D&D 5E Are Wizards really all that?

[Bill Zebub]

And that's fine. But does every troll in your game have a random vulnerability, or do the players know what their vulnerability is after figuring it out, and can rely upon that knowledge in the future? Or is it that the trolls show up once, the players figure it out, and then these kinds of trolls are never again seen in your campaigns?

No, they get to know certain kinds of monsters, and those naturally become easier to fight. Part of the fun of the game is encountering similar challenges but finding them a lot easier.

But the big challenges, the ones where each players' contribution really matters, I try to keep surprising and scary.

Unless I feel an urgent need to nova because I'm convinced that the encounter has a high likelihood of TPK, I don't even like to use my big guns until round 2. My DMs like to pull tricks like having enemies that are hidden, burrowed underground, or on the other side of a secret door (or wall, in the case of wraiths). I frequently don't even know what we're facing until round 2.

And then in round two you are counterspelled. Maybe round 3, too.

Besides, holding off for at least a round gives the martials in the party a sense of purpose, and lets the DM feel like he's providing a challenge.

That's why I cluster mooks within the radius of a fireball: to make the wizards feel good about themselves, instead of just getting frustrated that their one action each turn doesn't do anything.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Sure, Fire Giants have a poor Dexterity but a mind blowing +3 Dex save thanks to proficiency. They're still probably going to fail against a DC of 17-22, so I'm not exactly going to worry about it. That's like fretting that the monster will roll a natural 20 on it's save (we play that that's an automatic success).

Ok, let's say you are facing two fire giants. The fighter and barbarian both won initiative and want to go beat on one of them. What spell do you cast on your turn? Do you ask the melee to hold off for a turn? (Assume you can have anything prepared. They're CR 9, and this is supposed to be a challenge, so pick something level appropriate.)

 

[Zubatcarteira]

Targetting saves can be tricky, since proficiency for higher CRs can mean quite a high save mod even if the stat is low. Still, it's usually Con and Wis in my experience, targetting Int and Cha usually works out well, a lot of creatures just have negatives on those.

 

[Fanaelialae]

No, they get to know certain kinds of monsters, and those naturally become easier to fight. Part of the fun of the game is encountering similar challenges but finding them a lot easier.

But the big challenges, the ones where each players' contribution really matters, I try to keep surprising and scary.



And then in round two you are counterspelled. Maybe round 3, too.



That's why I cluster mooks within the radius of a fireball: to make the wizards feel good about themselves, instead of just getting frustrated that their one action each turn doesn't do anything.

So if I invade the fortress of the BBEG and it is full of trolls, we'll fight trolls all the way up to his throne room but when we face him it'll be him and a bunch of not-trolls?

You've lost me. Why am I being counterspelled in round 2? Do you add mages to every encounter just for the purpose of counterspelling your casters? If that's the case, no wonder you don't think casters aren't that good. It's because you're literally designing your encounters to counter them.

I don't even bother taking fireball with all of my casters.

Ok, let's say you are facing two fire giants. The fighter and barbarian both won initiative and want to go beat on one of them. What spell do you cast on your turn? Do you ask the melee to hold off for a turn? (Assume you can have anything prepared. They're CR 9, and this is supposed to be a challenge, so pick something level appropriate.)

It depends on whether I deem this a potential TPK or not, but based on what you've said I'm going to assume that this encounter is sufficiently challenging to drain some resources, but unlikely to kill any PCs.

I'd probably move back and put Tasha's Hideous Laughter on the one they didn't engage.

Although, in my group, the fighter and barbarian would more likely engage each of the giants to protect the back line. I do the same when I play a martial. In which case, assuming I'm trying to conserve resources for the day, I'd probably just use something like the Frostbite cantrip (I'd be fully aware that I have a low chance of landing it, but if I do it might save the martial a few HP) while I assess the battlefield and make sure there are no more serious threats. On round two, depending on how things are going, I might drop a real spell like Banishment or Hold Monster, so that the martials can focus on a single giant.

 

[Bill Zebub]

You've lost me. Why am I being counterspelled in round 2?

We are still talking about Tier IV, where Wizards are supposedly so amazing, right? On challenging fights, not just mook clearing, right?

I don't expect hard fights at that tier to be bags of hit points with obvious weaknesses. And because of action economy, it won't be a single boss. A non-casting boss is going to have casters as minions, and vice versa.

I'd probably move back and put Tasha's Hideous Laughter on the one they didn't engage.

Although, in my group, the fighter and barbarian would more likely engage each of the giants to protect the back line. I do the same when I play a martial. In which case, assuming I'm trying to conserve resources for the day, I'd probably just use something like the Frostbite cantrip (I'd be fully aware that I have a low chance of landing it, but if I do it might save the martial a few HP) while I assess the battlefield and make sure there are no more serious threats. On round two, depending on how things are going, I might drop a real spell like Banishment or Hold Monster, so that the martials can focus on a single giant.

