D&D 5E Are Wizards really all that?

[Fanaelialae]

It's not that Meteor Swarm itself is supposed to be all-powerful mechanically, but it's often used from a narrative argument to say "See, the wizard can just summon meteors while the fighter plays with sticks."

But the point is that the "meteor" is different than a realistic meteor in that a CR 2 human can decently hope to survive a magical meteor point-blank. So clearly magic can't be considered a one-to-one with their realistic counterpart.

While it should be no surprise a level 7 spell can incapacitate a CR 2 creature in a single turn, it also shows another point against the wizard's "almighty" power.

During a fight, it's great to be able to incapacitate a creature with one action and keep them from doing melee damage, potentially kiting them, etc. But this "powerful" cage is actually...very bad at being a cage.

Setting aside the size restrictions, it only lasts an hour. This means forcecage is capable of being useful in keeping someone in-place for about 4 hours at max, taking up 7th, 8th, and 9th-level slots. You could knock the creature unconscious, but it will wake up within 1d4 hours, meaning the wizard still has to monitor them lest they break free.

All this, and thinking about the types of threats where you would like to use Forcecage, would it really be worth it? A balor has the Charisma and magic resistance to leave the cage anyways. A pit fiend variant can summon devils and still has access to its fireball/wall of fire/hold person. A lich can guarantee their plane shift with a legendary resistance.

High level threats aren't as susceptible to this kind of restraints and low-level threats would happily eat up your 7th-level slot.

My takeaway is actually that high HD creatures (even unclassed NPCs) are far more durable than their real world counterparts. And that this makes mythic fighters a perfectly excellent addition to the game, if only older players could past their preconceptions and biases. But that's just me.

Who cares that forcecage isn't a permanent prison? It gives you plenty of time to cast Imprisonment, if that's your endgame.

What about a high level fighter? Wouldn't they be susceptible to forcecage? Wait... It's almost like a high level wizard villain would be a dangerous adversary who could escape a forcecage, while a high level fighter villain would be trivialized by the same...

 

[TwoSix]

What do you consider a turning point? I consider the turning points to be where the story has a major shift in direction, and those happen more often through RP choices in my experience than some cast spell.

On a local level casting a spell will shift direction a lot, but so can the fighter saying, "Let's not go to town like we planned and just head straight to the mine." In prior editions I think spells played more influence on the local level than martial stuff did, but martial stuff was still significant.

My pushback here is that "the fighter doing stuff" is not the same as "fighter stuff". Making decisions and influencing strategy is a function of being a player and has nothing to do with class balance.

Every player can decide to go to the castle, it's the cleric who can go there and also resurrect the dead king, and the wizard who can go there and take over the body of the current king. Sure, there will be NPCs countering those actions, and they might not work, but it's still the caster player driving the fiction.

When people say "the fighter brings nothing to the table" for non-combat activities, it's because they don't bring anything, other than the player being present and playing the game. The player of the fighter would have more possible actions, and thus more impact, if they had played almost any other class instead.

 

[Neonchameleon]

When people say "the fighter brings nothing to the table" for non-combat activities, it's because they don't bring anything, other than the player being present and playing the game. The player of the fighter would have more possible actions, and thus more impact, if they had played almost any other class instead.

This is why I say that out of combat the fighter is a glorified commoner. They (pre-2020/Tasha's anyway) bring almost nothing to the table beyond the background every character gets and the two class skills every single class gets (and something minor from their subclass at level 7)

 

[Maxperson]

My pushback here is that "the fighter doing stuff" is not the same as "fighter stuff". Making decisions and influencing strategy is a function of [/i]being a player[/i] and has nothing to do with class balance.

Every player can decide to go to the castle, it's the cleric who can go there and also resurrect the dead king, and the wizard who can go there and take over the body of the current king. Sure, there will be NPCs countering those actions, and they might not work, but it's still the caster player driving the fiction.

When people say "the fighter brings nothing to the table" for non-combat activities, it's because they don't bring anything, other than the player being present and playing the game. The player of the fighter would have more possible actions, and thus more impact, if they had played almost any other class instead.

