Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Asisreo" data-source="post: 8761874" data-attributes="member: 7019027">In this scenario. Same idea if it was a druid and wizard who prepared nothing for monstrosities. But that doesn't mean wizards are better than druids. If it was something that required a strength check, like pulling a stuck lever or pushing aside a boulder, then the fighter would have a clear and distinct advantage. But only the ones in their spellbook, which only adds spells through DM fiat or leveling up. If the wizard never chooses it as a level-up option, they won't be preparing it mid-adventure. Is it weird that a wizard would try to use their action for something other than damage? In fact, it's often argued the wizard's combat niche is specifically non-damage effects. They have lower AC and HP. And since they're surprised, they can't use a reaction or first-round buff to mitigate incoming attacks. Fighters needn't activate any of their defensive abilities. That's the power of resourceless passives. But that's not all a fighter can do, that's just what the class itself provides a character. But a fighter character can also create clockwork devices, communicate with small and smaller beasts, attempt hiding in light rain, fog, etc. Not to mention they do have a small catalog of spells they can acquire without a spellcasting subclass. And while these are afford to other characters as well, that still gives the fighter character options. Potentially better-used than if the wizard had them. Considering martials use ability checks more often than wizards, a halfling's lucky has more opportunities to be useful for a fighter. What I'm trying to say is that choosing to be a fighter doesn't mean you choose to disengage completely with exploration or social. And you're given options you can choose to have. Some of those options work better for fighters, too, so it's not a one-to-one benefit for wizards.</blockquote>

Verification