain getting knocked out and losing concentration that way.

Not a lot more slots.

For your 2 points in constitution to matter for concentration you need to take damage and fail by the check by 1 point. How many times is that going to happen a day? Less than once a day, particularly if you invest in defense to avoid hits in the first place.

Likewise on getting knocked out. If my 6th level Wizard has 26 hps and yours has 32 points the enemy needs to do more than 26 but less than 32 for this to matter. That will happen occasionally, but not very often and to be honest getting knocked out is not that big a deal. Finally, for the cost of one 1st level slot I can give myself more hps than you for an entire hour while also having higher abilities 24-7 .... or 24-10 on Ferun.

So what is the actual slot cost to be just as durable in combat as a wizard with 2 more points of con? Probably on average about 2 1st level slots a day at 6th level and 2 2nd level slots at 10th level, 2 3rd level slots at 15th level etc.

When 5e first came out I used to try to buff con on my wizards and then I realized how dumb that was and how much a character is with a high dex and a decent wisdom or charisma.

Things to hide behind are not corner case.

An invisible character is going to have far more places to hide than a non-invisible character, far more. An invisible character can hide literally anywhere, the number of places with something to hide behind are comparatively few.