In 1e-3e I saw wizards capable of major story shifts through spells. In 5e not so much. I suppose if a wizard were willing to risk his ability to ever cast wish again, he could use that spell to cause a major shift. Short of that, though, I just don't see it. Teleport just gets you to where the fighter can walk, just faster. The cleric raising just means that the fighter doesn't have to drag the bodies back to town first. The spells make it easier, but by and large don't actually do anything the fighter couldn't do. Even a fireball burning down an important building can be accomplished by a fighter, some oil and a torch. Outside of some corner cases, magic is a short cut to the story shifts.

 

[Undrave]

Hmm. I'd say most people familiar with games of any sort that feature heterogeneous choices (MOBAs, fighting games, strategy games, etc.) are going to be aware that the choices might strive to be as balanced as possible, but that true balance is essentially impossible. Character tier lists are ubiquitous in fighting games and MOBAs for a reason!

Oh for sure! Especially in a game as unpredictable as D&D, but it's always best when those disparity show up in corner cases and not basic situations. Ideally, you just don't want an obvious consensus on who is stronger and weaker, the more muddled the closer you are to balance.

Now, that's completely different from a product not indicating such disparity if imbalance is a design intent as opposed to just a natural consequence of design with deeply varied options. But I don't think casters exceeding non-casters is truly the intent, I just think it's the outgrowth of 50 years of design tropes within D&D hardening over time.

I think there's a certain bias toward the Wizard, it does have the biggest spell list and more exclusive spells than any other class, but I also don't know if it was intentionally a matter of 'power' and not just 'those spells are cool and the Wizard is the coolest so he gets them" ya know?

And really, most gamers don't make choices based on power until you get to the very highest tiers of competitive play, which TTRPGs don't really feature. That's why fighters still outnumber paladins in the D&DBeyond stats, despite paladins being fairly obviously better. People are choosing tropes over power. Even if the PHB labeled fighters as "Average" power and paladins or wizards as "Strong", I don't think the numbers would shift as much as you might expect.

I dunno, maybe not dramatically, but I think if the classes were presented in order from weakest to strongest we'd see situation with DM banning the top class, or player going for a middle class instead of the weakest for their concept. We'd certainly see way more discussion about the best pick.

 

[Oofta]

The rogue gets a lot of skills plus expertise to aid in out of combat situations (and reliable talent at higher levels).
The bard gets good skills, expertise as well, plus a host of spellcasting options that aid outside of combat.
The wizard gets a versatile ritual and spell list.
The fighter gets...?

Yes, THE PLAYER can talk and be dynamic and have a big impact on the play. But sometimes, the PLAYER could use some help instead of just relying on their own abilities.


But those are examples of the PLAYERS contributing to each other's strengths and shoring up each other's weaknesses. And that's great, that's what gaming is all about. But it really doesn't answer the question of how much the various classes aid on that front. The contention being that the wizard class aids significantly, the fighter class aids not at all.


No one has ever used, augury

Maybe once or twice

, or suggestion,

Not that I can remember which may not mean much. Also a great way to create a nemesis.

or knock?

Maybe? Not in 5e.

No one has ever used invisibility

Sure.

or scrying

Scrying just shows you an individual. You're just as likely to catch them sleeping or on the john as anything else. The location could be empty or just show routine activities. If I'm DMing seeing something that matters is just a roll of the dice. If there's an important negotiation going on that is widely known, scrying will likely be blocked.

It's probably been used, I don't remember.

or arcane eye?

Nope.

No one has ever used disguise self, alter self etc.?

Primarily used hat of disguise.

I'm not saying spells can't be useful. Just that they are rarely game changers any more than what other PCs also accomplish.

Unless the DM of course decides that the scry just happens to occur at just the right moment or is more powerful than it should be like Mercer does sometimes on CR.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Oh for sure! Especially in a game as unpredictable as D&D, but it's always best when those disparity show up in corner cases and not basic situations. Ideally, you just don't want an obvious consensus on who is stronger and weaker, the more muddled the closer you are to balance.

I think there's a certain bias toward the Wizard, it does have the biggest spell list and more exclusive spells than any other class, but I also don't know if it was intentionally a matter of 'power' and not just 'those spells are cool and the Wizard is the coolest so he gets them" ya know?

