D&D 5E Charisma Conundrum

[5ekyu]

My Warlock had rolled stats, you can give the wizard 18 int or lower the warlocks charisma to 16.

It's not my exact build but it's very close.

In combat I used Eldritch blast often with hex using an owl to grant advantage with the occasional guiding bolt.

I'm not 100% sure what the last cantrip was or the 4th spell.

I built it for a lot if utility and as a glorified Archer I think guiding bolt and hex were the only offensive spells outside the cantrips.

Ok so use std array for comparison but the warlock gets rolled, ok.

I like how you focus on damage output details while quoting my observation about overvaluing combat damage output.

Again, I now agree, in the campaign condition you choose to limit it to, in the rules you choose to employ and the metrics you choose to use and not use... etc I have no problem believing you when you claim you can build "better" warlocks than you can build wizards.

 

[5ekyu]

I was just pointing out where 9 comes from. Then I pointed out the difference without race (7 vs 3). Then I posted one I played (5 vs 3) that didn't add cantrips from subclass or race. Pointing out something that has been said and giving it a breakdown doesn't assume anything.

No one posted a build for comparison for the wizard yet. Adding a cantrip via illusionist doesn't match adding 2 via celestial and 3 more via tome. Unless you have a wizard subclass that adds 4 cantrips wizard are behind based on class potential.



That was my point to refute your comment that a wizard can cast the spells normally or as rituals.

Other class can cast those spells as rituals or slots because of the requirements of their ritual mechanics. Wizards don't cast them as either rituals or slots because it's so situational to need to cast them using slots that there's no point prepping them, and wizards aren't forced to prep them to cast them as rituals.



That doesn't make any sense. Warlocks wanting cantrips are likely going tome and having more than the wizard. The wizard is more likely to need the feat for more than the warlock, who can add more without the feat.



I never made any comments about portent vs EB. As you could see in my sample build that I liked playing I don't bother with EB in the first tier. If we're comparing subclasses and you want to use diviner I'm going to say diviners are awesome, portent is great and tied to long rests while warlock patron abilities are tied to short rests (fey presence in this example), I love that expert divination promotes the use of casting divination spells later, and then point out that a diviner doesn't get bonus cantrips so if that's the comparison we're using then it applies to all aspects of the discussion.



Except there was no one-way assumption. That was just a number breakdown based on something that came up in the conversation.



Yeah, cantrip damage sucks in general compared to weapon damage. EB has a pretty heavy investment for gains that early.

I think I should point out I've also gone with beguiling influence to expand my proficiencies and play heavily towards using ability checks. Friends can be useful but advantage on either persuasion or intimidation with a CHA class and proficiency without the aggression that comes after friends. The multiple target charm is handy for damage mitigation or stopping a fight in order to make use of those skills.

I just can't pull off rituals and 2 more skills and silent image on the same character in that tier. I do find silent image at-will and more cantrips and some good rituals and CHA vs INT is more advantageous at first.



That's still 18 CHA.

This demonstrates my issues with hex, however. Casting unseen servant ends hex. Casting flaming sphere ends hex. Casting comprehend languages as a ritual ends hex. Casting guidance ends hex. Casting find familiar is less likely to be needed but also end hex.

The difference between the eldritch blast and a light crossbow is 1 damage at that level range and doesn't require the investment, while hex isn't a given unless a person is giving up frequent uses of guidance or not using the ritual caster feature.

This is the point most worth noting in this imo...

"Unless you have a wizard subclass that adds 4 cantrips wizard are behind based on class potential."

No, not really, it shows they have different counts on numbers of cantrips. Different classes have that all over the place. Not just in cantrip vount tho, but in lots of different things.

The "class potential" is not behind because using some class options gives different numbers of cantrips.
The wizard diviner does not have less potential then its illusionist because the illusionist gets one more cantrip. The moon druid is not behind the land druid because it loses an extra cantrip orcspell recovery.

I see this often when folks post about the "'problem with EB." They complain about the cantrip but the complaint is not about the cantrip alone but about the cantrip on the wsrlock eith multiple class features adding in... invocations. Then its compared to regular canttips, not other classes and their features.

The more that is chosen to be left out the less reliable the conclusion will be in actual play when those left-outs matter.

I am not disputing that a wsrlock with tome can have more cantrips than a wizard... have not done so... just not believing that fact in isolation shows much about the ability or inability to build characters that are of comparable value in actual play.

The main point I got into about the cantrip count with the wsrlock guide expert thing was that it seemed the example was not using the rules right in that example or assuming one side made choices like the feat that the other could but wasnt. Turns out, it was right, the example had the incorrect count.

As for unseen vs prepping etc - again, it was originally presented as some sort of boost to wsrlock that they could take one of those four level-locked known as unseen servant but the wizard wouldnt. My counterpoint was that the 6 daily- change allowed even more freedom for the wizard to make that choice if he saw a reason to. So, it's not a plus that the wsrlock can choose to commit one of four yo unseen servant for a level while the wizard can choose to commit one of his six and change it daily (short hand for long rest.) The wizard won't need to fo so as often but has the same potential with less "risk".

 

[Zardnaar]

Ok so use std array for comparison but the warlock gets rolled, ok.

I like how you focus on damage output details while quoting my observation about overvaluing combat damage output.

Again, I now agree, in the campaign condition you choose to limit it to, in the rules you choose to employ and the metrics you choose to use and not use... etc I have no problem believing you when you claim you can build "better" warlocks than you can build wizards.

I can build a decent wizard. And yes diviner and bladesinger are on that list.

Low level warlocks better at combat, social, and competitive with exploration. Doesn't matter to much if they run out of spells they're still a decent Archer.

Wizards run out of gas very fast low levels and rituals don't get that good until level 3.