Good choices. Teamwork, with all classes contributing. Game working as intended.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Targetting saves can be tricky, since proficiency for higher CRs can mean quite a high save mod even if the stat is low. Still, it's usually Con and Wis in my experience, targetting Int and Cha usually works out well, a lot of creatures just have negatives on those.

Yeah I tend to go with Int and Cha when I don't have any other information as well. That might not hold up as good strategy based on a MM analysis, but I seem to have had better luck with those than I do with Con/Wis.

EDIT: We had a cleric...Tier III...who would upcast Banishment (Cha save) to hit multiple targets. He wasn't sure theorycraft supported him using 5th or 6th level slots for that, but he just liked that it increased the chances of that precious slot doing something instead of being entirely wasted. This worked especially well against extraplanar creatures, of course.

 

[Fanaelialae]

We are still talking about Tier IV, where Wizards are supposedly so amazing, right? On challenging fights, not just mook clearing, right?

I don't expect hard fights at that tier to be bags of hit points with obvious weaknesses. And because of action economy, it won't be a single boss. A non-casting boss is going to have casters as minions, and vice versa.



Good choices. Teamwork, with all classes contributing. Game working as intended.

If you're going to load up the encounter with enough counterspells to shut down the wizard, you're designing that encounter to hard counter the wizard. To put it another way, you could have every major encounter take place in an anti-magic zone. I wouldn't take that as evidence that high level casters are useless. I would take that as evidence that you go out of your way to make high level casters useless. There's a massive distinction between the two.

Good teamwork, sure. But that encounter would be a whole lot more dangerous and less certain if you replaced the wizard with a third martial. And that shouldn't be the case. Martials should also have potent features that can turn the tide of battle, rather than simply being meat shields for the wizard who clean up the battlefield after the wizard trivializes the encounter for them.

Moreover, if their role really is to simply meat shield the wizard, they should at least be given the tools to do that job effectively. When I DM and the martials are blocking for the back line, unless I'm dealing with the Sentinel feat, I'm painfully aware of how easy it would be to just run past the martials, provoke a few OAs for trivial damage, and hammer the back line. I don't do it as often as I maybe ought to because I know it makes the martial players feel useless, and that's antithetical to my goals as a DM.

 

[FrogReaver]

A giant seething mass of demonic ooze? I'll target Dexterity, that's usually a winner against stuff like that.

looks up stats for Juiblex

I correctly picked Juiblex's lowest stat, but it has proficiency in Dex saves for some reason, giving it +7. Its weakest save is Cha at +3 (followed by Int +5, and then Str/Dex tied at +7). On the other hand, I successfully avoided its +13 Con and +12 Wis saves.

Web for the win!

 

[ECMO3]

How is that supernatural? You just have a strong presence and voice that carries so more people can be intimidated. It's just applying a skill to a wider audience.

That affects people in a cone?

Can you give an example of a person that has this ability IRL?

Except that a newbie wouldn't understand the mechanics.

And there are 2 things to counter this, first differences will not make a newbie playing a wizard more powerful and second there is the "fluff".

I mean a newbie has not played the game and does not understand the mechanics, so barring someone helping him how is he going to make his choice ..... and if somoene does help him, that person should explain the power deficiencies if he things they are relevant.

And you're the only one here who, for some unfathomable reasons, think the game is BETTER if some classes are outright bad options?!

There is a big difference between being a "bad" option and being weaker than other classes. That is where the real disagreement is, that someone thinks a class is automatically a bad option because it is mechanically weaker.

When I play a Rogue, which I play more than any other class, I do not feel that I have made a "bad" choice even though it is probably the second weakest class. When I play a fighter, which I don't play a lot but which I do play at times, I don't feel I made a bad choice.

The only time I make a "bad" choice is when I play a Paladin, Druid or a Bard and the reason is I don't like playing them. It has nothing to do with the relative power level of those classes.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Take the example of the Lich upthread: what visual/behavioral cue tips you off to not go for a Con save?

Or dragons: if you haven't read the MM, what clue would suggest they are weaker at one save than another?

Easy. The Lich is literally known for returning from literally anything while not being known for being easy to blast apart. You also know not to go to poison attacks against them (which covers a lot of con saves) because they are undead.

As for a dragon, those things are huge. You do not go for either Str saves or Con saves vs huge creatures, period. And you do go for dex saves again because they are huge and can't dodge. Dragons have a literal Frightful Presence so you don't go for charisma. So avoid: Str, Con, Cha.