I dunno, maybe not dramatically, but I think if the classes were presented in order from weakest to strongest we'd see situation with DM banning the top class, or player going for a middle class instead of the weakest for their concept. We'd certainly see way more discussion about the best pick.

I don't think that it's necessarily an outright bias towards making the wizard stronger, but rather that the wizard is an extremely wide concept, coupled with the historical design of the wizard, having access to all of the spells under that wide umbrella.

Imagine if you will, if the 1e wizard has been much more specialized. There would have been a much more limited pool of general spells shared by all wizards, and beyond that wizards would get spells from their specialized schools (necromancers would primarily cast necromancy spells, illusionists illusion spells). There's no "generalist" wizard in this paradigm.

I think it's likely that today we'd have wizards that were evolved along those lines, and therefore far more specialized than the wizards we have. And it would have been the same designers in both cases (albeit from alternate timelines).

Unfortunately, rather than using the 1e Illusionist class as their baseline, the 2e designers chose to use the Wizard, which is why I think we are where we are. If it had been the other way around, I think people would largely accept that as the norm (and probably argue that a "generalist" wizard would be completely overpowered).

 

[Asisreo]

My takeaway is actually that high HD creatures (even unclassed NPCs) are far more durable than their real world counterparts. And that this makes mythic fighters a perfectly excellent addition to the game, if only older players could past their preconceptions and biases. But that's just me.

Not just NPC's. A meteor swarm can't even destroy a Keelboat, let alone a Warship. Meteor swarm is just not as powerful as a real meteor.

Who cares that forcecage isn't a permanent prison? It gives you plenty of time to cast Imprisonment, if that's your endgame.

Except Imprisonment requires a Wisdom save and the target is completely immune to any other casting of the spell from you from that point onwards, forever, if it succeeds. Plus, you lose out on the 9th-level spell if it fails as well.

And we can partially ignore the component cost for Forcecage, but Imprisonment requires a specific depiction of the target to function. Even if you wanted to, you'd couldn't imprison a lich unless you've somehow obtained a carved statuette or vellum likeness of the lich. Setting aside the other spell components.

What about a high level fighter? Wouldn't they be susceptible to forcecage? Wait... It's almost like a high level wizard villain would be a dangerous adversary who could escape a forcecage, while a high level fighter villain would be trivialized by the same...

Yeah, and a high-level fighter would be a dangerous adversary who could fight past an anti-magic zone while a high-level wizard could not. There's counters to every high-level creature, but it's up to the DM not to let them be too easily exploited.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Not just NPC's. A meteor swarm can't even destroy a Keelboat, let alone a Warship. Meteor swarm is just not as powerful as a real meteor.


Except Imprisonment requires a Wisdom save and the target is completely immune to any other casting of the spell from you from that point onwards, forever, if it succeeds. Plus, you lose out on the 9th-level spell if it fails as well.

And we can partially ignore the component cost for Forcecage, but Imprisonment requires a specific depiction of the target to function. Even if you wanted to, you'd couldn't imprison a lich unless you've somehow obtained a carved statuette or vellum likeness of the lich. Setting aside the other spell components.


Yeah, and a high-level fighter would be a dangerous adversary who could fight past an anti-magic zone while a high-level wizard could not. There's counters to every high-level creature, but it's up to the DM not to let them be too easily exploited.

I never claimed that meteor swarm is equivalent to a meteor.

There are plenty of ways to swing the odds of the save heavily in your favor. I think there's a cantrip now that causes disadvantage. Or a diviner can simply assign the save a low roll.

If you plan to Imprison (rather than simply kill) the target, I'd assume the wizard would have the sense to prepare Fabricate. Material component problem solved.

Sure, the fighter could fight through an anti-magic zone. Unless creatures immune to nonmagical weapons block his path. Then he's in trouble.

The wizard doesn't need to fight past the anti magic zone. They teleport past it.

 

[TwoSix]

Yeah, and a high-level fighter would be a dangerous adversary who could fight past an anti-magic zone while a high-level wizard could not. There's counters to every high-level creature, but it's up to the DM not to let them be too easily exploited.

"As the number of posts in a warrior vs caster thread increase, the probability of someone mentioning an anti-magic zone approaches 1."