There's multiple other classes that are better than wizards early. Wizards good at aoe but so are other classes.

What's a wizard the best at low level.

Damage? Nope
Support nope.
Exploration? Debatable
Can't heal
AoE probably not (light clerics).

Some subclasses are competitive, most aren't. Even land Druids are giving them a close run.

They're not crap I rate them as good enough but they're also squishy low AC and probably don't have the spells slots to buff ac and even then it's only around every other class. And the other classes have a d8 hd. Except sorcerer I suppose.

 

[5ekyu]

I can build a decent wizard. And yes diviner and bladesinger are on that list.

Low level warlocks better at combat, social, and competitive with exploration. Doesn't matter to much if they run out of spells they're still a decent Archer.

Wizards run out of gas very fast low levels and rituals don't get that good until level 3.

There's multiple other classes that are better than wizards early. Wizards good at aoe but so are other classes.

What's a wizard the best at low level.

Damage? Nope
Support nope.
Exploration? Debatable
Can't heal
AoE probably not (light clerics).

Some subclasses are competitive, most aren't. Even land Druids are giving them a close run.

They're not crap I rate them as good enough but they're also squishy low AC and probably don't have the spells slots to buff ac and even then it's only around every other class. And the other classes have a d8 hd. Except sorcerer I suppose.

In camspaigns where all the above are true, all the assumptions are true, where the warlocks and wizards are built by you and judged by your specs and value- I have no doubt in the accuracy of your conclusion.

But from a broader scope of cherries than that, it's not necessarily the case.

For example, looking at your warlock example, I see far less than "competitive" in the exploration/discovery tree than one could see with a high Int wizard who spent skills towards investigation and knowledge in a campaign where those matter, where that pillar matters as much ad the social.

Equally, looking at combat, combat is a lot more than "my archer dps vs single targets". Especially when one assumes both hex and familiar help for advsantage in a 6-8 encounter set on a character who pushes for rituals too but chooses to dismiss portent as unreliable.

 

[FrogReaver]

Personally my problem with EB + hex warlocks and combat is that virtually every weapon based class is better at damage than them - and by choosing to use hex in combat they are basically giving up their more powerful spells.

Don't get me wrong - hex is a great option to have against single enemies that have legendary resistance or low AC. But in general against groups there's much better spells a warlock can cast.

The only time hex and EB starts to look okay is when looking at a ranger after level 11 - because rangers get crappy combat boosts past level 11. I mean even a lowly (non-hasted) rogue does a good job keeping up in damage with EB + Agonizing blast + Hex (even in tier 3)

 

[Zardnaar]

Personally my problem with EB + hex warlocks and combat is that virtually every weapon based class is better at damage than them - and by choosing to use hex in combat they are basically giving up their more powerful spells.

Don't get me wrong - hex is a great option to have against single enemies that have legendary resistance or low AC. But in general against groups there's much better spells a warlock can cast.

The only time hex and EB starts to look okay is when looking at a ranger after level 11 - because rangers get crappy combat boosts past level 11. I mean even a lowly (non-hasted) rogue does a good job keeping up in damage with EB + Agonizing blast + Hex (even in tier 3)

Hex can last longer than a short rest in the mid levels.

Warlock later on is more if an Archer with utility and Nova capabilities.

 

[FrogReaver]

Hex can last longer than a short rest in the mid levels.

Warlock later on is more if an Archer with utility and Nova capabilities.

EB + Hex warlocks don't have any kind of nova capabilities.

They are pure sustain damage but don't even do a great job at that.

 

[Zardnaar]

EB + Hex warlocks don't have any kind of nova capabilities.

Nova is shorthand for whatever spell they want to cast. Could be a frireball, could be hypnotic pattern.

EB by itself is still decent relative to what wizards can do with cantrips.

Charisma will usually get to 20 and 1d10+5 force damage is better than 1d10 fire damage.

Or 2d10 or 3d10 etc as it scales.

It's almost double damage.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think you unfairly dismiss str and int as important stats.
Str is a lot more common in exploration than dexterity. From all the minor saves it is the most common one and also quite important.
Widsom is tied to perception, so no question there.
In our games, int checks are also very common. Investigation is rolled every session, as are lore skills. Actually a lot more often than charisma checks. So while on first glance, dex and charisma are way above all other stats, at least in our games actual play is different.

That does not mean I wouldn´t have liked more charisma and int saves, and more use for int in downtime activities and more uses of investigation in adventures.

It however proves, that the playtest actually tested actual play and was not theorycrafting. The game works fine if you just play with what yu have.
And with the artificer and soon psionic subclasses, there will be more people relying on int.
And not to forget: int (investigation) is the check to see through illusions!

 

[5ekyu]

Nova is shorthand for whatever spell they want to cast. Could be a frireball, could be hypnotic pattern.

EB by itself is still decent relative to what wizards can do with cantrips.

Charisma will usually get to 20 and 1d10+5 force damage is better than 1d10 fire damage.

Or 2d10 or 3d10 etc as it scales.

It's almost double damage.

But, what is being ignored are the following...
HEX last longer at higher level is right, even past short rest - long as you dont do rituals st all during that time and that whole book of secrets for more casting then falls out a bit. Matter of fact, when one factors owls for advsantage into examples as was done earlier - then the ritual casting of familiar to replace it after combats seems to nit gonna allow both familiar and more than one fight HEX to be, well, reliable.

EB with agonizing going more than a wizard cantrip is correct but that is faulty on two fronts. 1 its comparing cantrip plus festure agasinst cantrip. 2 the measure for combat it must meet is not against wizards just throwing cantrips but against wizards throwing "whatever spells they want" as it were.

But again, when all these things are assumed to not matter, when the assumptions ripun in one direction... in those campaigns with those judgements- I am sure it's awesome.